Fired Due to Sickness 3 Weeks into Job

whoosh

marliepanda wrote: »

Firstly, depression isn't always counted as a disability. It can be, but it is not a blanket 'you have to make reasonable adjustments' If someone is off with depression after 3 weeks, you cant make adjustments when someone is off.
Your blanket statement is inaccurate and dangerous. Can I go to work for one day, say the work has exacerbated my depression and lay down what I want them to change?

As regards to his 'injury at work' This is what the OP said.



So the job hasnt caused the depression (so what adjustments do you suggest?) and he actually says that the injury was NOT caused by work. Maybe a mistype, but he said that it wasnt.

You're wrong, I'm afraid. If somebody is off with depression after three weeks, an employer CAN and should try to make reasonable adjustments. Their obligation to do so has no qualifying period of service, unlike other employment rights such as (in most cases) the right not to be unfairly dismissed.

As to whether depression is medically diagnosed and likely to count as a disability, of course I wasn't trying to give a thorough and detailed account of the law, but suffice it to say that only a tribunal (not a doctor) would determine whether a condition was covered as a disability under the Equality Act. An employer ought to be prudent if nothing else when considering whether a condition might so qualify, and moreover they should be fair.

You asked "can I go to work for one day, say the work has exacerbated my depression and lay down what I want them to change?" Let's assume that the person who does this is being sincere - they have severe depression, their first day was overwhelming or unpleasant, and they believe certain adjustments could manage the effect on their depression. The answer is: yes, the employer is legally obliged to make reasonable adjustments.

You seem to imply that the employee in this case is automatically unreasonable, by having short service, trying to "lay down" what they want their employer to do. This may be the case but often isn't. I hope this helps to improve your understanding of this area, especially if you are an employer yourself.

Alderbank

whoosh wrote: »

a solicitor's letter is relatively cheap

If you believe this you must be a solicitor

Undervalued

whoosh wrote: »

If you have a diagnosed depression and this was the (or a) reason for your absence, and assuming you have informed your employer of that (and not withheld such information, e.g. on any pre-employment questionnaire) then your employer must make reasonable adjustments or else face potential liability for unlawful discrimination.

This is because depression counts as a disability under the Equality Act 2010.

It can do under certain circumstances but it the vast majority of cases it does not. There is nothing in the OP to suggest that this would be one of the rare circumstances where it did.

Undervalued

whoosh wrote: »

You're wrong, I'm afraid. If somebody is off with depression after three weeks, an employer CAN and should try to make reasonable adjustments. Their obligation to do so has no qualifying period of service, unlike other employment rights such as (in most cases) the right not to be unfairly dismissed.

As to whether depression is medically diagnosed and likely to count as a disability, of course I wasn't trying to give a thorough and detailed account of the law, but suffice it to say that only a tribunal (not a doctor) would determine whether a condition was covered as a disability under the Equality Act. An employer ought to be prudent if nothing else when considering whether a condition might so qualify, and moreover they should be fair.

Unless the OP's depression actually qualifies as a disability (which would be unusual although possible under certain circumstances) the employer is not obliged to make any reasonable adjustments at all.

Equally, unless there is actually a disability, the employer is under no legal obligation to be "fair".

whoosh

First, I only suggested the OP get initial help and correspondence from a solicitor, since his employer appeared to have treated him badly. I think I was quite sensitive to the fact that he might not want to pursue a claim, or might not have a valid claim (e.g. if he had not disclosed his circumstances to his employer).

Nonetheless I think you fail to understand that on at least a cursory reading of the limited information OP provided, his employer may have acted both unlawfully and badly, and at the very least ought to be held to account for the way he was treated. If he had given the reason for his absence as depression (as I assume he did) and was then sacked by email (which I am assuming means his boss made no attempts to find out the reasons for his depression and establish whether any reasonable adjustments could be made), then he has potentially been unfairly dismissed.

That's a very brief statement of what the legal position might be. Whether you agree with that is another thing.

I don't think advising the OP to seek legal advice is bad advice. I recognised myself that the OP might have limited appetite for doing very much - his postings suggest this, and I can't say I blame him. He is free to ignore advice he doesn't like. But equality legislation is there to provided protections for people in vulnerable positions. If this employer ignored that (as the limited facts seem to suggest) then it is not bad advice to suggest that they are held to account. This may smooth out the impact of the dismissal for OP and ensure other things, such as references, are agreed, as I mentioned. It will also prompt them to treat people who are protected by the Equality Act more fairly in future.

As I said it's only advice.

whoosh

ha ha fair point! (I'm not).

I meant relative to protracted legal action up to and incl tribunal.

Undervalued

whoosh wrote: »

First, I only suggested the OP get initial help and correspondence from a solicitor, since his employer appeared to have treated him badly. I think I was quite sensitive to the fact that he might not want to pursue a claim, or might not have a valid claim (e.g. if he had not disclosed his circumstances to his employer).

Nonetheless I think you fail to understand that on at least a cursory reading of the limited information OP provided, his employer may have acted both unlawfully and badly, and at the very least ought to be held to account for the way he was treated. If he had given the reason for his absence as depression (as I assume he did) and was then sacked by email (which I am assuming means his boss made no attempts to find out the reasons for his depression and establish whether any reasonable adjustments could be made), then he has potentially been unfairly dismissed.

That's a very brief statement of what the legal position might be. Whether you agree with that is another thing.

I don't think advising the OP to seek legal advice is bad advice. I recognised myself that the OP might have limited appetite for doing very much - his postings suggest this, and I can't say I blame him. He is free to ignore advice he doesn't like. But equality legislation is there to provided protections for people in vulnerable positions. If this employer ignored that (as the limited facts seem to suggest) then it is not bad advice to suggest that they are held to account. This may smooth out the impact of the dismissal for OP and ensure other things, such as references, are agreed, as I mentioned. It will also prompt them to treat people who are protected by the Equality Act more fairly in future.

As I said it's only advice.

Sorry but i think it is a wildly optimistic statement of what the legal position might be given that there is no evidence to suggest that this is one of the few cases where depression may qualify as a disability (for employment law purposes).

whoosh

Undervalued wrote: »

Sorry but i think it is a wildly optimistic statement of what the legal position might be given that there is no evidence to suggest that this is one of the few cases where depression may qualify as a disability (for employment law purposes).

You seem suspiciously keen to emphasise and reiterate that depression is rarely classed as a disability.

Do you have a source for this?

I have no source at all for how frequently depression is a disability. Based on my own experience with other people it seems many people with depression have had the condition for some time and are expected to have it in the future, albeit they may go through periods of improvement and relapse. They would be covered if it has lasted 12 months or is likely to last that long (and assuming a substantial impact on their daily life activities).

So yes, a mild depression due to a break-up with a partner probably wouldn't be covered. But my initial point was that the employer should have made enquiries. If there is stuff the OP hasn't told us, so be it, but if they booted him as soon as he said he had depression, then he deserved better and they ought to be held to account.

Birdman2015

Just to clarify a couple of things, the shoulder injury WAS caused by the job, typo on my part.

Re the depression, I did not disclose this to the employer therefore I wouldn't have any case against him nor would I want to start one. All I wanted at the outset was the monies I was due for the days worked.

I have just as I am typing this post received an email from the employer telling me he has paid the money owed to me. He had emailed yesterday to say that he was owe me 15 hours pay inclusive of accrued holiday and he has made a payment of £59, half of what I would have expected.. I don't think it's worth the stress taking this any further with him.

whoosh

Undervalued wrote: »

Sorry but i think it is a wildly optimistic statement of what the legal position might be given that there is no evidence to suggest that this is one of the few cases where depression may qualify as a disability (for employment law purposes).

Birdman2015 wrote: »

Just to clarify a couple of things, the shoulder injury WAS caused by the job, typo on my part.

Re the depression, I did not disclose this to the employer therefore I wouldn't have any case against him nor would I want to start one. All I wanted at the outset was the monies I was due for the days worked.

I have just as I am typing this post received an email from the employer telling me he has paid the money owed to me. He had emailed yesterday to say that he was owe me 15 hours pay inclusive of accrued holiday and he has made a payment of £59, half of what I would have expected.. I don't think it's worth the stress taking this any further with him.

OK, I'm glad you got part of what you were owed and wish you the best of luck in your next move.