Dismissed while hospitalised with sickle cell crisis: procedural failings made it unfair

A procedural failure with serious consequences

A pharmacist with 20 years' service at Whittington Health NHS Trust was dismissed on capability grounds after sickle cell anaemia prevented her from returning to on-site work. The tribunal found that while the Trust had genuine concerns about her ability to perform her role, the way it handled the dismissal was unfair.

The key failing occurred when the pharmacist was admitted to hospital with a sickle cell crisis during her notice period. She asked for an extension so she could participate in redeployment discussions, but the Trust refused, saying her leaver forms had already been processed. The tribunal found this refusal amounted to indirect disability discrimination and a failure to make reasonable adjustments.

What the Trust could have done differently

The Trust could have paused the process when the pharmacist was hospitalised, granted a short extension to her notice period, and allowed her to engage in redeployment once she was well enough. It also failed to tell her about her right to appeal, which the tribunal said was a basic procedural requirement.

Despite these failings, the tribunal applied a 90% Polkey reduction, meaning it found there was a 90% chance the pharmacist would have been fairly dismissed even after a proper process. This significantly reduced the compensation from what it might otherwise have been.

Why this case matters

This case shows that even where an employer has a genuine capability concern, procedural fairness matters. Refusing a reasonable adjustment during a medical crisis, and failing to inform an employee of appeal rights, can turn an otherwise fair dismissal into an unfair one. However, the substantial Polkey reduction also highlights that tribunals will look at what would have happened anyway, which can limit compensation.