Long-serving administrator dismissed for sickness absence: tribunal upholds Coventry University's decision
An employment tribunal has rejected claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination brought by a management support administrator with 18 years' service who was dismissed for capability due to long-term sickness absence.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Management Support Administrator from 15 October 2001 until 1 August 2019.
- She was dismissed for capability due to prolonged and repeated sickness absence.
- The claimant had two lengthy absences: October 2018 to January 2019 and from March 2019 onwards.
- The respondent followed a Stage II Absence Review Procedure and considered redeployment, but none was available.
- The claimant's allegations of race and age discrimination were found to be without merit; she had not raised them during employment or appeal.
- The tribunal found the claimant's evidence confused, inconsistent, and not credible, and dismissed all claims.
Timeline
-
Conflict begins
Emails show conflict and complaints regarding duties allocated to the claimant from as early as 2012.
-
Claimant raises concerns
The claimant wrote to Ms Moten expressing concerns about her role and duty allocation, but did not raise a formal grievance or allege discrimination.
-
Performance Action Planning Review Meeting
The claimant's conduct towards Ms Moten was extreme and unacceptable; she accused Ms Moten of 'behaving criminally' and started singing during the meeting.
-
Final written warning
The claimant received a final written warning for unprofessional conduct following a disciplinary hearing.
-
Performance Improvement Plan implemented
Ms Clark implemented a PIP setting out improvements required in performance and conduct.
-
First sickness absence begins
The claimant commenced a prolonged period of sickness absence, returning on 8 January 2019.
-
Second sickness absence begins
The claimant commenced a further prolonged sickness absence from which she did not return.
-
Stage II Absence Review Meeting
Professor McLaughlin chaired the meeting; the claimant attended with her union representative. The outcome was a recommendation to terminate employment.
-
Dismissal
Professor Marshall made the final decision to terminate the claimant's employment with contractual notice.
-
Appeal hearing
The appeal panel upheld the dismissal; the claimant raised no allegations of discrimination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for capability, and whether she had been subjected to direct race and age discrimination, harassment, or victimisation.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims brought by the claimant against Coventry University.
- The dismissal for capability due to prolonged and repeated sickness absence was fair. The respondent followed a Stage II Absence Review Procedure, considered redeployment (none available), and gave contractual notice.
- The claimant's allegations of race and age discrimination were rejected. She had not raised these during employment or appeal, and her evidence was found to be confused, inconsistent, and not credible.
- No compensation was awarded as the respondent won the case.
Lessons & takeaways
- Length of service does not automatically make a capability dismissal unfair if the employer follows a proper procedure and considers alternatives.
- Tribunals expect employees to raise discrimination complaints during employment or at appeal, not for the first time in tribunal proceedings.
- Inconsistent or confused evidence can significantly undermine a claimant's credibility and the strength of their case.
- Employers who follow a structured absence review process and consider redeployment are more likely to defend capability dismissals successfully.
A capability dismissal that withstood scrutiny
This case shows that even a long-serving employee can be fairly dismissed for capability reasons if the employer follows a proper procedure. The management support administrator had worked for Coventry University for 18 years, but after two prolonged sickness absences within a year, the university initiated its Stage II Absence Review Procedure. The tribunal found that the employer acted reasonably by considering redeployment options and giving contractual notice.
What the employer did right
The university's approach included a formal review meeting, consideration of alternative roles, and an appeal process. The tribunal noted that the decision-maker, Professor Marshall, had the authority to make the final decision and that the process was within the range of reasonable responses. For employers, this case reinforces the importance of having a clear absence management policy and following it consistently.
The discrimination claims that fell short
The claimant also alleged race and age discrimination, but the tribunal found these claims to be without merit. Crucially, she had not raised any discrimination concerns during her employment or at the appeal hearing. Her evidence was described as confused and inconsistent, which further weakened her case. This highlights that tribunals expect employees to raise such issues promptly and with clear evidence.
What this means for similar claims
For employees considering a claim after a capability dismissal, this case serves as a reminder that the fairness of the process matters more than the length of service. A well-documented absence review, with genuine consideration of alternatives, can justify dismissal. For those alleging discrimination, it is essential to raise concerns early and maintain consistent, credible evidence throughout.
Similar cases
Business analyst dismissed after 16 months of sick leave: capability dismissal upheld
A tribunal has ruled that Bud Systems Limited fairly dismissed a business analyst who had been on sick leave for 16 months with anxiety and depression. All discrimination claims also failed.
Long-term sickness dismissal: employer's flawed process saved by fair appeal
A station support assistant lost his unfair dismissal claim after 20 months off work. The tribunal found the initial decision to dismiss was premature, but the appeal corrected the flaw.
Meter reader with 16 years' service unfairly dismissed for ill health capability
A meter reader who was dismissed while on long-term sick leave after a motorbike accident has won his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claim. The tribunal found that Morrison Data Services Ltd failed to obtain an up-to-date occupational health report before deciding to dismiss.
Security officer dismissed after back injury: tribunal finds unfair dismissal and disability discrimination
A security officer with six years' service was unfairly dismissed after a back injury. The tribunal also found that CIS Security Ltd failed to make reasonable adjustments and discriminated against him arising from his disability.