Communications officer dismissed for 17 absences: tribunal upholds capability dismissal
A communications officer who had 17 separate absences over two years was fairly dismissed for capability. The tribunal rejected her claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #long-term-sickness
- #intermittent-absences
- #probation-extension
- #fibromyalgia
- #emergency-services
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a communications officer handling emergency 999/101 calls from 13 February 2017.
- The claimant had 17 separate absences covering 163 days between June 2017 and April 2019.
- The claimant's probation was extended multiple times due to attendance issues.
- The claimant was dismissed on 19 November 2019 for unacceptable attendance.
- The tribunal found the claimant was not disabled by fibromyalgia during the material time (before November 2019).
- The respondent provided support including occupational health referrals, micro breaks, and a recoup plan.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a communications officer.
-
First fall at work
Claimant fell while walking outside, sustaining a grazed knee.
-
Second fall
Claimant slipped on snow, resulting in ankle sprain and A&E attendance.
-
Third fall
Claimant fell on stairs, attended A&E for x-ray.
-
Probation extended
Claimant informed probation extended three months due to unsatisfactory attendance.
-
Probation review
PS Bolton completed review noting failure to improve attendance; recommendation for dismissal.
-
Fourth fall at work
Claimant tripped in car park, fell on knee and wrist.
-
Suspension
Claimant suspended pending recommendation for dismissal meeting.
-
Fibromyalgia mentioned
Claimant first told respondent of GP's opinion of possible fibromyalgia.
-
Dismissal
Panel chaired by Supt Warby dismissed claimant for unacceptable attendance.
-
Appeal dismissed
Appeal panel chaired by Commander Adelekan upheld dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for capability (attendance) was unfair, and whether the claimant was disabled by fibromyalgia and subjected to disability discrimination.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal (capability) and acted reasonably in treating the claimant's attendance record as sufficient reason to dismiss. The tribunal also found that the claimant was not disabled by fibromyalgia during the material time (before November 2019), so the discrimination claims failed.
No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can fairly dismiss for poor attendance if they have provided reasonable support and followed a fair process.
- A claimant must prove they are disabled under the Equality Act 2010 at the time of the alleged discrimination; a later diagnosis may not help.
- Multiple probation extensions due to attendance issues can be a sign that dismissal is likely if improvement does not follow.
- Tribunals will look at the overall attendance record, not just the reason for each absence, when assessing capability.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how employers can fairly manage long-term attendance issues, even when an employee has health problems. The claimant, a communications officer handling emergency calls, had 17 separate absences totalling 163 days over two years. Her probation was extended several times because of her attendance. The employer provided occupational health referrals, micro breaks, and a recoup plan to support her. Despite this, her attendance did not improve, leading to dismissal.
What the employer did right
The tribunal noted that the employer had a clear attendance policy and followed a proper process. They gave the claimant multiple chances to improve, extended her probation, and offered support. When the decision to dismiss was made, it was based on a fair review of her attendance record. The employer also considered the possibility of fibromyalgia but concluded, reasonably, that the absences were not all linked to that condition.
Why the result matters
For employees, this case is a reminder that having a medical condition does not automatically make you disabled in law. The tribunal found that the claimant's fibromyalgia did not have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on her daily activities before November 2019. For employers, it shows that a robust attendance management process, combined with genuine support, can withstand scrutiny at tribunal. The key is to act reasonably and consistently.
Similar cases
19-year investigations officer wins constructive dismissal after driving ban and ambush meeting
A long-serving DWP investigations officer was constructively dismissed after being banned from driving without medical evidence, ambushed in a meeting, and then forced to attend a review at an unsuitable venue. The tribunal awarded £373,936.69.
Agency worker's multiple claims struck out: no jurisdiction and out of time
An agency worker who worked for less than two years had his unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, and breach of contract claims dismissed by the tribunal, along with human exploitation allegations which the tribunal had no power to hear.
Sonographer forced to clean and threatened with deportation: race discrimination upheld
A black African sonographer was racially harassed and discriminated against after being required to perform cleaning duties and threatened with deportation. The tribunal awarded £33,611.12.
Dismissed while on sick leave: fixed-term contract not renewed without consultation
A mental health practitioner with 15 years' experience was unfairly dismissed when her fixed-term contract was not renewed while she was on long-term sick leave. The tribunal awarded £33,443.28.