Dementia outreach worker's whistleblowing and disability claims dismissed
A part-time dementia outreach worker who claimed she was dismissed for whistleblowing and disability discrimination has lost her case. The tribunal found no protected disclosure and no discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #protected-disclosure
- #disability-discrimination
- #anxiety-depression
- #aspergers
- #adhd
- #domestic-abuse
- #performance-improvement-plan
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Dementia Outreach Worker from January 2020, working one day a week.
- The claimant had conditions of anxiety, depression, Asperger's Syndrome, and ADHD/OCD-like tendencies, which were accepted as disabilities.
- The claimant was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan in August 2020 due to concerns about her performance and training progress.
- The claimant alleged she made protected disclosures on 22 September and 5 October 2020 regarding a client's PIP benefit.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant on 30 October 2020 for failure to follow reasonable instructions.
- The tribunal found the claimant did not make a protected disclosure and the respondent did not discriminate on disability grounds.
Timeline
-
Appointment
The claimant was appointed as a Dementia Outreach Worker, working one day a week, reporting to C.
-
GDPR concern raised
D raised concerns with C that the claimant had potentially breached GDPR in a case.
-
Email about anxiety
The claimant emailed C, mentioning anxiety and sensitivity to conflicting advice.
-
Positive update
The claimant emailed C stating she felt much better and was enjoying her work.
-
Appraisal meeting
C conducted the claimant's appraisal by telephone; the claimant later claimed she disclosed anxiety, but the tribunal found she did not.
-
Performance review meeting
C formally notified the claimant she would be placed on a PIP. The claimant broke down in tears and disclosed anxiety and domestic difficulties.
-
Webchat about PIP MR report
The claimant messaged D about a client's PIP MR report, expressing concern about delay. The tribunal found this was not a protected disclosure.
-
Email to C
The claimant sent a long email defending her performance; the tribunal found this was not a protected disclosure.
-
Disciplinary investigation report sent
C sent the report to the claimant by email and post, referencing her domestic situation.
-
Claimant disclosed disabilities
The claimant emailed D detailing her anxiety, domestic abuse, and medication. The respondent accepted knowledge from this date.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed on one month's notice for failure to follow reasonable instructions.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's communications about a client's benefit report amounted to protected disclosures, and whether her dismissal and treatment by her manager amounted to disability discrimination.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the claimant did not make a protected disclosure within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The communications on 22 September and 5 October 2020 were not disclosures of information tending to show a breach of a legal obligation or any other relevant failure.
The tribunal also rejected the disability discrimination claims. It found that the respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the claimant had a disability until 20 October 2020. The actions complained of occurred before that date, so the respondent could not be liable. The claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments also failed because the respondent did not have the requisite knowledge.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- To bring a successful whistleblowing claim, you must show that you disclosed information that you reasonably believed tended to show a specific legal breach or failure.
- Employers are only liable for disability discrimination if they knew or ought to have known about the disability at the time of the alleged discriminatory act.
- Performance improvement plans and disciplinary processes are not automatically discriminatory if the employer is unaware of a disability.
- Making a disclosure about a client's benefit delay is unlikely to be a protected disclosure unless it reveals a breach of a legal obligation.
A case about knowledge and timing
This case shows how crucial timing and knowledge are in discrimination and whistleblowing claims. The claimant, a part-time dementia outreach worker, argued that she was dismissed for raising concerns about a client's benefit report. She also said her manager discriminated against her by referencing her difficult home life in a disciplinary report and by criticising her attendance.
However, the tribunal found that the claimant's communications did not meet the legal test for a protected disclosure. They were not disclosures of information that, in the claimant's reasonable belief, tended to show a breach of a legal obligation. Instead, they were seen as performance-related discussions.
The knowledge gap
On the disability discrimination claims, the key issue was when the respondent knew about the claimant's disabilities. The tribunal accepted that the respondent only became aware of the claimant's anxiety, depression, Asperger's and ADHD on 20 October 2020. All the alleged discriminatory acts – the performance improvement plan, the disciplinary report, and the attendance criticism – happened before that date. Without knowledge, there can be no liability for discrimination.
What the respondent did right
The respondent had a legitimate concern about the claimant's performance and followed a proper process. The tribunal noted that the claimant was given a performance improvement plan and opportunities to improve. The dismissal was for failure to follow reasonable instructions, not for any protected disclosure or discriminatory reason.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that whistleblowing claims require more than just raising a concern – the disclosure must meet specific legal criteria. It also shows that employers cannot be held liable for disability discrimination if they genuinely did not know about the disability at the relevant time. Employees who want to rely on disability protections should ensure their employer is informed as early as possible.
Similar cases
Probationary lecturer dismissed for poor performance: all claims fail
A physiotherapy lecturer who was dismissed during her probationary period for failing a Performance Improvement Plan has lost her claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination, and victimisation against Cardiff University.
Care worker resigned after 'so bipolar' comment and sudden role change: constructive dismissal claim allowed to proceed
A care assessment officer who was told she was 'so bipolar' and had her role changed with less than 24 hours' notice has been allowed to add protected disclosure claims to her constructive dismissal case.
Registered Nurse lost constructive dismissal claim over protected disclosure and discrimination
A tribunal dismissed all claims by a dementia ward nurse who resigned after suspension, finding no link between his protected disclosure and the employer's actions.
Shift team leader loses constructive dismissal claim after credibility issues
A shift team leader with 9 years' service resigned after being placed on a performance improvement plan, but the tribunal dismissed all claims, finding no breach of contract and serious credibility problems with his evidence.