Warehouse operative dismissed after whistleblowing and long-term sick leave: victimisation and disability discrimination
A warehouse operative with 8 years' service was unfairly dismissed, victimised, and discriminated against after reporting safety issues and then being absent due to work-related stress. The tribunal awarded over £16,000 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a warehouse operative from 10 September 2012 until dismissal on 26 May 2021.
- The claimant was absent due to work-related stress from 28 February 2020, with fit notes until 6 December 2020.
- The claimant made a protected disclosure on 6 February 2020 regarding health and safety issues.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for unauthorised absence after he failed to respond to letters and attend meetings.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair, an act of victimisation, and discrimination arising from disability.
- The claimant was awarded £12,000 for injury to feelings, £2,863.32 basic award, and £1,908.88 for breach of contract.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a warehouse operative at Alliance Healthcare Management Services Ltd.
-
Protected disclosure
Claimant called Ann Jones to report colleagues not wearing protective footwear and a blocked fire escape.
-
Sickness absence began
Claimant went off sick due to work-related stress, covered by fit notes until 6 December 2020.
-
First tribunal claim
Claimant commenced early conciliation and later submitted a tribunal claim for whistleblowing detriment, which he won.
-
New manager appointed
Dean Scott started as outbound delivery manager, becoming the claimant's line manager.
-
First tribunal concluded
The earlier tribunal hearing ended; judgment was sent to parties on 12 May 2021.
-
First letter from Mr Scott
Mr Scott wrote to the claimant requesting a fit note and inviting him to a welfare meeting.
-
Claimant sent text
Claimant texted to say he could not attend the investigation meeting due to his mental state and would provide a doctor's letter within 2 weeks.
-
Dismissal
Sue Hanson held a disciplinary hearing in the claimant's absence and dismissed him for unauthorised absence.
-
Judgment
Employment Tribunal found unfair dismissal, victimisation, and discrimination arising from disability; awarded compensation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal for unauthorised absence was fair, whether it was an act of victimisation for bringing previous tribunal proceedings, and whether it amounted to discrimination arising from disability.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, victimisation, and discrimination arising from disability.
The key reasons were:
- The employer dismissed the claimant for unauthorised absence without properly considering his mental health condition or his request for time to provide a doctor's letter.
- The dismissal was an act of victimisation because it was motivated by the claimant having previously brought tribunal proceedings for whistleblowing detriment.
- The dismissal also amounted to discrimination arising from disability, as the absence was a consequence of his disability (stress, anxiety, and depression).
Compensation awarded:
- Basic award for unfair dismissal: £2,863.32
- Injury to feelings: £12,000
- Breach of contract (notice pay and pension contributions): £1,908.88
- Total: £16,295.19 (including interest on injury to feelings)
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must not treat absence due to disability as misconduct without considering reasonable adjustments or obtaining medical evidence.
- Dismissing an employee shortly after they have brought a tribunal claim can be seen as victimisation, even if the employer claims it was for a different reason.
- Ignoring an employee's request for time to provide a doctor's note and proceeding with a disciplinary hearing in their absence is likely to be unfair.
- Long-serving employees are entitled to a fair process that takes account of their mental health and any reasonable adjustments needed.
A dismissal that ignored mental health
This case shows what can happen when an employer fails to take an employee's mental health seriously. The claimant, a warehouse operative with eight years' service, had been off work with work-related stress since February 2020. He had also made a protected disclosure about safety issues and had won a previous tribunal claim for whistleblowing detriment.
When a new manager took over in March 2021, he wrote to the claimant asking for a fit note and inviting him to a welfare meeting. The claimant, who had literacy difficulties and relied on family for support, sent a text saying he could not attend due to his mental state and would provide a doctor's letter within two weeks. Despite this, the employer held a disciplinary hearing in his absence and dismissed him for unauthorised absence.
What the employer could have done differently
The tribunal found that the employer had not considered the claimant's disability or his request for time to provide medical evidence. A fair process would have involved waiting for the doctor's letter, exploring reasonable adjustments, and considering the claimant's mental health before deciding to dismiss. The employer also failed to recognise that the dismissal could be seen as retaliation for the claimant's earlier tribunal claim.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that employers must not treat sickness absence as misconduct when it is linked to a disability. It also highlights the risk of victimisation when an employee has previously brought a claim. For employees, it shows the importance of documenting requests for reasonable adjustments and keeping evidence of communication with their employer. The total compensation of over £16,000 reflects the seriousness of the failings, including £12,000 for injury to feelings.
Similar cases
Bid Manager with 12 years' service awarded £964k after disability discrimination and victimisation
A tribunal found that Mears Group plc unfairly dismissed a Bid Manager with spinal injuries and victimised her for raising concerns about reasonable adjustments. She was awarded £964,465.37.
In-house solicitor loses constructive dismissal claim against RMT union
An employment tribunal dismissed all 133 claims brought by an in-house solicitor against the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, including allegations of assault, constructive dismissal, and disability discrimination.
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.
Dismissed while on sick leave: employer ignored offer of imminent return
A tribunal found that EE Limited unfairly dismissed a broadband technical support worker with panic disorder after it refused to wait a week for her to return to work, and also discriminated against her because of her disability.