Locum occupational therapist with diabetes: failure to make reasonable adjustments during COVID-19
A locum occupational therapist with Type 1 diabetes succeeded in her disability discrimination claim after her NHS trust employer failed to carry out a proper risk assessment and required her to return to work during the pandemic. The tribunal found the trust's actions amounted to a failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #type-1-diabetes
- #covid-19
- #risk-assessment
- #reasonable-adjustments
- #harassment
- #locum-occupational-therapist
Key facts
- The claimant has Type 1 diabetes and was employed as a locum occupational therapist from 9 March to 5 June 2020.
- The respondent knew of the claimant's disability from her first day.
- The claimant worked from home from 18 March 2020 due to COVID-19 concerns.
- The respondent required the claimant to attend work in person from May 2020.
- The risk assessment carried out by the respondent was inadequate and failed to provide key information about workplace safety measures.
- The claimant's placement was terminated on 5 June 2020 after she refused to return to work without a proper risk assessment.
Timeline
-
Claimant starts work
Claimant began her locum occupational therapist role with the respondent and informed Mr Coningsby of her Type 1 diabetes.
-
Depot clinic and PM statement
Claimant attended a depot clinic without full PPE. The Prime Minister advised people to work from home where possible and that those with serious health conditions should shield.
-
Conversation with Mr Coningsby
Claimant asked to work from home; Mr Coningsby told her she was 'overanxious' and that the PM's response was 'draconian'. He also introduced her to a diabetic colleague against her wishes.
-
Claimant starts working from home
Claimant began working remotely due to COVID-19 concerns.
-
First risk assessment meeting
Ms French began a risk assessment but could not assess the workplace risks as she was not based at the site. She indicated the claimant's placement might end if she did not return.
-
Second risk assessment meeting
Meeting with Ms Marshall and Ms French; the risk assessment was not shared, and the claimant's diabetes was not discussed. The meeting was hostile.
-
Claimant receives risk assessment
Claimant received the risk assessment document, which she found inadequate as it did not mention her diabetes or reasonable adjustments.
-
Meeting to discuss return to work
Mr Coningsby and Ms Marshall required the claimant to return to work; the claimant refused without a proper risk assessment. Her placement was terminated with one week's notice.
-
Placement ends
Claimant's placement with the respondent ended.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the NHS trust failed to make reasonable adjustments for the claimant's Type 1 diabetes and whether the trust's conduct amounted to harassment related to her disability, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment related to disability.
Key reasons:
- The trust knew the claimant had Type 1 diabetes from day one but did not carry out a proper risk assessment before requiring her to return to work.
- The risk assessment that was eventually produced was inadequate – it did not mention her diabetes or any reasonable adjustments.
- The claimant was subjected to hostile treatment, including being told she was 'overanxious' and being introduced to a diabetic colleague against her wishes.
No compensation was awarded as the hearing was limited to liability; a remedy hearing will follow.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must carry out proper risk assessments for disabled employees, especially when their condition may be affected by workplace changes such as COVID-19.
- Hostile or dismissive comments about an employee's disability-related concerns can amount to harassment under the Equality Act 2010.
- Short-service employees can still bring discrimination claims even if they cannot claim unfair dismissal.
- A risk assessment that does not address the employee's specific disability or propose reasonable adjustments is likely to be inadequate.
This case shows how a failure to take a disabled employee's health concerns seriously can lead to a successful discrimination claim, even where the employee had only been in post for a few weeks.
The claimant, a locum occupational therapist with Type 1 diabetes, started working for the NHS trust in March 2020, just as the COVID-19 pandemic was taking hold. She raised concerns about attending a depot clinic without PPE and asked to work from home. Instead of carrying out a proper risk assessment, her manager told her she was 'overanxious' and that the Prime Minister's advice was 'draconian'. He also introduced her to a diabetic colleague without her consent, which she found intrusive.
When the trust later required her to return to work in person, it produced a risk assessment that did not mention her diabetes or any reasonable adjustments. The tribunal found this was inadequate and that the trust had failed to make reasonable adjustments. The hostile treatment she experienced – including being told her placement might end if she did not return – amounted to harassment.
What the trust could have done differently
The trust knew from day one that the claimant had Type 1 diabetes, a recognised disability. It should have carried out a proper risk assessment that considered her specific needs and the risks posed by COVID-19. It should have engaged with her concerns rather than dismissing them as overanxiety. A simple adjustment – such as allowing her to continue working from home or providing a safe working environment – could have avoided the claim.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that disability discrimination claims do not require long service. Even locum staff on short placements are protected. Employers must take reasonable steps to ensure that disabled employees are not placed at a substantial disadvantage. A risk assessment that fails to address the employee's disability is unlikely to be considered reasonable. The case also highlights that comments and behaviour that belittle an employee's disability-related concerns can cross the line into harassment.
Similar cases
Bus driver with Crohn's disease awarded £25,000 after employer failed to provide suitable shifts
A bus driver with over 30 years' service was awarded £25,000 after his employer repeatedly allocated shifts that did not meet his disability-related needs, causing him to soil himself at work.
Social worker's race discrimination claim over 'aggressive' stereotype dismissed
A black social worker with 15 years' service lost her claims of race discrimination and constructive dismissal after an altercation with a white colleague. The tribunal found no evidence of stereotyping or unfair treatment.
Before and after school club leader loses Covid-19 safety dismissal claim
A before and after school club leader who refused to attend work during the pandemic claiming serious and imminent danger has lost her unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found her belief was not reasonable given the school's risk assessments.
Administrative Officer's constructive dismissal claim over trigger words and phone policy rejected
An Administrative Officer who resigned after just seven weeks with the Ministry of Justice lost her claims of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The tribunal found her employer had acted reasonably throughout.