27-year social worker dismissed after 9 months' sick leave: tribunal upholds council's decision
Birmingham City Council fairly dismissed a Senior Practitioner with 27 years' service after a 9-month sickness absence for bereavement stress. The tribunal rejected claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 28 March 1994 until dismissal on 26 July 2021 as a Senior Practitioner in Adult Social Care.
- He was absent from work from 19 October 2020 due to bereavement stress reaction following his father's death.
- The respondent made occupational health referrals and held regular contact meetings during the absence.
- The claimant indicated possible return dates but did not return to work.
- The full case hearing on 26 July 2021 resulted in dismissal on ill health capability grounds.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses and not discriminatory.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant began employment with Birmingham City Council.
-
Role change
Claimant's role changed to Multi-disciplinary Senior Practitioner due to restructuring.
-
Father's death
Claimant's father died.
-
Sickness absence begins
Claimant absent from work due to bereavement stress reaction.
-
First occupational health report
Report recommended phased return and reduced workload when claimant ready.
-
Second occupational health report
Report stated claimant not fit to plan return; Equality Act not likely to apply.
-
Meeting with three managers
Meeting to discuss return to work in temporary Senior Practitioner Workforce role; claimant agreed to return on 7 June 2021.
-
Planned return date missed
Claimant did not return; provided sick note until end of June.
-
Third occupational health report
Report stated Equality Act likely to apply; recommended phased return with reduced caseload.
-
Full case hearing and dismissal
Claimant dismissed on ill health capability grounds after 9 months' absence.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the council's dismissal of a long-serving employee on ill health capability grounds was unfair, and whether it failed to make reasonable adjustments, discriminated because of something arising from disability, or harassed the employee in relation to disability.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It held that the council had a genuine reason for dismissal (capability) and followed a fair procedure, including occupational health referrals, regular contact meetings, and a full case hearing. The dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.
The tribunal also rejected the disability discrimination claims. It found that the claimant was not disabled at the relevant time (the occupational health reports were inconclusive and the stress reaction was not a long-term condition), and even if he were, the council had not failed to make reasonable adjustments or discriminated. The harassment claims were also dismissed as the contact and meetings were reasonable management steps.
No compensation was awarded as the claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can fairly dismiss for long-term sickness if they have medical evidence, follow their capability procedure, and consider alternatives like phased return or redeployment.
- A long period of service (27 years) does not automatically make a dismissal unfair if the employee is unable to return to work and there is no reasonable prospect of a return in the foreseeable future.
- To bring a disability discrimination claim, the employee must show they meet the legal definition of disability (a long-term condition). Temporary stress reactions may not qualify.
- Regular contact and meetings during sickness absence are not harassment if they are proportionate and intended to support the employee's return.
A long career ends in dismissal
A Senior Practitioner in Adult Social Care with 27 years' service was dismissed by Birmingham City Council after a 9-month sickness absence triggered by his father's death. The employee argued that the council should have done more to support his return and that his dismissal was unfair and discriminatory. The tribunal disagreed, finding that the council acted reasonably throughout.
What the council did right
The council referred the employee to occupational health three times, held regular contact meetings, and explored a temporary alternative role. When the employee failed to return on an agreed date, the council proceeded to a full case hearing and decided to dismiss. The tribunal noted that the council had a genuine belief in the employee's incapability and followed a fair process. The employee's long service was considered, but the absence was prolonged and there was no clear return date.
Why the discrimination claims failed
The employee also claimed disability discrimination, arguing that the council failed to make reasonable adjustments and harassed him. However, the tribunal found that the employee was not disabled under the Equality Act at the time. His bereavement stress reaction was not a long-term condition. Even if it were, the council had offered adjustments such as a phased return and reduced caseload, but the employee had not returned to work to implement them. The contact and meetings were not harassment but reasonable management steps.
What this means for similar cases
This case shows that employers can fairly dismiss long-serving employees for ill health capability if they have up-to-date medical evidence, follow their procedure, and consider alternatives. Employees should be aware that temporary stress reactions may not be protected as disabilities, and that regular contact from managers is not necessarily harassment. The key is whether the employer acted within the 'band of reasonable responses' – here, the council did.
Similar cases
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 after 10-month absence: employer's reasonable adjustments were enough
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of an assistant branch manager with 28 years' service who was absent for 10 months with anxiety. The employer had offered multiple adjustments but the claimant insisted on a customer ban.
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.
Personal banker's constructive dismissal claim fails after three-day stint at new branch
An employment tribunal has dismissed a personal banker's claims of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination against Santander UK Plc, finding that the final straw she relied on was innocuous and that earlier alleged breaches were not linked to her resignation.