Plumber with back injury forced to resign after employer ignored adjustments
A plumber with six years' service was awarded £134,411 after his employer failed to implement occupational health recommendations, cut his sick pay, and ignored his grievance. The tribunal found constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was a responsive repairs plumber with a back condition that was a disability.
- The respondent failed to implement occupational health recommendations including a lumbar support and lifting limits.
- The claimant's pay was reduced to half pay in breach of contract and due to disability-related absence.
- The respondent failed to progress the claimant's grievance or facilitate a return to work.
- The claimant resigned in response to the respondent's conduct, amounting to constructive unfair dismissal.
- The tribunal found disability discrimination, victimisation, breach of contract, and unfair dismissal but dismissed protected disclosure claims.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant started continuous employment as a responsive repairs plumber.
-
Industrial injury
Claimant sustained a lower back injury at work, leading to sickness absence.
-
Back condition re-emerged
Claimant experienced recurrence of lower back pain.
-
Constructive knowledge of disability
Tribunal found respondent ought to have known claimant was disabled.
-
First formal absence meeting
Meeting held but no review period set, in breach of policy.
-
Occupational health report
OH recommended lumbar support, lifting limits, and phased return.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned but adjustments not implemented.
-
Further injury at work
Claimant suffered acute back pain with sciatica while working in confined space.
-
Invitation to second absence meeting
Claimant invited to meeting despite policy breach.
-
Grievance presented
Claimant raised grievance about failure to implement OH recommendations and health and safety.
-
Pay reduced to half pay
Respondent reduced claimant's pay to half, in breach of contract.
-
Meeting with Interim Head of HR
Claimant expressed desire to return to work on lighter duties.
-
GP fit note for amended duties
GP certified claimant fit for work with light duties.
-
Claimant emailed about return to work
Claimant asked for consideration of GP recommendations; no substantive response.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned on notice, citing breach of contract and failure to address grievance.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's notice period expired.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer discriminated against the plumber due to his disability, failed to make reasonable adjustments, victimised him, and constructively dismissed him by breaching contract and failing to address his grievance.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld claims of disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, victimisation, constructive unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and unauthorised deductions from wages. Claims of protected disclosure detriment were dismissed.
Compensation of £134,411.83 was awarded, including:
- £15,000 injury to feelings (plus interest)
- £7,000 personal injury (plus interest)
- £14,454 past loss of earnings
- £25,325 future loss of earnings and pension
- £5,139 basic award
- £500 loss of statutory rights
- £12,120 for unpaid sick pay, holiday pay, and notice pay
- 25% uplift for failure to follow ACAS code
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must implement occupational health recommendations promptly, especially for disabled employees.
- Reducing sick pay for disability-related absence without contractual basis can be disability discrimination and breach of contract.
- Ignoring a grievance and failing to facilitate a return to work can amount to victimisation and constructive dismissal.
- A 25% uplift on compensation may apply if the employer unreasonably fails to follow the ACAS code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures.
When ignoring medical advice leads to a six-figure payout
A responsive repairs plumber with six years' service was awarded over £134,000 after his employer, Coalo Limited, repeatedly failed to act on occupational health recommendations for his back condition. The case shows how a series of seemingly small failures — not providing a lumbar support, not setting a review period, cutting sick pay — can add up to a finding of disability discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal.
The plumber injured his back at work in 2019 and again in 2021. Occupational health recommended a lumbar support, lifting limits, and a phased return. None were implemented. His pay was cut to half without contractual authority, and his grievance about the failures was ignored. When he tried to return with a GP's fit note for light duties, the employer did not respond. He resigned in January 2022.
What the employer could have done differently
Coalo Limited could have avoided liability by following its own absence management policy, implementing the recommended adjustments, and engaging with the plumber's attempts to return to work. The tribunal noted that the employer failed to set a review period after the first absence meeting, ignored occupational health advice, and did not progress the grievance. These were not just management lapses — they were found to be acts of discrimination and victimisation.
The tribunal also applied a 25% uplift to some compensation because the employer did not follow the ACAS code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures. This uplift added over £18,000 to the total award.
Why this case matters
This case is a reminder that employers must take reasonable adjustments seriously from the moment they know — or ought to know — that an employee is disabled. It also shows that cutting sick pay without a contractual right can be both a breach of contract and an act of discrimination. For employees, it illustrates that resigning in response to a fundamental breach of contract can lead to a successful constructive dismissal claim, especially when the employer has ignored grievances and failed to make adjustments.
Similar cases
Dental nurse's constructive dismissal and discrimination claims rejected by tribunal
A dental nurse who resigned after securing another job failed to prove she was constructively dismissed or that her employer discriminated against her. All claims were dismissed.
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.
Constructive dismissal after whistleblowing and disability harassment: a partial win for former employee
A former employee who resigned after being required to attend a disciplinary investigation meeting following protected disclosures has won claims for detriment, disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation, but her constructive unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. She was awarded £12,822.78.
Missed promotion while off sick: constructive dismissal claim fails
An occupational therapy assistant who missed a promotion opportunity while on sick leave because she did not check her work email has lost her constructive dismissal claim. The tribunal ruled the oversight was unintentional.