NHS trust failed to redeploy disabled nursing assistant without competitive interviews
A senior nursing assistant was unfairly dismissed after her employer required her to compete for sedentary roles despite medical advice. The tribunal awarded £21,173.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant had a pituitary gland tumour removed in November 2015 and suffered from ongoing symptoms including headaches, dizziness, and blurred vision.
- The claimant was unable to perform her role as a senior nursing assistant due to physical limitations and sought redeployment to a sedentary role.
- The respondent placed the claimant on the redeployment register but required her to undergo competitive interviews for alternative roles.
- The claimant was dismissed on 12 August 2018 on grounds of capability due to ill health.
- The tribunal found that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments by not redeploying the claimant without a competitive process.
- The tribunal also found that the dismissal was discriminatory arising from disability and unfair.
Timeline
-
Sick leave commenced
The claimant started a period of sick leave due to her pituitary condition.
-
Pituitary tumour surgery
The claimant underwent surgery in Germany to remove a pituitary gland tumour.
-
First occupational health appointment
The claimant attended an OH appointment; the report advised restrictions on heavy lifting and manual handling.
-
Stress risk assessment
Ms Romero met the claimant and completed a stress risk assessment; agreed to short shifts and light duties.
-
Second OH report
OH confirmed the claimant was fit for her role with adjustments, but recommended avoiding manual handling and considering redeployment.
-
First sickness advisory meeting
Ms Bines held an informal advisory meeting; discussed redeployment and referred claimant to OH.
-
Third OH report
OH advised the claimant should avoid heavy lifting, prolonged walking or standing; recommended a desk-based role.
-
First competitive interview
The claimant interviewed for Therapies Administrator but was unsuccessful.
-
Second competitive interview
The claimant interviewed for Patient Access Coordinator but was unsuccessful.
-
Redeployment period started
The claimant was placed on the redeployment register for 12 weeks to find a suitable alternative role.
-
Third competitive interview
The claimant interviewed for another Patient Access Coordinator role but was unsuccessful.
-
Final review hearing (adjourned)
Mr Hill adjourned the hearing to allow five more weeks for redeployment and a further OH referral.
-
Final review hearing (dismissal decision)
Mr Hill decided to dismiss the claimant with four weeks' notice due to ill-health capability.
-
Appeal lodged
The claimant's solicitors submitted an appeal against the dismissal.
-
Dismissal effective
The claimant's employment was terminated.
-
Appeal hearing
Ms Mackay heard the appeal in the claimant's absence and upheld the dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the NHS trust's requirement that the claimant compete for alternative roles, rather than being redeployed directly, amounted to a failure to make reasonable adjustments, and whether the subsequent dismissal for capability was unfair and discriminatory.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments. The key failures were:
- The trust required the claimant to undergo competitive interviews for sedentary roles, despite occupational health recommending redeployment to a desk-based role.
- The trust did not consider redeploying the claimant without a competitive process, which would have been a reasonable adjustment.
- The dismissal was therefore both procedurally and substantively unfair, and the unfavourable treatment (dismissal) arose from her disability.
Compensation: £21,173.01 total, comprising:
- Basic award: £2,705.52
- Compensatory award: £18,467.49 (including loss of earnings and injury to feelings)
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should consider direct redeployment without competitive interviews as a reasonable adjustment for disabled employees who cannot continue in their current role.
- Requiring a disabled employee to compete for alternative roles can amount to a failure to make reasonable adjustments if it places them at a substantial disadvantage.
- Occupational health recommendations should be taken seriously; ignoring them in favour of standard HR processes can lead to findings of unfair dismissal.
- Long-serving employees are entitled to a more thorough process; the trust's failure to properly consult and consider up-to-date medical evidence contributed to the unfair dismissal finding.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights the tension between an employer's standard redeployment processes and its duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled employees. The claimant, a senior nursing assistant, had worked for the NHS trust for many years before a pituitary tumour left her unable to perform her physically demanding role. Despite clear occupational health advice that she needed a desk-based role, the trust required her to compete for administrative positions through competitive interviews — a process that caused her significant stress and anxiety.
What the trust could have done differently
The tribunal found that the trust could have placed the claimant directly into a suitable sedentary role without requiring her to go through a competitive process. This would have been a reasonable adjustment. Instead, the trust applied its standard redeployment policy rigidly, requiring her to apply and interview for roles. When she was unsuccessful in three interviews, the trust dismissed her on capability grounds. The tribunal noted that the trust failed to properly consider whether the competitive interview process itself placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage due to her disability.
Why this result matters
This decision reinforces that employers cannot simply rely on standard HR processes when dealing with disabled employees. The duty to make reasonable adjustments may require departing from normal procedures — including bypassing competitive interviews for redeployment. The case also demonstrates that a capability dismissal can be unfair if the employer has not explored all reasonable adjustments first. For employees in similar situations, this case shows the importance of raising the need for adjustments early and obtaining clear medical evidence to support requests for redeployment without competition.
Similar cases
Dismissed after 12 years due to long-term sickness: employer's redeployment efforts upheld
A Food Technology Technician with 12 years' service was fairly dismissed for capability after a long-term sickness absence, the tribunal ruled, finding the employer had properly considered redeployment and made reasonable adjustments.
20-year manager dismissed for capability after employer refused to adjust role for disability
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
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.