Respondent won Employment Tribunal · 24 August 2023

Support worker dismissed for swearing at service user: disability discrimination claim fails

A support worker with 2.5 months' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after swearing at a person they supported. The tribunal rejected claims of disability discrimination because the employer did not know of his undiagnosed ADHD.

1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026

Case details

Key facts

  • Leon Schliker was employed as a support worker from 11 November 2020 to 27 January 2021.
  • On 12 January 2021, Leon swore using the words 'fuck off' in conversation with a person we support.
  • Leon was dismissed summarily for gross misconduct on 27 January 2021.
  • Leon had an undiagnosed mental impairment (ADHD) at the relevant time, but Accomplish did not know and could not reasonably have known of his disability.
  • All claims of disability discrimination and wrongful dismissal were dismissed.

Timeline

  1. Telephone interview

    Leon Schliker had a telephone interview for the support worker role.

  2. Contract of employment

    Leon received a contract of employment dated 24 July 2020, with a six-month probationary period.

  3. Employment started

    Leon started work as a support worker for Accomplish Group Ltd.

  4. Incident of swearing

    Leon swore using the words 'fuck off' in conversation with a person we support.

  5. Incident reported and investigation started

    The incident was reported by a colleague, and Mr Thomas began an investigation and made a safeguarding referral.

  6. Investigation interview

    Mr Thomas interviewed Leon, who admitted swearing but said it was 'banter'.

  7. Investigation report and invitation to disciplinary hearing

    Mr Thomas completed his investigation report recommending a disciplinary hearing, and Leon was invited to a disciplinary hearing.

  8. Disciplinary hearing

    Ms Jones chaired the disciplinary hearing via Teams; Leon attended and gave his account.

  9. Dismissal

    Leon was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct with effect from 27 January 2021.

  10. Claim presented

    Leon presented his ET1 claim form to the tribunal.

The outcome

The tribunal dismissed all claims brought by the support worker against Accomplish Group Limited.

  • The tribunal found that the employer did not know and could not reasonably have known that the claimant had a disability (ADHD) at the relevant time. The claimant's ADHD was undiagnosed until after his dismissal.
  • The dismissal for gross misconduct was fair and within the range of reasonable responses. Swearing at a person we support was a serious breach of conduct.
  • No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.

Lessons & takeaways

  • Employers cannot be liable for disability discrimination if they did not know and could not reasonably have known of the disability at the time of the alleged discrimination.
  • A short period of service (here 2.5 months) means the employer has less obligation to know about an employee's health conditions, especially if undiagnosed.
  • Swearing at a vulnerable service user is likely to be considered gross misconduct, justifying summary dismissal even for a short-serving employee.
  • Employees should disclose any known disabilities or health conditions to their employer to trigger the duty to make reasonable adjustments.
  • An employer's investigation and disciplinary process that is prompt and follows procedure will likely be upheld as fair.

This case highlights the limits of disability discrimination protection when an employer has no knowledge of the employee's condition. The claimant, a support worker with only 2.5 months' service, was dismissed after swearing at a person they supported. He later claimed he had undiagnosed ADHD, but the tribunal found the employer could not reasonably have known about it.

What the employer did right

Accomplish Group Limited acted swiftly and properly. When the incident was reported, they launched an investigation, held a disciplinary hearing, and gave the employee a chance to explain. The employee admitted swearing but called it 'banter'. The employer treated the matter seriously given the vulnerable nature of the service users, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.

Why the discrimination claims failed

The key point was that the employer had no actual or constructive knowledge of the disability. The claimant's ADHD was only diagnosed later. Under the Equality Act 2010, an employer cannot be liable for failing to make reasonable adjustments or for discrimination arising from disability if they did not know and could not reasonably have known of the disability. The tribunal also found no direct discrimination or victimisation.

What this means for similar cases

Employees with hidden disabilities should consider disclosing them to their employer, especially if symptoms might affect behaviour at work. For employers, this case is a reminder that a fair process and a clear misconduct policy can protect against claims, provided they act on what they know at the time. Short-serving employees have less protection, but all employees are entitled to a fair procedure.

Similar cases

Partial win £400 · Dec 2022

Wrongful dismissal claim succeeds as Tesco admits conduct was not gross misconduct

A Tesco night-shift customer assistant who was dismissed for gross misconduct has won his wrongful dismissal claim after the tribunal found he was entitled to notice pay. He was awarded £400.

wrongful-dismissaldisability-discriminationrace-discrimination
Partial win · Aug 2023

Autistic customer assistant unfairly dismissed for leaning on colleague

A customer assistant with autism was unfairly dismissed by Marks and Spencer after leaning on a colleague, as the tribunal found the employer failed to consider his condition or obtain updated medical reports.

autismdisability-discriminationreasonable-adjustments
Respondent won · Jul 2023

Head of PE dismissed for allowing pupil to use another child's inhaler: dismissal fair

A tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a Head of PE who authorised the use of another pupil's inhaler for a child with severe allergies during an off-site lesson. All disability discrimination claims also failed.

off-site-lessonmedical-baginhaler-use
Partial win · Mar 2023

Two teaching assistants dismissed after cocaine incident at school: one unfair but no compensation, other wins disability claim

A teaching assistant was unfairly dismissed over a cocaine incident at a special needs school, but received no compensation because she would have been sacked anyway. A second assistant won a disability discrimination claim after her mother was refused as a companion at her disciplinary hearing.

gross-misconductcocaine-at-schooldisability-discrimination