Warehouse operative dismissed for failing to report injury: disability discrimination claims rejected
A tribunal rejected disability discrimination claims from a warehouse operative with a shoulder deformity who was dismissed for breaching health and safety rules by not reporting an injury. The employer's actions were found to be proportionate and not discriminatory.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant had a left shoulder deformity from birth, accepted as a disability.
- The respondent did not operate a practice requiring warehouse operatives to lift loads of 10kg or more without assistance.
- The respondent did not have set picking or unloading targets; the tote pick rate of 40 products per hour was not a formal target.
- The claimant failed to report an incident on 11 November 2021 when he lifted a heavy box and aggravated his shoulder pain.
- The claimant was dismissed for breaching health and safety policy by failing to report the incident.
- The claimant's relationship with managers had not broken down; adjustments had been made by one manager.
Timeline
-
Claimant started as agency worker
The claimant began working as a warehouse operative at DHL's Thorne site via an agency. He had a left shoulder deformity.
-
Induction and health and safety training
The claimant signed the health and safety policy and completed Safe System of Work training, including accident reporting.
-
Disability disclosed to manager
Ms Scripa told Mr Rusciuc about the claimant's disability and that he could not lift heavy items. Mr Rusciuc adjusted duties.
-
Claimant obtained truck licence
The claimant passed his truck licence and moved to the MHE team of drivers.
-
Claimant applied for permanent role
The claimant applied for a permanent warehouse operative role, disclosing his disability but stating no aids or adaptations needed.
-
Claimant started permanent employment
The claimant became a direct employee of DHL, subject to a 13-week probationary period.
-
Claimant lifted heavy box and aggravated shoulder
The claimant lifted a heavy box at work, causing increased shoulder pain. He did not report it.
-
Claimant absent due to shoulder pain
The claimant took sick leave and obtained a GP fit note stating left shoulder deformity and recommending workplace adaptations.
-
Return to work and investigation meeting
Mr Arion held a return to work meeting and an investigation. The claimant stated the pain started two weeks earlier after lifting a heavy box.
-
Probationary hearing with Mr Lambert
Mr Lambert held a probationary hearing regarding the failure to report the incident. The meeting was adjourned overnight.
-
Claimant dismissed
Mr Lambert dismissed the claimant for breach of health and safety policy due to failure to report the incident.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether DHL Services Ltd failed to make reasonable adjustments, indirectly discriminated, or discriminated arising from disability in relation to the claimant's shoulder deformity, and whether the dismissal was due to something arising from disability.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all three disability discrimination claims.
- Failure to make reasonable adjustments: The tribunal found that DHL did not operate the alleged practices (requiring lifting of 10kg or more, or specific targets) that would have put the claimant at a substantial disadvantage.
- Indirect discrimination: The health and safety rule requiring reporting of incidents was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of maintaining workplace safety.
- Discrimination arising from disability: The dismissal was for failing to report an incident, not for something arising from his disability. The claimant's failure to report was not a consequence of his disability.
No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can dismiss for breach of health and safety rules even if the employee has a disability, provided the rule is applied consistently and for a legitimate aim.
- To succeed in a reasonable adjustments claim, you must show that a specific provision, criterion or practice placed you at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled employees.
- Failure to report an injury at work can be a fair reason for dismissal, even if the injury is related to a disability, unless the disability caused the failure to report.
- Disability discrimination claims require a clear link between the disability and the alleged discriminatory treatment; a general connection is not enough.
What this case shows in practice
A warehouse operative with a congenital shoulder deformity was dismissed during his probationary period after he lifted a heavy box and aggravated his shoulder pain, but failed to report the incident as required by health and safety policy. He brought claims for failure to make reasonable adjustments, indirect discrimination, and discrimination arising from disability. The tribunal rejected all claims, finding that DHL's actions were justified and proportionate.
The claimant argued that DHL applied practices requiring lifting of 10kg or more and meeting targets, which disadvantaged him due to his disability. However, the tribunal found no evidence of such formal requirements. The health and safety rule requiring incident reporting was applied consistently and was a proportionate means of ensuring workplace safety. The dismissal was for breaching that rule, not for something arising from his disability.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant's case failed largely because he could not establish that DHL operated the specific practices he alleged. He also could not show that his failure to report the incident was a consequence of his disability. A stronger case might have been built if he had documented any informal expectations to lift heavy items or meet targets, and if he had evidence that his disability directly caused him not to report the injury.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that employers can enforce health and safety rules strictly, even where an employee has a disability. It also highlights the importance of clearly identifying the provision, criterion or practice that allegedly disadvantages a disabled employee. Without evidence of a specific practice, a reasonable adjustments claim will fail. For employees, it underscores the need to follow reporting procedures, even when the injury is disability-related, unless the disability itself prevents reporting.
Similar cases
Support worker with osteoarthritis denied reasonable adjustments after furlough wins discrimination claim
A support worker with osteoarthritis was discriminated against by her employer, a disability charity, which failed to make reasonable adjustments and treated her less favourably than a non-disabled colleague after furlough. The tribunal upheld her disability discrimination claims but dismissed her constructive unfair dismissal claim.
Deposit orders and strike-out: what happens when a claimant fails to pay
A manager with 5 years' service had multiple discrimination and unfair dismissal claims struck out after failing to pay deposit orders totalling £125 per claim. The tribunal found some claims had little reasonable prospect of success.
Two employees win unfair dismissal and discrimination claims against Ibco Limited
A tribunal upheld claims of unfair dismissal, indirect race discrimination, and victimisation for one former employee, and unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments for another. Damages of £31,752 were awarded to the first claimant.
Removal of temporary sign-on location: constructive dismissal claim fails
A roadside technician with 15 years' service resigned after his employer ended a temporary sign-on arrangement. The tribunal found no constructive dismissal or disability discrimination.