Stress claims and the impact of an employer’s conduct
October 2007
Two recent Court of Appeal (CA) decisions have considered the scope of an employer’s liability where an employee is suffering from a stress-related illness. This article looks at the implications for schools.
Schools will be familiar with their duty to take reasonable care of the health and safety of their employees and will know that a failure to do so can give rise to a number of claims, including personal injury, breach of contract and disability discrimination.
However, what happens when the employee’s stress is caused by the manner of his employer’s investigation into disciplinary matters (as was the case in Deadman v Bristol City Council), and can a school ever fairly dismiss an employee following a period of sickness absence which the school has allegedly caused (as was the position McAdie v Royal Bank of Scotland)?
Guidance
In Deadman, the CA held that:
 |
although it was a breach of contract for the investigatory panel to be convened with two, not three, members, it was not reasonably foreseeable that, as a result, Mr Deadman would suffer a psychological reaction | |
|
|
it was not negligent to inform Mr Deadman of the reinvestigation by leaving a letter on his desk as it was the content of the decision which was important and not the manner in which it was provided |
In McAdie, the CA rejected Mrs McAdie’s argument that the Bank was unable to dismiss her fairly because it was responsible for her illness. It endorsed the EAT’s previous guidance that:
|
|
where an employer is responsible for an employee’s incapacity, it may be necessary to “go the extra mile” in allowing a longer period of absence or finding a new role | |
|
|
the Tribunal’s focus should not be on what had given rise to the employee’s situation but on what it was reasonable for the employer to do in response; here, there was no alternative to dismissal |
What does this mean for me?
Although disciplinary investigations are inherently stressful for employees, where a school is investigating alleged misconduct, it should not be at risk of a stress claim provided it follows a fair procedure. This means investigating the complaint, and disciplining the employee in accordance with the school’s disciplinary procedure and the statutory disciplinary procedure.It will be reasonable to dismiss in long-term sickness absence cases where an employee is unlikely to return to work even if the school has caused or contributed to the employee’s illness. In sickness absence cases, up-to-date medical evidence and consultation with the employee regarding returning to work is critical. In dismissal situations the statutory dismissal procedure must be followed.
We value your comments, please
click here with your feedback/suggestions
Forward to a
colleague