In Bugden v Royal Mail Group Ltd [2024] EAT 80, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that a tribunal had made a mistake by not considering the possibility of redeployment when assessing the fairness of a disabled employee’s dismissal. However, the tribunal did not make a mistake in failing to consider redeployment as a reasonable adjustment, as this issue had not been argued or included in the list of issues.
The EAT found that the tribunal failed to evaluate whether the employer had considered redeployment as an alternative to dismissal. The employee, who had multiple physical and mental disabilities, was dismissed under an attendance management policy after 32 periods of ill-health absence totalling 297 days over four years. Although the tribunal initially rejected his claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination, the EAT upheld his appeal regarding unfair dismissal. The EAT decided that the employer should have considered redeployment before dismissing the employee. The tribunal erred by failing to address this issue when determining whether the dismissal was reasonable, even though it was not raised by the parties. Consequently, the unfair dismissal claim was sent back for reconsideration.
However, the EAT dismissed the appeal regarding the failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal was not wrong for not considering redeployment as a reasonable adjustment, as this argument was not presented at trial or included in the list of issues. Although the employee’s mental health was a contributing factor to his absences, redeployment was not identified as a necessary adjustment by the occupational health reports, the employee himself, or the employer.
