The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas)

Case Summary

The case involved a disability discrimination claim by Ms S Anrude against ACAS, focusing on the 12-week return-to-work policy and the counting of absences due to long COVID. The tribunal found that while the 12-week rule was not justifiable in all circumstances, it was justified for counting absences.

• •reasonable adjustments
• •indirect discrimination related to absence policy and counting of absences for trigger point purposes

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS BETWEEN Claimant AND Respondent Ms S Anrude Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) Heard at: London Central On: 15-18 and 21 November 2022 Before: Employment Judge H Stout Tribunal Member C Brayson Tribunal Member S Soskin Representations For the claimant: Mr Patel (counsel) For the respondent: Mr Kirk (counsel) WRITTEN REASONS ON LIABILITY AND REMEDY Judgment and reasons were given orally at the hearing. What follows is the corrected transcript. The Judge apologises sincerely to the parties for the delay in providing these Written Reasons. She is now aware that Written Reasons were in fact requested shortly after the hearing, but it was not until the Claimant’s solicitor chased on 22 February 2023 that this came to her attention. The further delay in producing the Written Reasons is owing to pressure of work. The type of hearing 1. This has been a remote electronic hearing under Rule 46. The public was invited to observe via a notice on Courtserve.net. There were no significant issues with connectivity. 2. The participants were told that it is an offence to record the proceedings. The participants who gave evidence confirmed that when giving evidence they were not assisted by another party off camera. The issues 3. The issues that we had to decide were agreed by the parties in the list of issues which was refined to a certain extent in the course of the hearing and to some extent in closing submissions as well, but in all matters of substance the case has remained as agreed on the list of issues, which is set out in an Appendix to this judgment. The Evidence and Hearing 4. We explained to the parties at the outset that we would only read the pages in the bundle which were referred to in the parties’ statements and s…