Employers should review bonus or other schemes designed to reward good attendance levels, to assess whether any discriminatory affect against disabled employees can be justified.
In Land Registry v Houghton, the aim of an employer's bonus scheme was to reward good performance and attendance. However, it automatically excluded from an award those who had received a formal warning in respect of sickness absence (regardless of any improvement in attendance post warning). In contrast, managers were given a discretion whether to exclude employees who had received a warning for misconduct.
The claimants had high absence levels due to disability-related illness. The employer had adjusted the usual trigger points for absence warnings for the disabled claimants, and the warnings themselves were not unlawful. However, the automatic exclusion from the bonus scheme because of the warnings was clearly less favourable treatment in consequence of disability. It was not justified given the lack of discretion (compared with the position for misconduct warnings) and failure to reward improved attendance post-warning. The automatic exclusion from bonus was unlawful, notwithstanding the fact that the warnings themselves were not unlawful. It was no defence that the member of HR who disallowed the bonus because of the warning was unaware of the claimants’ disability.
Key contacts
Steve Bell
Managing Partner - Employment, Industrial Relations and Safety (Australia, Asia), Melbourne
Emma Rohsler
Regional Head of Practice (EMEA) - Employment Pensions and Incentives, Paris
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.