An NHS hospital cleaner, Zoe Kitching, has been awarded nearly £50,000 in compensation after being dismissed following over 400 days of sick leave across four years. 

Ms. Kitching, who worked at Royal Lancaster Infirmary, experienced extended absences between 2019 and 2023 due to “complex mental health issues,” including anxiety and depression. Despite substantial evidence of her condition, NHS managers did not acknowledge her as disabled and terminated her employment due to the prolonged absences.

An employment tribunal found this decision to be “irrational and wrong,” criticizing an NHS manager for denying her disability status prior to her dismissal. The tribunal concluded that Ms. Kitching should have been granted additional sick leave. As a result, she successfully sued the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust, which oversees the infirmary.

Representing herself at the hearing in Manchester, she won claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal. She has been awarded £49,147 in damages.

Hospital records show that she had a total of 406 absence days over four years.

Equality Act 2010

Of the 406 days, 85 per cent were connected to her disability and 12 per cent were owing to non-disability related reasons, such as Covid-19 or general cold and flu.

One period of disability-related absence, from September 2020 to January 2021, lasted for 130 days.

She asked Ruth Bradburn, her manager, if she could cut down her hours at the Lancaster Suite, but her request was refused.

Although she had previously been classified as disabled, in January 2021, the hospital received an occupational health report that stated she was “not a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010”, the tribunal heard.

Over the following months, Mrs Bradburn, the patient environment site services manager, held meetings with Ms Kitching over her absences and set her targets to reduce days off.

By June 2023, her absences had improved, but she was fired by David Passant, divisional manager of facilities.

Christopher Brisley, people & OD business partner, told Mr Passant that Ms Kitching was not disabled.

‘Irrational and wrong’

It was heard the NHS managers only took the January 2021 occupational health report into account and ignored other evidence indicating Ms Kitching was disabled.

The tribunal judgment said: “[Ms Kitching] was extremely upset by the decision to dismiss her and the refusal of Mr Passant to recognise that [she] was a disabled person as defined under the Equality Act 2010.

“[Ms Kitching] asked for another chance and explained that her absences had been due to mental health. [She] said it was unnecessary for her to lose her job.”

Robert Childe, an employment judge, said: “We find the [NHS trust] should have permitted a high level of sickness absence overall from [Ms Kitching] and the failure to do so was a failure to make adjustments.”

Judge Childe added: “At no time during the dismissal meeting or appeal meeting did the [NHS trust] agree that [Ms Kitching] was a disabled person... which led to an unfair and fundamentally flawed and discriminatory decision to dismiss [her].

“The decision to deny that [Ms Kitching] was disabled was irrational and wrong, given the medical evidence available to the contrary.”