If I don’t feel anything because of a condition eg I have severe depression and am just numb to everything or I’ve got ASD which means I didn’t realise people were taking the piss out of me, does this mean I can’t claim harassment because I did not personally find it offensive etc or is it based on what the typical person would feel in that situation?
England
Hello everyone. I hope you are all enjoying the new(ish) sub.
We've had a few instances of people posting questions, receiving advice, then deleting the posts immediately afterwards.
As a group of mods, we want to discourage this. The purpose of the sub is to help all LiPs by providing help and assistance with specific questions. That means that it's not just the author of a post that benefits, but also anyone who reads the post and the comments - whether they read them contemporaneously or in the future. We know that people search the sub for help - that was why we introduced post flairs, on feedback from users.
We also understand that posters want to keep themselves anonymous, and we suspect that the reason for deletion is to try to maintain that anonymity. We recognise that there will be cases where deletion is necessary for that reason.
So we are not blanket banning post deletion, but we are strongly discouraging it. Please think about what you post, make sure that you are happy for it to be in the public domain, and only delete if absolutely necessary.
Serial posting-then-deleting may result in a suspension or a ban.
What does it mean a solicitor instructs “counsel” and what’s the value of doing this?
I’ve got a complex case and I’m searching around for potential legal representatives.
Some law firm websites I’ve seen have said that for complex cases they might instruct counsel. If that means a barrister, why wouldn’t I just go to a direct access barrister then?
I’m really confused about a situation at work and I’m wondering whether it amounts to pregnancy discrimination, and more generally I’m looking for advice on how to navigate this.
I’ll give full details below, but in summary I’ve been off on stress leave for two months, I’m doing a phased return now with support from OH. OH made some recommendations about how work can help/support my return to work.
I’m pregnant, and I emailed HR, OH, and my manager’s manager on Wednesday to let them know.
I had a meeting with my manager’s manager yesterday (Thursday), and she said they are not willing to do any of the things recommended by OH. She was reading everything off a script, presumably from HR. She said she had an offer for me, that she could share without prejudice and off the record only, did I want to hear it, I agreed. She said they had a pot of money and they would like to offer me some money to leave and would I like to accept it, she didn’t even say how much just would I accept it, I said no. The whole meeting only lasted 6 minutes.
Are they allowed to do this while I’m pregnant? Is this discrimination given I told them I was pregnant the day before? And are they going to keep trying to get rid of me now, what are my rights?
I want to go back on stress leave because I already feel as bad as I did when I left before because of this, I’m having trouble sleeping. But I’m worried that if I go back on stress leave that they’ll try to say I don’t have capability to do my role and get rid of me, can they do that?
Full details:
I started reporting to a new manager in January. He has been promoted over me from a less senior role because the work he looks after is considered to be really important, business critical (I used to look after it before I went on mat leave, returned Sep 2025).
The work I reverted to looking after on return is different, and my new manager has repeatedly told me he knows nothing about it. He has made some objectively bad decisions since managing me, including pausing all of my work then unpausing it the following week, conducting my private 121s in the open plan office after saying he wasn’t comfortable recording them because they are private, and giving really unrealistic deadlines for work to be completed. He actually asked me if I had finished a task after I’d been off sick for two days, I was like no? I’ve been off sick? You know this?
He doesn’t have any other reports, I’m his only employee.
After all of the issues I was having I asked my doctor for help and he signed me off work, I was off for 2 months and then met with OH who put in a phased return plan for me, gradually increasing hours. I explained about the problems I was having with my manager, and in my report they recommended that I report to someone else. I also emailed my manager’s manager and HR to explain the issues I was having and asked to report to someone else. I have a good working relationship with everyone else in the department and there are other suitable people I could report to.
My manager’s manager said they would think about it, then the following week emailed to say they didn’t think they could accommodate it but that perhaps they could look at alternatives to improve things.
I found out I was pregnant that evening, and I emailed the following day to tell HR, OH, and my manager’s manager. MM replied to email saying congratulations and could she tell her manager, even if I wanted it to be private for now, so she had acknowledged reading the email.
The following day, we have our meeting, and she reads everything off of a script. Confirms they won’t change my reporting lines and I’ll just have to work at repairing the relationship with my manager. Then says all the stuff about the without prejudice, off the record offer. I told her I’m good at my job, I enjoy my job and I don’t want to leave.
I’ve got another meeting with OH next week and I’m wondering whether I should tell them about it confidentially or whether I have to pretend it never happened? I also really don’t feel like I’m ready to come back to work, but I’m so scared that they will try to terminate me for a lack of capability if I’m off any longer. It’s in their sick leave policy that they can do that.
What should I do? Any advice or support welcome!
I’m helping someone with a tribunal claim. They’ve gone through ec, the employer dragged it out but basically didn’t engage, and now we’re moving onto writing the et1. The thing is, I think it would have been better if they’d added the name of the manager into the claim, but didn’t for the ACAS certificate, can it be added into the et1?
Hi,
I’m dealing with a grievance at work. My employer is refusing to provide the investigation findings in writing before a grievance meeting, insisting I attend a live meeting instead. The grievance has been ongoing for 15 weeks at this point.
I have a diagnosed work-related psychiatric injury and my GP has signed me off as unfit for work. Attending a live meeting would be detrimental to my health.
I’ve requested reasonable adjustments- specifically that findings be provided in writing so I can review them in my own time.
My employer is saying they can’t go against their grievance policy and won’t provide findings before the meeting. They’re advising the grievance process isn’t over because they need a meeting with me before it concludes, even though they’ve sent emails saying it concluded weeks ago and that the disciplinary process was completed against the individual almost a month ago.
My question: Do I have legal grounds under the Equality Act to insist on reasonable adjustments (written findings) even if it goes against their policy?
Good morning all,
I have my upcoming PH which is set as a private face to face hearing for 2 hours , and have a couple of questions as a litigant in person :
Can a strike our of deposit order be raised in the meeting?
Will the judge help me with a list of issues?
Will I print copies of paperwork for the R and judge ?
In section 3.7 how many questions can I ask the respondent ?
Finally any hints or tips for a LIP as I am up against a large company solicitor
Thanks
Hello everyone, does anyone know how many respondents are usually permissible in a single claim?
Thanks 😁
Hi there,
I'm looking for some advice as an LiP.
We've just had a letter today from the Judge to say -
Application for Extension of time to respondents is granted.
Your response was presented to the Tribunal office more than 28 days after you were sent a copy of the claim. However, your response included or was accompanied by an application for an extension of time, and you have given reasons why the response was not presented in time.
Employment Judge has granted your application and has extended the time limit to enable the response to be accepted.
The parties should now liaise to ensure they are prepared for the preliminary hearing.
I am assuming that this means that their ET3 was retrospectively accepted? If so, we're still blind and do not have copies of the ET3 or extension, and so cannot liaise with them?
I've tried calling the tribunal office but they're saying they now have a further 28 days to submit another ET3 but that's not what this says?
I'm just getting really confused about what's happening here, as in addition we were contacted by someone who said they were representing R now, but there's no notice of acting, and the email with the letter attached has been sent to someone else in the company again.
Help!
Just to note the portal for ET1s and ET3s will be down from 8,30pm on 21 May. It says it will be back online by 11.30pm, but best assume not.
Thanks to the Daniel Barnett email circular (strong recommend).
My claim covers a 2 year period, and there is a lot of documented evidence.
As I understand the witness statement is describing events from my perspective, as well as referring to emails I have sent and received am I able to refer to emails sent by managers to HR - which at the time I did not know of but I have since seen which can support my account?
For example I told ‘Mr Jones’ that I was not coping, and needed adjustments (email to Mr Jones), Mr Jones was aware that I was having seizures in the workplace, as documented in an email sent to HR. (email from Mr Jones to HR)?
Background - Stuff at the bottom is really where I need advice
Sorry this post has turned out far too long.
I have a complex case I am presently acting as a Litigant in person. I am facing a very experienced legal team well resourced former employer.
My case has strong merits as discrimination case towards a protected group (EA2010)
It also has strong merit on Disability Discrimination, Failure to make reasonable adjustment(s) and harassment and victimisation in relation to a past grievance / dismissal. There is evidence the reason for dismissal was not the real 'issue in the room' and that I was instead dismissed in order to prevent facts relating to a grievance coming to light.
Current Situation: ET1 submitted ET3 returned & Rule 49 application, hopefully to be established at preliminary hearing.
I am very much hoping that an order for anonymity under rule 49 will be granted, I understand they are rare.
My case has particularly strong reasons for this to be considered, in part due to public profile of my former employer and my specific health needs have the potential to make me very identifiable.
Public knowledge of health conditions could affect my prospect of recovery and future employment. attention of the press could be hugely damaging to my mental health and prospect of obtaining justice.
In the event I am diagnosed with a more complex and long term mental health condition there is a chance I will need long term therapy taking 3-5 years to process what has happened (subject to diagnosis.) I will need to preserve the option to discuss this at tribunal, to allow them to consider how much R actions may have contributed to that outcome.
I have been able to obtain Consultant Psychiatrist letter that outlines that anonymity is a proportionate and legitimate need in this case - That the medical situation justifies the need for this, and why that would be proportional to the spirit of open justice. it also outlines justifications for reasonable adjustments at tribunal.
I have been asked to prepare 1000 word statement and medical evidence in support of early establishment of a disability with Respondents legal team. Thats more or less complete but Its not comprehensive and I've now hit the word limit.
I have been asked to supply "medical evidence on which I rely." in support of this and have no idea how much of this to share at this stage?
I'm extremely keen to protect the position regarding the Rule 49 application, when sending medical evidence. Any tips ???
I have a lot of medical evidence overall some of which contains information not really relevant to the case, can this be redacted? Some pages only contain signatures / addresses, often my own. leave them out? Redact 3rd party names like clinical admin staff?
Some diagnosis are duplicates private and NHS, Do I need both? Do I prepare A massive .pdf or multiple individual ones. The latter will take forever to upload.
I could offer one .PDF of useless reports and one of useful. Offer R both and see if they just want to discard the rubbish half once they see theres nothing to hide?
Do I need to share full diagnostic reports or is it enough to share shorter clinician letters?
If a document is a dosage change and some irrelevant commentary on my employers conduct from a medical professional do I put that in? I'm not relying of those diagnostically It's more like: "C was reporting a period of stability and positive response to medication." "R then Dismissed C due to events that took place before medication. "C's" condition In work was x."
Some reports contain mistakes or inconsistency a NHS GP referral says ' no known medical history' contradicting another earlier report. Theres also a useless letter from an NHS MH service saying not enough school reports available (I'm 30+) may not meet diagnostic criteria. This is completely contradicted by a later 6 page full diagnostic and 3 clinic letters.
I also don't want to over claim disability either to the point where my capability is called into question, I was in spite of my disability(s) capable of working for R. I needed the right adaptions, I absolutely could should have been able to work.
Any help and advice on how to present medical info appreciated
Using a throwaway.
I'm a Quant in UK that was fired via redundancy - I think it is a sham redundancy to avoid paying out a large bonus at the end of 2026. The details and timeline are as follows-
Role - Quant Mgr for a large ($10B+ valuation) that's based in the US with a small presence in the UK
Comp - £150K+ base. Have received large discretionary bonuses in the past (1-2x base)
Timeline -
April 2021 - Joined the firm in India initially
Up to 2024 - Promoted twice due to excellent performance twice
September 2024 - Moved to UK due to a change in personal circumstances (visa not tied to the employer) - base £140K, bonus of £300K paid out in Feb 2025. Awarded $50K in options up to this point.
August 2025 - Promoted again to the current role, base raised to £155K. Awarded another $100K in options, 25% of which were going to vest in September 2026.
Feb 2026 - Paid a £50K bonus for performance in 2025. Strategy goes back up and live after 1+ year of no activity
March - May 2026 - Strategy makes about $200K net of all costs.
May 2026 - Dismissed with no consultation or warning due to redundancy - told my role was being removed entirely (however there are others with the same title and responsibilities as me in the NY branch). Also told my strategy would be scaled down entirely (which is not true, details below). HR mentioned since I was in the UK for less than 2 years, I'm technically not owed a severance and can be dismissed without notice, but they're being gracious and giving me 2 months pay + £15K severance. I was invited into a call and not given a reason for it by a manager 2 levels above me that has never given me a review nor interacted with me day to day. I was working for the firm till the minute I joined the call - had just pulled an all nighter to deliver a different project that management asked me to work on. The manager had the head of HR and my former manager on the call explaining I was being let go. After this call my access was immediately cut and I lost access to my work email and all contacts. I did not have a chance to let other folks in my team know I was being let go. I worked there for five years and have a lot of personal connections at the firm at this point.
May 2026 - Firm gave me a settlement agreement to sign. Engaged a solicitor who said that the dismissal reason is a genuine redundancy if they have passed on my work to another employee. I gave a counter offer of £300K including vested and unvested options buyouts, unpaid deferred bonus from 2024. It was deferred over 3 years of which the last deferred share was expected to be paid out in 2026. The company has ignored my counter offer and missed the deadline I set to reply to the letter (gave them 3 working days to respond). I have just filed for unfair dismissal at ACAS.
July 2026 - This will be my end of employment at the firm
I feel the dismissal is extremely unfair because I delivered a working strategy, but the firm essentially is taking the route of firing me and just handing the strategy to someone else. There was no indication whatsoever and no consultation that they would do this. There's no commercial reason for redundancy because the strategy I had was making multiples of my cost to the company in less than a month. They have tossed away five years of goodwill in an 18 minute call to tell me my role is redundant.
Details-
I have a few questions-
After witness statements have exchanged, what happens behind the scenes please? Do these get emailed to respondent for them to review and have a discussion with the solicitor?
And then prep for cross exam?
Thank you
Hi everyone
I got my letter for a preliminary scheduled alongside the notice of claim to the respondent and it says it’s scheduled for over a year from now?
Is this normal for the Newcastle area? I’m quite surprised cause I heard my region is not doing as bad as some others like London, so I’m a bit confused.
This is for case management, so I’m not sure of what to expect with settlement possibility before then, if that is to be low with the respondent having insurance backed litigation. If someone can advise if the preliminary date being scheduled far in advance means settlement talks will be low, so I know whether to rest until 2027 :)
The order was for disclosure of my timesheets. It was made orally with no written record yet available, and R's solicitor is now claiming their instructed counsel didn't inform them of the order. How likely do we think that is?
(I know how likely I think it is, I just want a bit of a sense check before I confirm to the Tribunal that I'm withdrawing my consent for judicial mediation. I'd told R I still expected my timesheets to be disclosed so I can calculate an accurate schedule of loss, and that if they don't comply with the order, I'll proceed as if we're going to another open hearing.)
I’m looking for some honest views on whether I’m being unreasonable here, particularly from anyone familiar with UK employment law / NHS processes / disability discrimination issues.
I work for an NHS Trust and have ADHD, which was disclosed to management in 2024. I have:
- a Health Passport,
- Psychiatry UK adjustment recommendations,
- Access to Work involvement,
- and documented communication needs around clear written/step-by-step guidance.
Earlier this year I was trying to access the Trust Fleet Scheme. My initial application was declined on National Minimum Wage grounds, so I contacted Workforce multiple times between January–March 2026 asking for guidance around affordability and eligibility.
Throughout the discussions:
- Workforce discussed affordability,
- salary deductions,
- Vivup deductions,
- and my upcoming pay progression.
- I was told affordability would improve after pay progression.
- I was advised to apply once the increase had been applied.
- I was told they would review the order after my new salary hit ESR.
At no stage during any of these discussions was I told about a separate Trust rule limiting total salary sacrifice deductions to 20% of salary.
Because of the way the situation was being explained to me, I understood the issue to be affordability/timing rather than a fixed eligibility barrier. Based on that understanding, I returned my existing lease car in preparation for transitioning into the fleet scheme.
When the application was later declined, I was told for the first time that the actual reason was the Trust’s 20% salary sacrifice threshold.
The Trust has since acknowledged:
- there was a “gap in communication”,
- that the 20% threshold “was not referenced clearly within the email exchanges” I relied upon,
- and acknowledged that as a neurodivergent employee I rely on “clear, direct and structured guidance”.
I am NOT arguing:
- that they guaranteed approval,
- that the policy shouldn’t exist,
- or that I was “owed a car”.
My argument is more:
- if I repeatedly sought guidance,
- they actively discussed affordability and encouraged reapplication after pay progression,
- but failed to identify the determinative threshold despite having all my salary/deduction information,
- was it reasonable for me to rely on the direction of that guidance?
- and is it unreasonable for me to feel the Trust should bear some responsibility for the financial/practical fallout that followed?
The impact has been significant financially and emotionally and has massively exacerbated my ADHD symptoms.
I’ve now raised a formal grievance and started ACAS early conciliation, but Unite declined representation very quickly and I honestly don’t know whether I’m being completely unrealistic or whether there is actually something in this.
Would genuinely appreciate balanced opinions rather than just validation either way.
Hello all. I have my preliminary hearing in 6 weeks and I have still not received the ET3 despite chasing it up with the Tribunal. What do I do? Can I ask that the PH be postponed?
How have people used AI to help with witness statements and how do you rate the quality?
It’s taken me hours just to summarise a few emails into my witness statements (there’s hundreds more emails). I put the emails into AI to summarise and didn’t think the output was that bad.
Just a reminder for anyone interested or nerdy enough, but this case is in the Supreme Court on Thursday next week. It will be live streamed. Who knows when the outcome will be.