Skip over navigation

£20,000 Settlement for Disabled Man Suspended for Seven Months


    Date:
    14 Aug 2002

    Print friendly version

    A disabled man from Coventry - who was suspended for seven months from his job because of his diabetes - has won £20,000 from his employer in an out-of-court settlement.

    The Disability Rights Commission (DRC) argued that Richard Cleaver had been subject to less favourable treatment at the hands of his employer, Persimmon plc, in suspending him for so long. Mr Cleaver agreed to tender his resignation in return for the five-figure settlement.

    Richard Cleaver worked as an assistant site manager, which involved overseeing the construction of houses. He worked for six weeks without difficulty and then went on two weeks holiday. On his return to work he was called into a meeting and told he was suspended on full pay. His company claimed they had concerns over his health and safety yet no one had previously spoken to him about this.

    After a long delay, the company obtained two medical reports that both stated Mr Cleaver could continue in his job yet he remained suspended.

    The details - according to the DRC - are that Persimmon plc failed to refer Mr Cleaver to an occupational health consultant claiming they needed to obtain medical records first. However, they then failed to obtain these reports.

    Mr Cleaver’s Rheumatology consultant then sent his employer his own report that stated the walking involved in the job, climbing ladders and working on the upper floors of buildings, should not be a problem for him. Yet still the employer took no action. Persimmon further failed to speak to Mr Cleaver’s diabetes consultant, despite many promptings.

    Related topics:

    Add a comment


    Send me an email-alert when someone comments in this discussion:

    Please remember that your name and comment will be visible to all users of the Network, and that we may edit or remove comments without notice. Terms and conditions


    This document is for general guidance and research purposes only, and does not purport to give professional advice. Please check the date at the top of the article; the Workplace Law Network retains historic articles for general research.