DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Harassment and victimisation
Covert surveillance
Case Baker v Peninsula Business Services Ltd (2016) Eq Opp Rev 271:22, East London ET
Facts B suffered from dyslexia. He was employed by P as an advocate. The employer imposed covert surveillance of B on the basis of a suspicion that he was not devoting all his time to his work duties and that he was taking on private work. B complained of disability discrimination. He alleged that the surveillance amounted to harassment related to disability and victimisation arising from the protected acts of raising his disability.
Decision 1. The complaints were upheld.
The decision to impose covert surveillance had been triggered by the employee claiming that he had a disability.
Informing the employee of the surveillance in the context of disciplinary proceedings was harassment related to disability.
The imposition of the surveillance was victimisation because it was in response to B raising his disability.