The recent case of Lothian & Borders Fire & Rescue Service v Gray has highlighted an important difference between the standard and modified grievance procedures under the 2004 regulations.

After Mr Gray suffered injuries at work, he subsequently claimed that his employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate his needs as they were obligated to do under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

At the time, a pre-condition of bringing a claim to an employment tribunal was that the employee had to have already made a formal grievance to their employer. Mr Gray had done so through his solicitors. As they were entitled to, his solicitors asked “that this grievance be dealt with under the modified procedure as set out in regulation 6 of the Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004″ which removed the need for a meeting. The employer agreed.

An employment judge agreed to consider the claim on the basis that the statutory grievance procedures had been followed. The employer appealed, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld their appeal.

During the course of the appeal, the EAT highlighted the fact that, unlike in the standard grievance procedure, the modified procedure requires the claimant to set out the evidential basis of their grievance as well as detailing the nature of the grievance.

While Mr Gray’s grievance did set out the nature of his grievance - and would have been acceptable as a standard grievance - it failed to provide the evidential basis. Hence it failed to comply with the statutory modified grievance procedure rules.

Due to this, the EAT ruled that the original tribunal had no jurisdiction to address Mr Gray’s complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments. The employer’s appeal was allowed.

Technorati Tags: Evidential Submission, Modified Greivance Procedure, Unfair Dismissal