Tech employee on sick go away for 15 years whereas nonetheless getting £54k wage sues – as a result of he desires extra money – Alokito Mymensingh 24

A SENIOR technician who has been on sick go away since 2008 and continues to be incomes an annual wage of £54,000 has taken authorized motion over not being given a pay elevate.

Ian Clifford claimed he was the sufferer of incapacity discrimination as a result of his wage was not elevated within the 15 years he was unable to work.

2

The IT specialist is paid over £54,000 a yr as a part of a profitable IBM well being plan and is assured to obtain the wage till he turns 65 – that means he’ll rake in over £1.5million.

Nevertheless, Mr Clifford argued that was “not beneficiant sufficient” and claimed that his £54,028 wage would “wither away” over time as a result of inflation.

Nevertheless, an employment tribunal dismissed his claims – on the grounds that he had obtained “very important benefits” and “favorable therapy”.

The Labor Courtroom in Studying, Berks, heard that Mr Clifford – who studied at King’s Faculty London – began working at Lotus Growth in 2000 earlier than the corporate was acquired by IBM.

He was placed on sick go away in September 2008 and remained unable to work till 2013, when he made a criticism.

As a part of the criticism, Mr Clifford complained that he had not obtained a pay rise and in addition complained in regards to the vacation pay for the five-year interval.

In April 2013, when Mr Clifford was in his mid-30s, a ‘compromise settlement’ was reached and his grievances settled by putting him on the corporate’s incapacity scheme.

Below the plan, a disabled particular person isn’t fired however stays an worker and has “no work obligation,” it stated.

An worker of the plan has a “proper” to be paid out at 75 p.c of agreed earnings till restoration, retirement or loss of life, whichever is sooner.

In Mr Clifford’s case, his agreed wage was £72,037 – that means he can be paid £54,028 a yr after deducting 25 per cent from 2013.

The plan lasted for over 30 years till he reached retirement age of 65, that means he’ll obtain over £1.5million in whole.

He was additionally paid £8,685 to settle his vacation pay grievances in 2013 and agreed by no means to make a grievance on the identical points once more.

Nevertheless, in February 2022, Mr Clifford sued IBM in an employment tribunal with new incapacity discrimination claims, mirroring his earlier criticism.

He stated he had been handled “unfavorably” since 2013 as there had been no pay rise and no proper to furlough, and in contrast himself to a able-bodied employee who would have been paid his full wage in the course of the furlough.

Mr Clifford advised the tribunal that with inflation now above 10 per cent “the worth of the funds would quickly dwindle”.

He stated: “The entire level of the plan was to offer safety for disabled staff – that wasn’t achieved if funds have been frozen endlessly.”

Labor Decide Paul Housego dismissed his case.

Decide Housego stated, “The truth that energetic employees might obtain raises however inactive employees don’t constitutes a distinction, however for my part doesn’t represent a drawback attributable to incapacity.”

“Certainly, the criticism is that the advantages of being an inactive worker within the plan usually are not beneficiant sufficient because the funds have been at a set stage since April 6, 2013, 10 years now and this presumably will stay.”

“The declare is that the dearth of a pay rise constitutes discrimination on the premise of incapacity, as it’s much less favorable therapy than for non-disabled folks.”

“This declare isn’t tenable as solely disabled folks can profit from the plan.”

“It’s not incapacity discrimination that the plan isn’t much more beneficiant.

“Even when the worth of the £50,000 a yr has halved over 30 years, that’s nonetheless a really important profit.”

“Nevertheless, that’s not the problem as, basically, the phrases of a profit granted to the disabled and never obtainable to the able-bodied can’t be inferior therapy within the context of the incapacity.”

“It’s a less expensive therapy, not much less.”

A LinkedIn profile of Mr Clifford stated he was from the Guildford space, Surrey, was “medically retired” and had a son.

2