Mrs White suffers from repetitive strain injury. She is a PA in a large, well-known organisation and has been employed for just under two years. Her employer is aware of her condition, and she has pointed out that she is often in severe pain when carrying out her typing duties. She is sent to an occupational health therapist who recommends adjustments to the equipment she uses. Nothing is done. She is then off sick for two weeks as a result of her RSI. When she returns to work, she is called into a formal meeting and informed her performance is not up to the mark and a performance improvement plan (PIP) is going to be started against her. She explains that her typing may have been slow due to her RSI. Nevertheless, a PIP begins, and she is subsequently dismissed. She lodges a claim to the employment tribunal saying she has been discriminated against on the ground of her RSI, which she says is a disability. Firstly, she alleges that her employer failed to carry out reasonable adjustments to her equipment. Secondly, she complains that putting her on a PIP and dismissing her constitutes discrimination.
Mrs White proceeds with a claim. A preliminary hearing is listed to decide whether her RSI constitutes a disability for the purposes of the definition of disability discrimination. The tribunal decides that it does not, and her case is not accepted.
Mrs White is successful in persuading an employment tribunal that the RSI constitutes a disability and goes on to win her case. The tribunal find her employer discriminated against her by failing to provide her with equipment that would not put her at a substantial disadvantage compared to other employees. It also finds that her employer discriminated against her by putting her on a PIP and subsequently dismissing her.