Woman signed off sick for four years tries suing firm after they sacked her

The woman said she was unable to work due to brain fog.

A woman who was off sick for four years tried to sue her employers for sacking her.

Jeananne Henderson suffered from fibromyalgia which led to brain fog and insomnia.

This meant she was unable to work for Maximus Services Limited – which carries out medical assessments on people who claim state benefits.

The 55-year-old stopped working in October 2018 and told bosses four years later she could not work in a team properly due to her condition.

Her sick pay was cut by insurers, and bosses made the decision to fire her on the grounds of ill health.

But Jeananne, who was a manager at the company, was unhappy with the news and tried to sue for disability discrimination which were not upheld.

Judge Macleod said: ‘Ms Henderson had been absent for more than 4 years from work, which in the Tribunal’s experience is extraordinarily long without dismissal being considered.’

A tribunal held in Edinburgh heard Jeananne was seen by Occupational Health in one month after calling off sick, where it was recommended the manager should continue her absence due to suffering anxiety, low mood and pain.

She was seen another month later, when it was advised she should not return for another four to six week.s

The tribunal in Edinbugh heard Jeananne’s line manager at the time often made contact to ensure the company knew how she was feeling and to ‘offer support to her’.

But Jeananne said the ‘regularity of contact’ had a ‘negative effect’ on her recovery.

In February 2021, around two years and four months after first calling off sick, she old her employers she did not feel ready to return ‘now or anywhere in the near future’ due to how she was feeling.

After being off work for three years, another meeting was held in which Jeananne was told they would look to advertise her role and when she returned to work they would place her in an alternative position.

The tribunal said throughout Ms Henderson’s absence, her income had been protected under a policy held by the business and Legal & General Assurance.

In April 2022, the legal group wrote to bosses and said that her symptoms ‘no longer met their definition of incapacity and they would no longer pay her any benefits.

Legal & General wrote: ‘We are no longer satisfied that Jeananne is suffering from symptoms of such severity that she should be prevented from fulfilling the duties of her insured occupation and being prevented from returning to work.’

Jeananne was ‘not happy’ with this declaration and in a welfare meeting that month she said she still did not want to discuss any return to work date, despite being told  if a return to work date is not selected then her contract may be terminated.

In February 2023 her contract was terminated on the grounds of ill-health capacity.

The former manager believed that she should have had more occupational health referrals over her absence and argued that the process had
been very haphazard without any real structure.

The tribunal said: ‘In our judgment, the respondent allowed the claimant to remain in employment for an extraordinarily long time, even once Legal & General had decided to withdraw her income protection.

‘We are unable to sustain [Ms Henderson’s] submission that her dismissal amounted to disability discrimination.’

Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.

For more stories like this, check our news page.