Website Cookie Policy

We use cookies to give you the best possible online experience. If you continue, we’ll assume you are happy for your web browser to receive all cookies from our website.
See our cookie policy for more information.

Practice Areas

More Information

thepartners@wrigleys.co.uk

Leeds: 0113 244 6100

Sheffield: 0114 267 5588

FOLLOW WRIGLEYS:

Send us an enquiry
Close

Discrimination: Adjustments for Candidate with Asperger's Syndrome

16 May 2017

Was a job applicant with Asperger's Syndrome discriminated against by being required to sit a psychometric test? Yes, held the EAT

In the case of The Government Legal Service v. Brookes, The Government Legal Service (GLS) was recruiting lawyers in what the EAT called "a fiendishly competitive recruitment process". The process included a multiple choice Situational Judgement Test (SJT).

Brookes contacted the GLS and requested adjustments on the ground of her Asperger's Syndrome. She was informed that an alternative test format was not available (although time allowances were). She completed the SJT and failed. She claimed disability discrimination.

The employment tribunal concluded that a 'provision, criterion or practice' (PCP) (being the requirement that all applicants take and pass the SJT test) put a group people such as Brookes at a particular disadvantage compared to those who did not have Asperger's Syndrome. It went on to find that the PCP put Brookes, in particular, at such a disadvantage.

Further, while the PCP served a legitimate aim, the means of achieving that aim were not proportionate to it, and, accordingly, Brookes' claim of indirect discrimination succeeded. The claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments also succeeded on similar reasoning.

The EAT agreed. The employment tribunal was entitled to conclude the PCP placed Brookes at a particular disadvantage because she has Asperger's Syndrome. Additionally, her psychiatrist had made previous recommendations (in relation to her university courses) that a multiple choice format test would not be appropriate for her.

The EAT further held the employment tribunal adopted the correct approach when carrying out a proportionality assessment, but acknowledged that whilst the GLS needed to test the core competency of ability of its candidates to make effective decisions; a psychometric test was not the only way to achieve this.

Case Report - The Government Legal Service v. Brookes [2017] UKEAT 0302_16_2803 (28 March 2017)

If you would like to discuss any aspect of this article further, please contact the Employment Team on 0113 244 6100.

The information in this article is necessarily of a general nature. Specific advice should be sought for specific situations. If you have any queries or need any legal advice please feel free to contact Wrigleys Solicitors

29 May 2020

Government publishes new Covid-19 Job Retention Scheme Directions

Important considerations for employers who have decided to furlough staff

27 May 2020

When will changes to terms because of a TUPE transfer be void?

The key risks of changing terms on a TUPE transfer – even when they are beneficial to the employee.

26 May 2020

Community-led housing: What happens after Covid-19?

Our CLH team held a virtual social in May, the theme of which was what the future holds for the sector, in the aftermath of the Covid-19 epidemic.