CABG Disability Discrimination evidence of effect of not taking meds.
I need to find a source of info for emoyment tribunal that outlines the substantial effects on day to day of not taking the medication prescribed post CABG x3. Eg Beta Blockers, aspirin, clopydodryl. Statins... ETc.
We know that's to promote optimum health but apart from saying, he'll probably have another attack , how can I explain this in a more relatable and specific cause and effect way?
Any one had to do this before?
The ability to reply to this post has been turned off.
Surly not taking prescribed medication is your decision (and frankly crazy) and any affects are self inflicted. Or am I reading your post incorrectly?
Thanks, its about entitlement to reasonable adjustments at work. Common sense and fairness doesn't seem to be that important.
What has your work got to do with your medication? And why do you think you are entitled to anybody helping you other than your medical advice.
Wow really caring response
Wow. Makes me wonder why you are a member of a support forum with a response like that.
? Have you actually read the post. ? The poster has no heart problems and is seeking advice on a work related issue.
You should probably read her other posts before commenting.
Yes I did and its clear that they are asking on behalf of a friend or partner........ is that not allowed on here then? I have been a member of the AF forum for some time and have recently joined this one as I now have another heart issue, expecting the same level of help and support for this communities members.
On the AF forum, folk help with all sorts of advice, if they can, related to the condition and the other stuff that comes with it ie if anyone has experienced work issues because of their condition.
Apart from that, there are more polite ways to put your point across to someone, who is clearly trying to ask for help from others in the same situation, than just being rude.
Having read others rude responses as well as yours I think I'll just make an exit from this forum altogether as from what I've seen, it's not my idea of help and support so I'll leave you all to it.
Thank you. My husband is too traumatised by wirk to deal with this, so its why I'm fighting my husbands corner on his behalf. He is on here, its whete I thought it might be an idea to ask for help incase others have experience to share.
This was my understanding of your post and quite frankly, I'm shocked at some of the callous responses you have had. I sincerely hope that you can get some help to make your situation better but I fear, you're not going to get it on here. Good luck.
What reasonable adjustments are you expecting? Reasonable adjustments relate to a disability and CABG isn’t a disability,
Yes it is if it leaves you with Angina. I take it you have had one ?
I have. 22 years ago. Angina is not a disability, try finding it in the blue book. It will absolutely not be classed as a disability if you don’t take your meds or don’t have angioplasty to solve it.
Then maybe your handling it better than he is. I know when i first had mine i was worried about every step i took but i am 7yrs down the line an know how to read my body but it doesnt stop me being scared of it happening again. I know its not classed as a disability but obviously he hasnt come to terms with that yet ! All i am saying is dont judge others reaction we all deal with it differently no one is right or wrong just different
All I’m saying is it isn’t a disability, if people want to hang on to their illness so it controls their lives then more fool them. I had a cardiac arrest on 19/04/22 and an ICD on 29/04/22, not including the multitude of other health issues I have and I don’t want a badge I want to live my life and enjoy it.
I am pleased that YOU are able to move on with YOUR life, unfortunately not everyone is so lucky and are unable to for various reasons (especially post cardiac arrest).
Whilst a CABG in its self is not classed as a disability, the reason for it may well be, iirc to be classed as having a 'disability' for employment purposes is not the same as for registering as disabled, but I may be wrong.
You are wrong, maybe try some research before diving in.
I think I did say "I may be wrong"!
Check the 'Disability and the Equality Act 2010', you may be surprised as to what is classed as a disabilty 
P.s. I did do a little research to confirm what I already knew.
Take a look at Charlie_G's response here
healthunlocked.com/bhf/post...
p.p.s. no need to apologise.
And you are wrong, also there isn’t a Disability Act, the Disability Discrimination Act was incorporated into the Equality Act in 2010 with many other acts. I’ve been dealing with discrimination in employment in my own career for 22 years. Your suggestion was it was the illness that was a disability which is wrong, it’s the result that’s a disability. Osteoarthritis is detailed but it’s the result of it that’s disabling, if you can’t perform daily activities you may be disabled but if you can then you won’t be determined as having a disability if you can carry out activities without any difficulty or restriction.
You’re wrong.
Really. Do your research.
Really, I suggest you do. Last reply from me.
Enjoy your Sunday.
Fill your boots, the first paragraph says it all. gov.uk/definition-of-disabi...
Wasn’t going to reply, but the OP has clarified, you should read it.
You are still wrong, but still no apology required ☺️
Apologise, hilarious. You have absolutely no clue, you jumped into this thread arguing the wrong point. Here’s the definition you don’t appear to know or actually understand.
Strange, I haven't been arguing with anyone.
You are making yourself look stupid so lets leave it.
Neil you're a bit mixed up.
This us about being g allowed to not be 100% when returning to work with a diagnosed co diction that affe ts you every day.
Ps the psychological impact alone leaves some people with a disability. Depression, ptsd, you've starred death in the face and been taken to the brink of death with pain, had soneone root around inside your body, organs have shifted position, been slit from ankle to thigh, sawed open.
Any of these things happening leave an impact than affect you Companies don't want to pay more tax, and want us to work Till 110, so there's an amazing legal Act Eq10 which states that employers need to adjust but it's being dodged and hard to enforce.
Also anyone who has an impairment, is so vulnerable. Threatening someone's livlihood by not adjusting and making someone feel not good enough for something they feel powerless to change is sooooo damaging.
I'm happy that you've never been made to feel this way. I wish more weren't forced out of bad businesses on to food banks and trauma of trying to get benefits by employers.
If you don't believe me look at the marks and Spencer case from last week, they must have spent £100k fighting a case where they treated a long standing employee abonibly. They were in the wrong, they knew they were in the wrong, legally and morally, claimant store assistant fought it and won.
Her compensation £15k.
I would love to explain more when we can.
Best wishes. J
I think Neil works for M&S 😉
Ha ha. Yeah!!
Whos making assumptions now.
That is called 'humour', hence the 'Ha ha'.
So it was about low heart rate, now it’s about not being 100% on returning to work or is it about not driving a lorry. If you haven’t been told not to drive then you’re fit to drive, if you believe you aren’t and have PTSD or depression then you should be signed off or sign yourself off work. Regardless of what you believe unless a doctor has told you you’re unfit to work or drive then it’s your choice not to go to work, you might want to see an employment lawyer because what you’re describing is not wanting to do something and confusing it with a disability. It isn’t a badge.
I live with vasospastic angina, I experience debilitating chest pain.My only treatment option is with medication, as my coronary arteries are clear, they go into transient contrictions causing angina.
I am at risk of a heart attack, stroke and heart failure.
I have just spent 8 days in hospital on IV GTN and morphine to stabilise my coronary vasospasms.
I was forced to retire early due to ill health. I was independently assessed as never being able to work in any capacity ever again.
I have PIP, which awarded at enhanced levels for both sections indefinitely, next review will not be before 2029.
I have a Blue Badge.
Some people live with chronic long term heart conditions, they have to find ways of living with their challenging heart conditions. They do not choose to perpetuate their conditions such as heart failure, refractory angina or heart rhythm problems.
I feel your statement below is unkind and judgmental.
"if people want to hang on to their illness so it controls their lives then more fool them."
So there’s a difference between people with severe complex health issues who are medically unable to work and people who seem to seek being defined as such, I’ve had heart issues for 22 years and a multitude of other issues including seizures, atelectasis, bronchiectasis, LVD, osteoarthritis in my left ankle, knee, both hands, wrists and shoulders, I had an MI and 3x CABG and on April 19th had a cardiac arrest and was shocked back after 15 minutes and now have an ICD so I’m not exactly in a happy place myself so my comments aren’t aimed at those who are genuinely suffering but at those who want to wear it as a badge or have an axe to grind so to be bluntly honest if those people don’t like my opinion I actually don’t care, the 1st place you go for help is yourself because unless you’ve tried you’ve already given up.
I am glad you are acknowledging that refractory angina is a debilitating heart condition, a hidden disability.
We all come to the forum with different experiences.
I would hope this is a space of safety where people can express their views and be given support without judgment.
I would acknowledge anyone who is suffering a genuine health issue but people who come in search of case history for legal arguments without bothering to do their homework I find quite annoying and it’s disrespectful for those who are seeking genuine support and guidance.
It's the Impact it has. Its the right to not get a written warning for deciding not to drive a 50tonne lorry if his pulse is 40bpm.
So read Assessing Fitness to Drive, link below.
If you decide not to drive then it’s a choice, if you’ve been medically told not to drive it’s a different matter. Do you have it in writing from a medical professional saying you must not drive, if the answer is no then your employer is correct. You can’t simply decide yourself that low heart rate or the result of it is a disability yourself, the law doesn’t work that way.
gov.uk/guidance/cardiovascu...
He's fit to drive, he had to get his license back through heart tests.
I used to think just like you, logically and fairly. But legal arguments are not logical.
We need evidence that's free ideally. To prove the legal grounding on unfair and fair and reasonable.
Reading this interesting thread ... Can I please just say that when you have a pulse of 40 ... you know about it. Furthermore, you know full well that you dare not put yourself on the road. If the gentleman had taken the lorry out, he would not have acted responsibly. In fact, whether so low or if it were a tachycardia you would not/could not do it. Whatever the rules that are written, I applaud this gentleman for thinking of other people's safety as well as his own. Sorry to butt in - please don't give me 'what for'. Thanks.
Daring not to put yourself behind the wheel of any vehicle when you feel unwell is a moral choice, unless you’ve been advised not to drive by a medical professional as you would need to surrender your licence or you’d be breaking the law.
If you’re that unwell you would either be signed off work by a medical professional or self certify and not go to work. They have indicated they’re now struggling with mental health but again being signed off applies.
They say they’re being disciplined at work for not being willing to drive, this suggests 2 things.
1. They haven’t been advised by a medical professional not to drive.
2. They haven’t been signed off as unfit to work either by a medical professional or self certified.
Without 1 or both of the above I’m guessing they will struggle to have a legal argument.
The law doesn’t look at morals, applauding them is your choice but absolutely for certain they should get employment law advice, what people think and what the law says are generally the opposite.
I don’t envy their complex situation.
I understand that fully and I don't envy their complex situation either.
The law is finite, that is true.
I receive regular magazines from Cardiomyopathy.org. A few years ago, there was an retired Cardiologist that wrote an article. It was fascinating to read. Basically, what he said was that throughout his medical career he was unable to understand how patients felt, albeit he had all the medical knowledge you could ask for. (I am of course relaying this in my own words.) And this is how life is .... you know the facts, medical facts, pharmaceuticals, etc. but until you experience for example a low pulse of 40, you know what the patient 'would' feel like, but experiencing it for yourself is yet another thing.
When I started nurse training in 1975, our tutor told us that whatever knowledge we gain, whatever procedure we undertake (ie saying it'll be a little uncomfortable), you will never know what any condition you are treating that your patients actually feel. He said that we were going to have one session, whereby we passed a naso-gastric tube on each other. Think it's easy for the patient, he said ... you will experience it first hand. That practice never took place, but it made us think from the very beginning.
You are of course quite right about 'moral' judgment. But actually, it's not just about morality, it's about the fact that we are all individual and some will - at a pulse of 40, feel a hell of a lot worse than others. Ask anyone on here actually with a heart problem if they can perform their usual tasks, be it driving, in the middle of being out - shopping say, and they will tell you that they feel so bad. You can feel you are going to pass out ... at 40, the brain isn't receiving much oxygen .... I am pretty sure many will feel like death. If the gentleman's pulse was 40, he would not have been fit to do much if anything. Sometimes these events can last for hours and such a low pulse can lead to cardiac arrest.
The law makers, the doctors that make decisions tribunals actually have no experience themselves - it is all text book data. I can recollect coming out of hospital with ? this and that, heart failure (low ejection fraction), arrhythmias and high blood pressures. Yes, I was on medication and so I was told to get off my backside and go to work. But, I was feeling so ill - feeling sick and feeling as if I was going to pass out and it was irrelevant. I was on medication and so go to work. I couldn't function
I eventually took myself off all the drugs, as I didn't know which one was causing it. Sadly, it was the last one which was the beta-blocker. That was 7 years of misery.
The interesting thing is this and that is there's a lady I know that has 'just one' of my issues, and she says she cannot work. I have no idea whether she attended a tribunal or not, but this lady even has her disability allowance.
To top the lot, when I said all that time ago about having such a dreadful time of it, I was told basically where to go. Interestingly, I came across a thread where someone (not too dissimilar to myself heart-wise), said she had good and bad days. Fair enough - that's how it is. I learned a lot from that, from replies and the fact that the law is flexible as and when it suits. The new PIP is now a telephone conversation assessment and it depends I suppose on a sympathetic caller to patients.
Sorry for all this Neil, but whilst I understand 100% where you are coming from, it seems to me that the 'law' is used as and when the person with authority chooses. Law or not, I wish this family success and I wish that the law makers would take into account that when it comes to conditions and medications, nothing is concrete.
Kind Regards
Could you possibly try and re-phrase this and give us all a clue what you are talking about? Is your Bio actually yours or the person you are trying to deal with?? There are no immediate effects of not taking the medication prescribed, they are a long term preventative measure. I am sure i am not the only one who has absolutely no idea what you are asking.
Ha yeah your probably right, im so used to work jargon now, I forget what normal speech sounds like. Thanks anyway, a HR person has replied.
This is a heart disease forum not a bloody HR resource is this how you normally deal with this sort of thing? Unbelievable.
Shocking reply to someone asking for advice!
So this "HR" expert comes on here basically masquerading as someone with heart disease with some mumbo jumbo post full of "HR Jargon" in their own words, which nobody can understand, and you think my reply is shocking?? I think you should read it again to be honest. I am glad they have never had to represent me!
Wow so angry!!!
I thought it was the perfect response.Advice on not taking medication for an Industrial Tribunal!!
The next question from the same poster will be seeking funeral plan recommendations.
Unless the OP was asking 'what if' the only way to work without any adjustments is IF they where to stop taking their med's, what are the consequences of not taking them.
Then the responses are completely inappropriate.
You are right. I have to prove that not taking his meds will likely have an effect on him continuing to drive a 50t truck on M1.
But if he continues taking his meds, vigillant and regular medicals in line with dvla and and gets enough rest, he's tickets boo!
I don't always agree with outoftheblues and sometimes they 'shoot from the hip' however I really don't get the manner of your reply.
If the employee was doing everything they had been told and the employer wasn't taking into account their health and looking into and offering reasonable adjustments then yes, I can see where the employment tribunal might apply.
However, where the employee is not taking the medication as prescribed by a medical professional and DRIVES a lorry, I would be absolutely horrified.
Not just for the protection of the company but more so for the protection of everyone else who use the roads/pavements etc.
If the vehicle insurers were aware of this I wouldn't be surprised if they refused to provide cover and if the DVLA were aware then they would remove the HGV licence.
Now that the mists have cleared it does actually pose a very difficult problem, I just found it unbelievable that the OP chose to present it in such an unprofessional and misleading manner. But anyway as you say, should this person be allowed to actually carry on driving an HGV? If he is stupid enough not to take the prescribed medication, what does that say about him/her? I would guess he/she is also not doing much lifestyle wise, so the chance of future problems could well be quite high. However I guess you can't start penalising people for not taking medication, can you? or can you? Personally I would like to see him/her off the road, but that's just me.
Of course he's taking his meds silly!
It's about a comparator in eyes of employment law. About till being disabled but well due to medication.
They say he's either not disabled and just an unreliable unemployed,
Or if we orive he's disabled he should have been medically dismissed
For this little legal hoop, we need to show that if he didn't take his medication it would have a significant effect on his wellbeing.
It's a stooped but necessary argument for this latest little game their playing .
Its OK I've found what I need.
Now read her latest post and tell me if you still agree with them?
My point was they should wait before making inappropriate comments.
I commented on what was written at the time, and therefore will stick by my original comment.
Of course if further information comes along then that opinion can change however I will say in this case there has been a complete 100% turn around here from the title of 'not taking their meds' to 'of course he is taking his meds silly'.
I really don't know how anyone is going to get the correct answer by giving information that is the opposite to what you want the answer for!
If the question had been clear in the first place none of this would have happened, any apology should have come from the original poster and certainly not the condescended remark 'of course he is taking his medicine silly'.
It actually reads "evidence of effect of not taking meds", it does not say they are not taking their meds!
But regardless the comments where inappropriate.
Come on, play nicely!
Do you mean he should be allowed to drive or that the OP was clear and not misleading ?
It wasn’t ‘about the content. It was a gentle reminder to be respectful.
Well said. It amazes me that the OP is not clear, yet so many assumptions are being made and aggressive responses don’t really help anyone.
There is no aggression involved, you are being a bit sensitive. If this person (who we have to assume is a pfofessional!) had come on here and said "I am a xxxxxx representing a lorry driver who has xxxxxxx and explained the situation clearly, and also, by the way, not filled in their Bio as if they had heart disease, then there would not have been a problem. Good luck to the lorry driver is all I can say, in more ways than one by the sound of it.
Once again 'assumptions'!
You should have stuck with your original response and waited for them to clarify.
There was no need for your 2nd response "This is a heart disease forum not a bloody HR resource", especially as the OP had said "Thanks anyway, a HR person has replied".
Whatever.
Read Ghost-233's response, this is how I interpreted the OP.
I agree with you on the point you raise in the second paragraph, this was rude and aggressive and shouldn't have been said.
Hrs taking his medication, this I'd about a legal definition and common law. Not common sense I'm afraid.
Your reply is offensive
You don't think the original post was totally ridiculous then? If you understood it you are the only one who did. At least she has had the sense to post up a second attempt which is at least coherent. The original post was an utter fiasco from start to finish, why do you think my reply was offensive?
So tattylash, have you got what you needed from your post?
Doubt we will hear from them again to be honest.
Incorrect again ☺️
Now you are being rude.
I’m a bit puzzled by the question. Are you saying that this individual isn’t taking his meds post CABG and his workplace feel it puts him at risk of an episode whilst driving a lorry and they’re not so happy about that? It’s tricky. I might choose not to take my meds but that would increase my risk of a HA. Should my workplace have some say in my Russian roulette decision? I haven’t even considered that. I’m sure most of us haven’t. I guess there might be some clause in my contract requiring me to be fit to practice. I haven’t looked.
No he's taking them. For a legal argument I need to show the likli disabling effect of if a lorry driver stopped taking it.
Oh I see. Whilst we’re not supposed to give advice here, as a pharmacist I would judge that he wouldn’t be obviously disabled if he didn’t take them but it’s about risk reduction of a major heart incident whilst driving. These meds are about reducing the risk of heart attacks and strokes. But the specific risk to him would involve looking at his whole medical history, surgery, meds etc not just his meds in isolation.
Dear Heartifact
Stop hiding behind the settee and popping out with your judgmental comments, fill in your bio and let us see at lest something of the someone that likes to use one liners to judge others.
We are all here to help, { belive me I have better things to do on a glorious Sunday morning ] so expend your answers into helpful comments that we can all benefit from.
I assume that you (and 1 or 2 others) completely understand what the OP is saying, I don't, so I think to jump to conclusions and give such aggressive responses is inappropriate.
It seems the conclusions you and a few others jumped to, where in fact incorrect, so I stand by comments.
Tattylash, we don't normally recommend Dr Google, but try searching for post CABG medication trials and morbidity.
Thanks. I found a research study that shows impact of compliance to medication post CABG. Lots on there. Should be enough.
Otherwise we may have to get an estimated pert cardiac witness and if we get say on who, we will have to pay at least half. But the judge should accept these I think. (Together with common sense)
Hi Tattylash do you mean you are trying to explain to your partners employers that the reason he is having stomach problems etc is due to the effects of his medication. So therefore you are trying to explain to them what the outcome might be if he didn’t take the medication? My own employer, before I was retired on the grounds of medical health at age 50 took into account the effects my medication was having on my day to day health and ability to continue working. However in my case all my Doctors had advised me to stop working and my employers did everything they could to help me get the best package possible.
Perhaps if you made an appt with Citizens advice they could help.
I hope you get something sorted out as it must be a worry for you both.
This is how I read it, but without them clarifying their post I guess we won't know.
Im not surprised tattylash has not replied the amount of rudeness to her question is unbelievable.
You lucky thing. My husband got unauthorised absence and attempted written warning fir going to a&e when his pulse was 40bpm.
5 absences in 2 years following g CABG avg 3 days each.
Having ibs (No access to toilets) from the medication.
These are just a few, but they're saying he wasn't disabled and didn't deserve a break on the absence management trigger system.
If he was disabled, he should have been dismissed.
But law says you can be disabled and condition managed by meds. So I need to prove that he is fit enough 90% of the time due to his medication, to do that I need to show the Impact of not taking it.
I dont need much as the reasonable balance of probability is that it wouldn't be great for road users, in a robust empirical way.
So yes that you. In this instance. Google was the perfect suggestion!
It all sounds very distressful for you both I hope you get the advice you need…. In my own case it was 22 years ago I was retired on the grounds of ill health, I think employers might have been a bit more compassionate and understanding back then than they are now. I wish you luck and your partner better health.
Well this is interesting. I nearly died taking post bypass medication - that is Statins -because I could not tolerate them confirmed by the hospital. I am now retired so your problem would not affect me but I really feel for you. Before my op I hinted to the cardiologist that I had problems taking certain medications and his reply was that I must be able to tolerate Aspirin which I can. My post op assessment Cardio took me off all but aspirin because I had lost so much weight . So many people on this sight do not understand the pressure associated with not being able to take Statins and the doom type offerings from people who can without a problem
Hi
I think you just need to say that the prescribed medication is necessary to treat his cardiac condition; without the medication he would be at very high risk of his cardiac condition deteriorating.
Hope this helps
Having been in a very similar situation, although not heartt related, I would be saying to you that there is absolutely no "worth" in anything might find out here, no matter how worthy the information is - a personnel department or tribunal would only want to hear "evidence" from a legitimate source ie a qualified medical statement from the surgery doctor, heart specialist etc and any information greened here, although interesting, is absolutely worthless to put before a tribunal. With the person's approval, why not accompany them to a specialist appointment and find out what it would cost to obtain a statement to any or all of your thoughts and suggestions - but not here - IMHO
Thanks, your right. I was wondering if people have been in our shoes and what they used.
I've found what I need, a really good empirical study on the Impact of non compliance with medication. If they want more, I'll ask the judge to request they pay for us to get private expert witness report from our Cardiologist.
I'm a post grad so I'm not so bad at research and law for layperson.
It's just a big fat game if chess! But one where each peice costs money and they want you to run out of pawns.
Oh world, your so unfair!!
Oh please tell me about it. My case was one of bullying frooom my line manager, long before my heart bypapss, but absolutely a contributer, the details of which are far too painful to put to paper again, suffice to say, like you and having completed a research masters degree in educational management, gave me the tools to begin the long road to justice. I have always believed a paper trail worth its weight in gold, and was able to bring this with me, along with a taped conversation I had - the truth of which, because of my fear, trepidation and having little worth in myself, forgot to push the "record" button. However, the fear of such evidence was enough to tip the balange just sufficiently in my favour, that said evidence was never played in court. It's all bluff and double bluff, however you have so much statutory rights in your favour, I can see no reason doe you loosing such a provable case, dominated by irrefutable medical evidence, they do not stand a cat in hells chance in open court. Go for it for if you do not, you will never believe in yourself again! If you ever need a friend or help with advice do please get in touch through this page and I can give you my email. Good luck and never give up
I think we need the OP to clarify what she means, I have interpreted the 'no meds' differently.
Agreed, I am curious as to which interpretation is correct though. But either way at least she has some good responses.
What on earth is happening to this forum? That's two posts today in my news feed where some replies have been os nasty that they've caused the original poster to leave. It's supposed to be a "support" forum.
She has responded and clarified what she meant.
totally agree there was a post this morning where the lady was looking for help and 25 mins later she had left the forum after being upset by some of the replies such a shame the way some people reply to posts.
Woah I'm so in awe of the response.
1. 1st of course he's taking his meds.
2. There's a lot of misunderstanding on here. Disability definition for protection at work is different to out of work eg pip, esa....
3. Any condiction that lasts more than a year, and has more than a trivial impact on your day to day, even if you take medication and you seem fine, gives you protection. (Depression, asthma, diabeties, back pain).
4. I'm deeeep In to this, when our case uis resolved, I'll come back and explain it all, I've no idea what I can and can't say ay this time.
5. Please don't hate, we're not work shy, we're trying to fight the good fight. We are not screwing average employers, but a massive billion pound company who knows better and has had fatalities. Its cheaper to not train its managers or HR, and bully vulnerable people out and pay for the few 'mistakes'.
6. This isn't a case of logic, fairness, right or wrong. In truth, it's like chess, It's a series of little points and legal tests we have to prove, and they know compensation is low and unrecoverable legal fees are high. So they strategise that the longer they draw this out, most people (who are vulnerable anyway) will feel the intimidation, run out of money for legal support and they bank on the complainer having no protection in week long court hearings.
It's just, we've the motivation of 2 sons who might face this discrimination one day, we've been through hell already, so this to me is a doddle, we've amazing legal support which is affordable.
So you never know, we might be able to get them to think again.
And If we don't, because of some legal t*wattery, we'll make sure everyone knows what we learned, so the next person, can take off from where we fell.
Good Luck, hope you win.
To be honest I have no idea what any of this is about but it certainly isn't something I expect to read on here from us 'lay people'. Yes the op is asking for some kind of advice but does anyone think we are the best people to be asking?
I think this is so technical it needs a legal mind (they have a barrister) and maybe speaking to Citizens Advice where they may have a HR expert.
It seems everyone is attacking the only person who could give advice (I don't understand why) and that person has obviously become defensive (understandably so)
I personally am not sure we are the right people to help - as always JMHO!!
I'm a lay person, just trying to see if anyone else has experience with what is happening to us.
Thank you.
I said what I needed to say, this has become like a verbal brawl.
I would say yes, in the hope that someone has been through similar and may be able to answer.
If it's to tech then don't answer! Simples. There are a few on here that really seem to know their stuff when it comes to HR legal 'stuff' (technical term).
Good luck I think you are amazing , I understood what you were asking and your explanations clear. Please do let us know any outcome
Obviously not all of us are as bright as you.
Now if anyone wants to know what my experience relating to Bypass/Stroke/Angiogram/Rotablation/medication etc, happy to offer my experience, legal issues in the workplace - sorry can't help.
Wow yes please I'm not sure if we can message privately?
Well said. Hope they do, you never know when one might be in such a position and this person has offered to come back and explain.
Well done, gold star!!
Hes taking the meds they don't believe he should have any flexibility for heart related absences. Denying he's disabled and if we prove he is, they'll medically dismiss him
Substantial = more than trivial. Eg has to take medication to manage a condiction so he can work, eg Asthma, Depression, Diebeties.
So I just have to show that he's fine in normal conditions as he has his medication. It's what he is like without his medication that is what us used to determine if he gets protection.
CHD is a recognised impairment, so we just have to show how his medication means he can work.
They gave him a written warning abd unauthorised absence for his stains being too high and him going to ae with pulse if 40 which his watch picked up.
Then the change in his statins gave him ibs, and exhaustion so he needed to adjust. Another trigger warning.
I don't appreciate sarcasm!
I'm sorry. I'm not attacking you. I'll delete it if I can, if that's the way it landed.
Anyone would think I've asked who's vaccinated. Thank you for you reasoned responses. I didn't realise it'd go nuts!
I can not recall when contacting DVLA when I could return to drive , being asked if I was taking my medication associated with my heart bypass
This person did say he was taking his meds. Some of you sound like you'll have a heart attack if you don't calm down.
In fairness the original post was a bit ambiguous, but I totally agree about calming down.
I used the term 'verbal brawl' to describe the whole thread and couldn't believe that yet another thread has been started.
I was 'admonished' for an earlier comment but stand by the fact I am not sure this is the place for legal information. We say that a medical diagnosis shouldn't be asked for or given on here I feel the same way about legal advice.
It IS my opinion I AM entitled to it therefore am saying it.
Oh I am perfectly calm.
Not sure if this reply was meant for me?
I think this is the place, they werent asking for Legal info. they were asking if anyone has experienced similar!
Then we read it very differently - I understood that specialist HR advice was needed re a tribunal.
Was I wrong?
The last line of her OP
"Any one had to do this before?"
To what question? I took it as legal action?
If asked about having stents, bypass surgery, valve etc etc we are absolutely right as I said I don't think we are the place for legal advice.
What more can/should I have to say?
As someone else suggested, if you can't answer why would you!
If someone asked a question about 'Rotablation' I would not reply as I know nothing about it.
I didn't!!
Look I don't know what your issue is but if I have something to say I'll say it!!
Ah but if someone else disagrees with you, you take offence and say it's a 'brawl'.
Have a lovely Sunday.
You too!
Sorry I must have missed the post where you knew something about this subject!
I can recommend Specsavers 🤓
But even if I didn't know anything, I never posted complaining that I didn't know anything or that it shouldn't be posted here!
Yahoo fight fight fight
I have just discovered you are a troll so won't enter into further communication with you.
As with some of her comments, she can give but can't take.
I don't want to worry you but you have now started to talk to yourself
Hi
Can I suggest you pay your GP to write up the information you need and present it to the tribunal.
Reading this discussion I have now lost the will to live! Surely you have better things to do?
Yet you read it all 😂
The same way you can ignore what I’ve written or stay away but you chose not too so well done for being a hypocrite, this isn’t a forum for employment rights advice, if they’d done their homework they wouldn’t be asking questions they’d be getting legal advice from an employment lawyer because clearly this isn’t the place.
I’ve chosen the side of, go to the right place if you want legal advice about employment law and situations or contact the DVLA or your GP about fitness to drive which I sent them a link to. The support they need is not on here as their original post was about previous case history.
There is an awful lot of tosh written above. All I can do is recount my experience in case it helps. I was a single dad to 3 teenage boys when (out of the blue) I urgently needed a CABG×4 about 16 years ago. I'd just navigated a stressy divorce and I was holding down a full time professional job ... with a team working for me.
The op went well and I was back on a gradual return to work after about 8 weeks (wish I had had longer off). My personal objective was get fitter and manage my stress. I'd already done a lot of stuff to sort out stressy things following an episode of stress and depression 4 years earlier when I was carrying on doing stuff even though my world was falling in (sick and dying close rellies, failing marriage, people being made redundant at work and me being put in charge of a demoralised new team). The body and mind said enough's enough ... and the heart came out in sympathy 4 years later.
Nevertheless despite everything, I had recovered from the stress and depression; was prioritising my family; and, when I had the heart issues, did all I was told and asked; and, generally got better (doing lots of walking, focussing on family etc.)... while still holding my job down.
TBH things were going well for 2 or 3 (maybe 4) years ... then I ended up with a much younger, less experienced, less competent boss who used to pressurise people and set unrealistic deadlines. A bully, really.
Even though I was, by this time, generally fit and well, I became concerned that this manager was threatening my recovery and health. I still had heart disease and I was taking about 6-8 drugs per day for secondary prevention (i.e. reduce the risk of another heart event: angina, heart attack, etc.) The icing on the cake was expecting a presentation the weekend my ex-wife's mum died - my teenage sons' grandma. The manager seemed annoyed that I prioritised mourning and funeral over his presentation.
I subsequently asked for reasonable adjustments to be made (basically to get the idiot off my back). The company refused on the grounds that I wasn't disabled. In lots of ways, I am not, but daily (now for 16 years) I take drugs to reduce the risk of a recurrent cardiac event, and I permanently monitor what I eat. The company and I reached some sort of impasse, so I raised a grievance about how the company was not respecting its obligations under the Equality Act 2010.
When the company was sold, I was asked to indemnify the buyer against bringing a claim. I refused because no discussion of reasonable adjustments had occurred.
Long story short a couple of years later a number of people that had had similar issues with the company were selected for redundancy. It turned out that we worked for slightly different legal entitities ... and could not easily demonstrate that the holding company was being discriminatory.
I think things might be better now ... because the Equality Act is better established. Unfortunately a lot of employers do not do the right thing.
Ultimately I was happy to leave the company ... because health (however dodgy it is) and happiness are two of the most important things we can have.
On a final note (and this relates to the original post), one of the ways that the severity of a disability is measured, is by looking at what would happen if appropriate aids or medicine were not in place. For example, many amputees cope brilliantly with prosthetic limbs, but their disability is self evident without the prosthetic. Many have hidden protected characteristics, if I didn't take the prescribed meds, I'd be more likely to die sooner. Though I choose to live with that, I think it's entirely reasonable for us to respect the hidden challenges that so many face.
I am so sorry to read your post, I do hope you & your husband win your tribunal. Maybe CAB could help you with your application, they will know all the buzz words required. I was in the same situation 10yrs ago when I went into heart failure at 54. I had union involvement but it didn’t help & I was too ill to go to tribunal. Like your husband I had a record of time off for medical appointments, it took 2 yrs to finally diagnose me.
All was good until I had a meeting to ask for reasonable adjustments to my working day…time to take medication, to do a phased return, to take a break during my afternoon work.
It all fell on deaf ears, my head teacher was determined to dismiss me & she had the backing to do so from HR & governors. She had told my colleagues I was off with stress!
Sadly I lost a job I loved, my income & the respect of my colleagues through one persons ignorance of hidden disability.
It’s time this changed, going through this is so distressing & can have a bad effect on both physical & mental health.
I wish you well at tribunal & very much hope you win!
Hi Tattylash,
The replies to this post have now been turned off as some replies breach our community guidelines.
If you have found any of the peer to peer support useful on this post you are able to get in touch with these members via the private chat function
HU_Moderator
The ability to reply to this post has been turned off.
Taking meds at night 
Problems with side effects of meds and psoriasis
Side effects from meds.
Help please on times to take new meds
Do you mind me asking on what grounds you’re claiming they’re discriminating? I ask out of curiosity, but I’m a qualified HR officer with experience of several tribunals from the employer’s side, and my last role included responsibility for absence management and occupational health, including ensuring reasonable adjustments and dismissal due to capability if necessary.
Thank you for getting back to me. Its a saga but basically they wont accept he's protected by EQ10, and making us jump through hoops as they wouldn't provide him with adjustments, not sent him to occ health even after returning from his triple heart bypass, or give him any flexibility in absence triggers (eg tried to give him a verbal warning after going for an ecg when his pulse was low). He's a lorry driver so its a bit daft really and its only 5 absences in 2 years since returning after his CABG, (They included his Bypass as the first absence trigger) other than that his absences since avg 3 days each, mostly due to sensitive stomach, fatique etc. We have got the complaint in hand but for simplicity, it would be nice and easy if there was some info or case history about the critical importance of his medication in managing his impairment.
If I had a member of staff who was having an average of 3 days off, 5 in 2 years, they would be seen by Occy Health. Also, if they are driving a lorry and not taking their meds, it would be a big Red Flag to me. You do not say why he is not taking his meds etc.
she never said he wasnt taking his meds .
No no, of course he's taking his meds.
It's about the definition of disabled in the workplace. They're defence was he's not disabled so there wasn't a duty to ensure his absences from his heart condition didn't cause him a detriment.
If his condition did cause more than trivial impact on his day to day then he should have been medically dismissed. (It's nonsense, I know, theyre just making it as hard as possible.)
There's loads of cases that throw this argument out eg. A diabetic, asthmatic, depressive is still disabled, even if the condition is managed well with medication, as you're still more vulnerable if enviro ment or condition changes.
I just wanted a quick reference to show that its comparable to these cases. I've since found a study that shows importance of medication compliance post CABG so I'm OK.
He's left there now. If I told you the full story you'll all be going down to the local depot with fire and pitch forks.
I'm so proud of him, he fought back from near death and even got a lorry licence back. He was a perfect employee, an award winning driver, perfect attendance in years prior to Heart and would have really loved occ health support.
We're upset how they treated him, because he refused on a few occasions to not drive when he didn't feel 100% as its not safe, or unload 26tonnes of pallets each day following open heart surgery, insisting unless he gets his license back hes no job, and were worried if they pressure other people to drive, for fear of unemployment someone could die oneday.
It wasn't personal to him, he was just a victim of an out dated hr process that's discriminatory but they seem to believe its better for business to ignore the law, and they usually get away with it. It is a multi billion pound employer of thousands of people. Its a David and Goliath.
We'd love a HR input, as we've never done anything like this before, and we are genuinley trying to get them to change for the greater good. I wonder if I might message you directly with general questions?
Once the case is over, we want to use our experience to help others too. We've an amazing barrister working with us whose as passionate as us, but to keep it affordable im doing the solicitor role, research etc and as my Husbands traumatised as he was so vulnerable when they bullied him, I have to tread carefully to protect his wellbeing so I do t really have anyone to discuss things with.
Regards
Bless you. Some are really giving you a hard time and it's really not necessary. I responded to Neil somewhere down the line. When your pulse is low, you really know about it and it's the same with a tachycardia. You know when you are feeling bad and these moments can come and go, despite medication. The company should instead of applauded him for his common sense, putting his and other people's lives first. I hope you get the help/support needed in trying to sort this. Kind Regards,