Firm 'forced out' mother of disabled boy

(By Sarah Womack, Social Affairs Correspondent)

A mother who claimed she was "harassed" into resigning from her job because she had a disabled son has won the first round of a landmark court case that could benefit millions of carers in the United Kingdom.

	Sharon Coleman and son Oliver. She says she suffered ‘discrimination by association’

Sharon Coleman claims the law firm where she worked forced her out by refusing to give her flexible working arrangements to enable her to care for her child, who was born with serious respiratory problems.

She says she suffered "discrimination by association" and, after launching a constructive dismissal case, believes she should be entitled to protection under the same laws that ban discrimination against the disabled.

An employment tribunal asked the Advocate-General of the European Court of Justice to rule on whether EU discrimination laws introduced in 2000 should also cover those who care for disabled people. The Advocate-General has said they should.

Although Ms Coleman must now wait for a full panel of European judges to give a formal ruling later this year, the judges concur with the Advocate-General in about 80 per cent of cases.

If Ms Coleman wins her case she will be entitled to unlimited compensation and will set a precedent that will give far greater legal protection to the 2.5 million carers currently in employment in the United Kingdom.

Ms Coleman was employed as a legal secretary at Attridge Law when she gave birth to Oliver in 2002. He suffers from serious respiratory problems, including apnoeic attacks - where he stops breathing - and has hearing problems.

As primary carer, Ms Coleman wanted flexible working arrangements, but accepted voluntary redundancy in March 2005. She began a claim for constructive dismissal five months later.

She claimed her manager had commented that her son was always sick and had accused her of trying to use his condition to get out of work.

She said: "They knew about my son's problems because I took him into the office, but they wouldn't allow me to work flexibly to make it easier to look after him. Other members of staff were taking time off for hospital appointments or worked from home but my requests were always turned down."

Ms Coleman, from London, alleges discriminatory treatment because her son's condition meant she was treated less favourably than other staff and therefore forced to leave.

She claims she was described as "lazy" at work, and that abusive and insulting comments were made about her and her child.

Ms Coleman said: "I am delighted that we are one step nearer to stopping people with caring responsibilities like me from being badly treated and harrassed at work. It has taken a lot of courage to fight this case, but no one should have to choose between caring for disabled relatives or their job."

A spokesman for the Equality and Human Rights Commission said: "This case will have huge implications."

The case is now set to return to an employment tribunal.

Source: The Telegraph-telegraph.co.uk