An experienced barrister, who had sued the Crown Prosecution Service because he was harassed by a colleague in the tiny office they shared, has been dismissed.
Tarique Mohammed claimed that he felt “embarrassed” when a colleague asked him to stop making rumors in an office he shared. This was according to an Employment Tribunal.
Mohammed stated that his symptoms of flatulence were caused by medication he took for a heart condition.
After suffering from a heart attack, Mr Mohammed filed a number of claims against his employers regarding flatulence.
Co-workers and bosses were also accused of discriminating against him. He asked for one day per week to be worked 60 miles from home, and asked him to leave his water bottles on the shared desk.
Tarique Mohammed said he was unable to help his flatulence because it was caused by medication he was taking for a heart condition, an employment tribunal in Reading heard. Pictured: Reading Tribunal Hearing Centre
Chaired by Emma Hawksworth, Employment Judge Emma Hawksworth, the tribunal dismissed Mr Mohammed’s claim of victimization and harassment due to disability. It also found that it was reasonable for his colleague to request this because of their shared office and repetitive nature of the flatulence.
It is, however. found the CPS was guilty of disability discrimination and failing to make reasonable adjustments by not allowing the barrister to work from home two days a week, leave work at 4pm to help him manage his condition and by removing him from court duties.
Reading, Berks was informed that Mohammed started work in the Thames Valley in 2004 as a senior prosecutor.
After suffering a severe heart attack, he was required to be on daily medication. He also had side effects that meant he would have to spend several hours at home.
Panel members were told that Mr Mohamed had returned to work the year after collapsing with angina at home. He then moved into an office, rather than an employment in a Guildford court.
He made a claim to the tribunal that Nick Wilson, the senior prosecutor for Nick Mohammed, had thrown away five of his used water bottles.
Although the prosecutor claimed they were rubbish, Mr Mohammed said that he had to have a lot of alcohol because of his illness. He also accused colleagues of “ganging up” on him.
In the next year, the panel was informed that he had started to share a small office in which he worked with Paul McGorry.
The tribunal heard that Mr McGorry had noticed flatulence after two to three days (Mr Mohammed was) in the room.
McGorry acknowledged that the claimant had suffered from a heart attack. However, he did not know the type of medication or whether flatulence could be attributed to the side effects of medication.
“There were several instances of flatulence that occurred in the quiet area. Mr McGorry once asked Mr Mohammed, “Do you have that Tarique?”
It was his medication. McGorry wanted to know if Mr. Mohammed could do this outside. (Mr Mohammed) replied that he couldn’t.
“The conversation was over.” It was never brought up by (Mr Mohammed) or Mr McGorry again.
“Mr Mohammed found it embarrassing and was not upset by the situation. He did not complain about the event.
According to the tribunal, Mr Mohammed was allowed to return to court work in autumn 2015.
He also asked his bosses to allow him to work at home on two days per week, and to end at 4 pm on court days. Anne Phillips denied this request.
It ruled that Mr Mohammed was not entitled to claim disability-related victimization and harassment. The tribunal found that CPS committed discrimination against disabled people and made insufficient adjustments. (Stock image)
His February 2016 move to another team meant that he no longer had to be at court. He was however asked to drive an hour from Guildford, but to still work in Brighton, East Sussex, one day per week.
He filed a grievance against Phillips, his coworkers and Ms Phillips in March 2016. According to the tribunal, he took a sick leave in March 2016.
In January 2018, the grievance was concluded and it was determined that the CPS had to have provided the appropriate allowances for Mr Mohammed.
In September 2018, he returned to work, but his employment was terminated in April 2020.
The tribunal dismissed Mr Mohammed’s claim of victimisation and harassment related to disability.
It is, however. CPS guilty of Discrimination in Disability and Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments for Refusing His Requests, Ignoring Occupational Health Advisors’ Advice, and removing him From Court Duty.
M. Mohammed and CPS were encouraged by the tribunal to reach an agreement on compensation, without the necessity of a second hearing.
The panel stated that many of the complaints he made were not related to his disability, or were caused by him overreacting.
The tribunal noted that the questions Mr McGorry asked to (Mr Mohammed), were not meant to violate (his) dignity, or create such an atmosphere.
It was reasonable to ask the question after repeated flatulence incidents in small offices.
‘There wasn’t any indication that Mr McGorry was aware (Mr Mohammed’s) flatulence was connected to disability.