Deborah Cullingford, who worked as a bailiff in Leeds for over 10 years, brought a claim against the Ministry of Justice for disability discrimination and harassment after being prohibited from bringing her dog, Bella, to work.
Cullingford adopted Bella in 2020, finding companionship in her during the Covid pandemic. She told the tribunal that Bella had been the reason she “did not end her life when she felt depressed and could barely face the day”. In 2021 Cullingford was diagnosed with cancer for the third time and following an operation she was on sick leave for nearly 3 months, returning to work full time the following year.
In February 2022, colleagues noticed Bella in Cullingford’s car and she was told to stop bringing the dog to work as Bella was not a registered guide dog. Her manager cited safety concerns, expressing that the dog might jump from the vehicle and deemed the situation unprofessional.
Cullingford claimed that her anxiety was a feature of her cancer disability and Bella acted as an emotional support animal. She further argued that her job involved confrontations and the presence of Bella meant she could “talk it through” with her when she felt anxious.
In April 2023, after being told she could not bring Bella to work, Cullingford resigned. She subsequently filed claims against her employer asserting that they had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her condition.
Tribunal ruling on the case
The tribunal dismissed Cullingford’s claims, finding that her employer had valid concerns regarding confidentiality, health and safety, and the security of the vehicle where Bella was kept.
Judge Rebecca Eeley, who presided over the case, acknowledged that Cullingford had been through a “very difficult and distressing time” following her third cancer diagnoses and a period of sick leave. Judge Eeley also noted that the employer had not always demonstrated the “care and compassion, to the degree expected in the circumstances”.
Although Cullingford sought a letter from her GP to support her claim that the dog was an emotional support animal, she did not follow through with a formal registration. The tribunal ruled that it was difficult to determine whether bringing the dog to work would have alleviated her anxiety as there was evidence that the dog was not brought to work on particularly stressful days. Furthermore, she had not notified her employer of her anxiety until after the issues with Bella arose. Therefore, the employer did not have actual or constructive knowledge in order to make reasonable adjustments.
Judge Eeley concluded that the employer had acted reasonably in prohibiting Bella from the workplace leading to the dismissal of Cullingford’s claims for disability discrimination and harassment.
The law on emotional support animals
Under the Equality Act 2010, emotional support animals do not have the same legal protections as service animals, such as guide dogs. This means employers are not legally required to allow emotional support animals in the workplace, and the decision is left at each company’s discretion.
However, employers are still under a duty to make reasonable adjustments for employees with disabilities. A blanket ban on animals in the workplace may be considered discrimination if it prevents an employee who relies on an emotional support animal from performing their job.
Employers should evaluate the potential impact of allowing an emotional support animal in the workplace. Factors to consider include possible disruptions, health and safety concerns such as allergies or phobias, and whether the animal is/can be trained. These should be balanced against the employee’s needs. Employers should consider creating a policy detailing the steps on how employees can request a workplace accommodation, guidelines on emotional support animals and the process that will be followed if there are any potential issues.
Deborah Cullingford’s case illustrates the complexities involved concerning animals in the workplace. While employers may have legitimate concerns about safety and professionalism, it is crucial that these are balanced with the needs of employee’s who rely on support animals for their mental well-being. Employers should strive to foster an inclusive environment by developing clear and inclusive policies that consider individual circumstances.
For further information, or to discuss the issues raised within this case, please contact us to speak to a member of our Employment Team.
“Herrington Carmichael offers legal advice to UK and International businesses as well as individuals and families. Rated as a ‘Leading Firm 2023’ by the legal directory Legal 500 and listed in The Times ‘Best Law Firms 2023’. Herrington Carmichael has offices in London, Farnborough, Reading, and Ascot.”
Please visit the firm link to site
