Water company harassed worker after surgery

Crette Berry took Anglian Water to court, claiming harassment

A water company has been held liable for harassment after trying to support a disabled employee back into work after surgery.

Crette Berry, a former contact centre agent for Anglian Water, felt "humiliated" after being invited to an absence meeting shortly after having a hysterectomy, an employment tribunal judge ruled.

Judge Dr Peter McTigue said most of the contact from the company had been "polite and appropriate" but that it should have given Ms Berry more time to recover from her surgery.

Anglian Water said: "We take looking after our people incredibly seriously, and are pleased that the judge and panel found no failing in our overall people management processes."

Ms Berry joined the company in May 2022 and resigned in March 2023. She claims she was constructively dismissed.

Tribunal documents published since the case was heard in September reveal Ms Berry had made Anglian Water aware she would need a hysterectomy before her employment started.

An occupational health assessment received by the company confirmed she had suffered with endometriosis for about 10 years, giving Anglian Water, which covers a large area in the east of England, sufficient knowledge she was disabled, the judge said.

'Very poorly'

Ms Berry's line manager sent her a letter in January 2023, less than three weeks after she underwent the operation, inviting her to an attendance support meeting via Microsoft Teams.

Five days later, a WhatsApp message was sent asking Ms Berry if she had received the letter.

She responded to say she had received it but was "very poorly at present" so did not know if she would be able to make it.

The day before the meeting, contact was made from Ms Berry's phone to confirm she would not be attending the meeting.

Her line manager responded: "I'm sorry to hear you are not feeling well. It is important that we catch up to discuss your current absence and what support is available to you at this time," and in a follow-up message rescheduled the meeting for a week later.

The judge ruled any contact should have been avoided until eight days after the first letter was sent.

He dismissed further harassment complaints and Ms Berry's claims the company failed to make reasonable adjustments.