I'll try to keep this clear, but there?s a lot going on. I?d be really grateful if anyone with knowledge of employment law could try to decipher this.
My apologies that this is so long. If it's too much to read, it would really help to get some information on the two questions at the bottom of this post.
OK...I'm in the process of appealing a decision to not promote me to a higher grade. (I'm a University lecturer).
- I returned to work in January 2011 after my second maternity leave.
- Prior to returning I went to Occupational Health to tell them that I was suffering from postnatal depression. (DD2 was 11 months at that point). The postnatal depression was nasty. I was hospitalised for 6 weeks, and at the time of going back to work things were far from settled. My psychiatrist was still trying to find a combination of medication that would stabilise me.
- Prior to my return to work, Occupational Health wrote to my line manager (School Dean) and detailed the problems, as well as the fact that I had also experienced similar problems after the birth of my first daughter. In particular, they recommended that I be given support in re-building my research agenda, which is where I'd really felt the effect of my illness. They also informed my employer that I'm more than likely covered by the Disability Discrimination Act.
- I went through a number of medication changes in the following months. I continued to see Oc Health and they kept my line manager and HR up to date with the continuing problems in trying to stabilise things. My psych now things that I have bipolar II.
- In September this year, I applied for a promotion from grade 7 to grade 8. My colleagues expressed surprise that I was not already on grade 8. (The reasons are complicated, but it was partly due to the fact that I'd not been well enough to go through this + the fact that I'd been away on two maternity leaves.)
- There was a general consensus that this move was long overdue. The four Professors in my department wrote a lengthy letter giving their absolute support for my promotion, and outlining why they thought I should move up.
- The outcome of this was that I was denied promotion. The reason they gave me was that my research was not up to scratch. They placed a lot of emphasis in the rejection letter stating that they had made "reasonable adjustments."
- I would argue that they have not.
- They said that I'd been given a 'lighter teaching load' to enable me to do 'further research.' I was not. I temporarily reduced my contract to 80% for the first 3 months back. Thus, I did not have a spare 20% of time to work on my research as I was not at work and not being paid to do work.
- When I looked at the workload model, I was actually down as 100% during this time, and my workload was equal to all of my peers. In other words, I was only being paid 80%, but I was doing a workload equal to 100%.
I am currently putting together an appeal. My questions are:
1) Should promotion committees make ?reasonable adjustment? when they are considering your performance? If so, what would be considered reasonable?
2) Is there a basis for saying that, whilst they claim to have made reasonable adjustment in my workload to accommodate Oc Health?s advice that I should be supported in my research, the reality is that I have not? If you take into account the fact that I was on an 80% contract, I was actually doing a heavier workload than my colleagues. Could I therefore claim that their criticism that I have not published since my return is partly a product of the fact that they have not given me the support that they say they did?
Many thanks to anyone who has the time and patience to offer advice.