Posted on 02/10/2016 11:24:10 AM PST by Impala64ssa
Campaigners say tribunal finding in favour of Meseret Kumulchew highlights duty to make allowances for dyslexic staff
Starbucks has lost a disability discrimination case after it wrongly accused a dyslexic employee of falsifying documents when she had simply misread numbers she was responsible for recording.
Campaigners say the ruling highlights the duty of all employers to make allowances for staff with dyslexia.
In December, an employment tribunal found that Starbucks had victimised Meseret Kumulchew after she inaccurately recorded the water and fridge temperatures as part of her duties as a supervisor at Starbucks in Clapham, south-west London.
The tribunal heard that Starbucks accused Kumulchew of falsifying the recordings, reduced her responsibilities and ordered her to retrain. The stories you need to read, in one handy email Read more
A separate hearing to determine how much compensation Starbucks should pay will be held in the next few weeks.
Kumulchew, who is still employed by Starbucks, said she had made her bosses aware of her dyslexia, and the accusation of falsifying numbers had made her want to take her own life.
She told the BBC: “There was a point that I wanted to commit suicide. I am not a fraud. The name fraud itself shouldn’t exist for me. It’s quite serious.
“I nearly ended my life. But I had to think of my kids. I know I’m not a fraud. I just made a mistake.â€
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
I think they could have counted her not qualified for that particular service without an accusation of falsification.
I mind leftiness a lot less when it is done sincerely.
Bad ruling. I’ve got dyslexic friends, I know it can be a challenge, but wrong numbers is wrong numbers and if part of her job is validating the numbers she needs to figure out how to do that.
How about an accountant with dyslexia? getting the numbers wrong is OK and the employer has to make accommodations.
How about a dyslexic filing an income tax return with numbers mixed up? will the IRS make accommodations?
I imagine life is pretty rough for a dyslexic person named Meseret Kumulchew...
OMG. How long will it be until we have to submit to neurosurgery performed by the mentally disabled? After all, life must be fair for everybody.
/s
If she knew she was dyslexic, she should not have taken a job that requires accurate entry of numbers. Plain and simple.
A restaurant can lose it’s license at the drop of a china plate, should they have a warm freezer during inspection.
I’m a dyslexic accountant who did 10 years in Federal prison because my dyslexia resulted in $500K disappearing from my employer’s books and,amazingly enough,appearing in my personal account the very same day!
“I imagine life is pretty rough for a dyslexic person named Meseret Kumulchew... “
Well, that just goes without saying, doesn’t it?
Wow. Starbucks will get fined for incorrect numbers. So, now they get fined because they object to incorrect numbers.
I hate to say it, but the company is getting screwed.
The problem seems to be not that they deemed her unqualified but that they accused her of a purposefully wrong act and weren’t able to back up the latter.
“I hate to say it, but the company is getting screwed.”
Don’t worry, they always get kissed first.
They need to reduce their liability and her hours asap.
Hopefully, they are not yet unionized.
This girl is not ready to play ball.
How about a blind truck driver?
If you think about taking your life over a job at Starbucks then you have bigger issues to work on.
Wow, she became so despondent ... she nearly threw herself behind a bus!
Yeah that could be a problem. The line between misfeasance and malfeasance is rather stark and if you can’t prove what side the error was on best not to make accusations.
(rimshot)
MAD DOG! Wait sorry, GOD DAM!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.