Employment and occupational health psychiatric expert witness in Scotland
Employment disputes with a psychiatric dimension require an opinion that distinguishes ordinary occupational stress from a recognised psychiatric disorder, and that addresses causation in a workplace of many contributing pressures rather than a single index event. He is instructed by employee and employer representatives, by pension scheme administrators and by agents acting in employment tribunal claims.
Common instructions include claims for personal injury arising from work-related stress or bullying, applications for ill-health retirement, disability discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010, and disputes over fitness to return following long-term sickness absence. Reports are prepared for the employment tribunal, the sheriff court and the Court of Session as the forum requires.
What Dr Qureshi can advise on
- Whether the individual meets diagnostic criteria for a recognised psychiatric disorder, and whether that is properly described as work-related stress, an adjustment disorder, depression, anxiety or another condition.
- Causation where multiple potential contributors exist — workplace conduct, organisational change, domestic circumstances and pre-existing vulnerability — and apportionment between them so far as the evidence allows.
- Whether the individual meets the definition of disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 on mental health grounds, including the substantial and long-term adverse effect tests.
- Fitness for the substantive role, fitness for any alternative role, and the reasonable adjustments, if any, that might support a return to work.
- Whether the condition meets the medical criteria for ill-health retirement under the relevant pension scheme rules, where he is asked to address a defined test.
- Prognosis with and without a change in working conditions, and the likely timescale for recovery or for sustainable return.
- The effect of the internal grievance or disciplinary process itself on the individual's mental state, where that is said to be a contributing factor.
- Capacity to participate in employment tribunal proceedings, including giving evidence, where this is raised.
Where the question is a legal one — whether conduct amounted to harassment, or whether an adjustment was reasonable in the circumstances of the business — that is left to the employment tribunal. The medical evidence is confined to diagnosis, causation, disability status and fitness.
Typical instructions
- Stress claim following a period of organisational restructuring
- An employee brings a claim after a redundancy process, alleging the manner of the process caused a depressive illness. The instruction requires the report to separate the effect of the process itself from pre-existing occupational and domestic stressors recorded in GP notes.
- Application for ill-health retirement refused by the scheme
- A member's application for ill-health retirement has been refused on the basis that the medical evidence does not meet the scheme's permanence test. An independent opinion is sought on whether the criteria in the scheme rules are met on the current evidence.
- Disability status disputed in an employment tribunal claim
- An employer disputes that an employee with anxiety and depression meets the statutory definition of disability. The opinion addresses the substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities at the material time, including the effect of medication.
- Contested fitness to return after twelve months' absence
- Occupational health and the employee's own psychiatrist disagree on fitness to return to a customer-facing role. A joint or single joint expert opinion is sought on fitness, the adjustments that might make a return sustainable, and the prognosis if none are made.
What the report includes
The report sets out the chronology of employment events relied on, cross-referenced against GP records, occupational health records and any earlier fit notes, before addressing diagnosis and causation. Where the account given at interview differs from the contemporaneous record, the difference is identified and its significance to the opinion explained.
Disability status, where in issue, is addressed by reference to the statutory test directly rather than by inference from diagnosis alone, considering the effect of the condition without medication or other coping measures where the evidence permits that assessment.
Fitness and prognosis are addressed separately for the substantive role and, where relevant, for alternative roles, with specific comment on adjustments that could reasonably support return and the timescale over which improvement might be expected.