08-05-2025
Charity director who claimed 'menopause madness' caused her poor performance at work loses disability discrimination claim
A charity director has lost her case for disability discrimination after blaming poor performance at work on ' menopause madness'.
Deborah Sangster claimed her failure to hand in reports on time and attend meetings were due to symptoms causing 'low mood, irritability and night sweats', an employment tribunal in south London heard.
Concerns were repeatedly raised about how she carried out duties in the two years she worked for StopWatch, which campaigns against police stop and search policies.
She went on to resign before being sacked after her failure to provide regular reports to funders risked the charity losing vital income, the tribunal was told.
Ms Sangster said she had been discriminated against and was 'suffering significant challenges with my mental health provoked by my menopause'.
But the tribunal found the charity's criticisms of her over her failings at work had nothing to do with the condition.
Indeed, it found StopWatch - based in Vauxhall, south London - had 'bent over backwards' to accommodate and support Ms Sangster while she showed 'no appreciation' for what they had done.
The hearing, held in Croydon in south London, was told that Ms Sangster began working for StopWatch UK in June 2021 as an executive director.
StopWatch, founded in 2010, aims to promote 'fair, effective and accountable policing', with a particular focus on stop and search policies.
Ms Sangster's role involved financial management and reporting as well as fundraising applications to support the volunteer trustees.
The tribunal heard that from the start of her employment there were issues with Ms Sangster who was described as 'difficult to contact', did not turn up for meetings and missed reporting deadlines including to the organisation that funded her role.
In January 2022, Ms Sangster had a probation review in which she was told to improve her time management.
Concerns about her fundraising work were also raised, including over an expression of interest form for a grant which was submitted six months late.
Despite these concerns, the tribunal found the charity had provided Ms Sangster with 'every chance of success' because they did not want to let her go.
In June 2022, the day before a trustee meeting, Ms Sangster asked to take a week off to 'gather her energy' because of issues in her personal life.
The trustees suggested she take her leave after the meeting to provide her handover, but she did not attend and it was cancelled.
After the aborted meeting, one trustee sent an email to the others explaining the situation and raising further concerns about Ms Sangster's performance - including a suggestion that her projects were 'ill-conceived and poorly executed'.
Ms Sangster was offered a month of paid leave during which time she saw a menopause specialist and was prescribed HRT to manage her low mood, brain fog, poor memory and night sweats.
On her phased return to work at the start of September she agreed, at the time, to a co-director plan with the employee who had been covering in her absence - halving her workload.
She emailed one of the trustees the following month to thank them for their support through what she called her 'menopause madness'.
Ms Sangster also discussed some of her physical symptoms but made no mention of mental health issues under which she would later claim disability discrimination.
In January 2023 one of the trustees, who was also a long-standing friend of Ms Sangster, spoke to her about the performance concerns that were going to be raised at an upcoming meeting and told her 'all options were available' regarding her employment.
At the meeting where continued concerns over her meeting attendance and funding reports were raised, Ms Sangster explained she felt overwhelmed and was only operating at '70 per cent' of her former self.
The tribunal heard that one key report that Ms Sangster failed to deliver on time was for the Charity Commission.
At the end of January, she raised a grievance on the basis she was being treated poorly because of her disability, sex and age.
Ms Sangster told the tribunal that, in her view, once she made this formal complaint things became 'incredibly difficult' at work.
At the end of the grievance process, Ms Sangster was told that the charity did not accept that her menopause symptoms qualified as a disability but they would still continue to make reasonable adjustments.
In April, she was invited to a contractual review meeting because of 'serious concerns' about her performance - especially concerning her failure to report to a key funder.
Later that month, whilst the review process was ongoing, Ms Sangster resigned - claiming the conditions had become 'unbearable'.
The tribunal found she had never tried to link her failure to submit a report to her mental health and that StopWatch had 'bent over backwards' to support her and that even when her role was halved she could not complete her duties.
Employment Judge Helen Rice-Birchall said Ms Sangster showed 'no appreciation' for what the charity had done for her.
She said: 'At no point did [Ms Sangster] ever say to [StopWatch] that she was unable to submit a specific of her alleged disability.
'She was vague and unspecific and did not link her ill health to her failings in a way that [they] could contemplate that her failings were down to her alleged disability.
'However, [StopWatch] bent over backwards to support her, reducing her role by half, and yet [she] still did not perform or even properly communicate with [them] to explain why reports were late and so on despite numerous opportunities to do so.
'[Ms Sangster] showed no appreciation for what they had done for her, seeking in this tribunal to complain that her role had been split, even though she could not perform the half which remained.
'In her evidence the claimant appeared to criticise [another executive] for effectively being pedantic in his management of the accounts.
'The Tribunal concludes that [he] probably did have a sense of frustration with [her] attitude to finance, not least because her chaotic and disorganised approach meant that [StopWatch's] financial compliance, in a highly regulated sector, was at risk.
'Her approach meant that she would or could not take on more responsibility as budget holder which was what was expected of her. There was no evidence whatsoever to suggest that this was because of any menopause related ill-health.'
Ms Sangster lost her claims for disability, age, and sex discrimination, disability harassment and victimisation.
She was also ordered to pay £1,750 after being found to have acted 'vexatiously' during the tribunal process.
