If you work for a large employer like the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), Royal Mail or Tesco, long-term sickness or fluctuating health can quickly turn into a series of formal meetings about your attendance and capability. At first, it might be presented as support, but over time you may feel you are being managed out. This guide is for staff in England and Wales, UK who are dealing with repeated attendance reviews, warnings for hitting absence triggers despite genuine health issues, or pressure to accept redeployment, reduced hours or exit packages.

It explains how attendance and capability procedures typically work at large employers, when those processes cross the line into unfair dismissal or discrimination, common patterns seen at DWP, Royal Mail and Tesco, and practical steps you can take to protect yourself and challenge unfairness. This is general information, not individual legal advice, but it should help you understand where you stand before you speak to a union or adviser.

Why attendance and capability policies feel relentless at big organisations

Large employers are expected to have clear, accessible policies for managing absence and capability. These are meant to ensure consistency, but can feel impersonal and relentless, especially for disabled staff or carers. The pressure to meet performance targets often leads to rigid use of triggers and under-use of discretion, even where policies allow flexibility.

It’s not uncommon for staff to feel as though they’re on a conveyor belt towards dismissal, with meetings and warnings stacking up regardless of the underlying reasons for absence. If you’re in this position, keep a diary of all meetings, triggers, and communications about absence or adjustments. Ask for copies of all correspondence and meeting notes. If your employer fails to follow its own procedures, this can be strong evidence in your favour if you need to challenge a decision.

Capability and unfair dismissal – the legal basics

In England and Wales, an employer must have a fair reason to dismiss you and must follow a fair process (Employment Rights Act 1996, s.98). Capability, including ill-health, is a potentially fair reason, but only if the process is reasonable. The Equality Act 2010, section 6, defines disability and creates a legal duty for employers to make reasonable adjustments. The employer’s knowledge of your condition is vital. If you haven’t told them, their duty may not be triggered.

If adjustments are refused, always ask for the reasons in writing. A dismissal that ignores these duties can be both unfair and discriminatory. Employers must obtain enough medical evidence, consult with you, and consider reasonable adjustments or alternative duties before moving to dismissal.

How attendance and capability processes work at DWP, Royal Mail and Tesco

Each organisation has its own terminology, but most use set triggers for review meetings, formal stages leading to warnings and possible dismissal, and standard letters summarising concerns and outcomes.

-At DWP, tribunal decisions often criticise the department for failing to follow their own policies or for poor communication between HR, managers, and Occupational Health. Staff report that adjustments to triggers are not always made, even when recommended.

-Royal Mail’s physically demanding roles mean long-term health conditions are common. Tribunals have found Royal Mail at fault for not properly exploring redeployment or reasonable adjustments before dismissal.

-Tesco’s attendance and performance are tightly linked to shift patterns and targets. Problems arise when managers apply policies mechanically, without considering disability or caring responsibilities.

If you’re unsure, request copies of all relevant policies and your own Occupational Health reports. Keep a log of all requests for adjustments and the responses received.

When attendance management crosses the line into unfairness or discrimination

Not every trigger meeting is unlawful, but certain patterns are warning signs. You should pay attention if you notice:

• Lack of meaningful medical input, such as no Occupational Health assessment or decisions made before evidence is obtained.

• Failure to consider reasonable adjustments, for example, treating disability-related absence the same as other sickness.

• Rushed escalation through stages, with no genuine trial of adjusted duties or redeployment.

• Inconsistent application, where colleagues without disabilities are treated more leniently.

• Hostile comments or pressure to resign.

If you see a pattern of similar treatment across your workplace, this can support a group or collective grievance. Keeping a log of all requests for adjustments and responses is vital.

Practical steps if you are in the attendance or capability process

You are not powerless. Here’s what you can do:

• Get hold of the full policy and read it carefully. Request the attendance, sickness, and capability policies. Check what they say about Occupational Health, discretion, and redeployment.

  
  

• Request or update Occupational Health input. Ask for an OH referral if there hasn’t been one. Make sure OH is told about the actual demands of your job. Provide relevant medical information (with your consent).
  
  

• Put your need for adjustments in writing. Explain how your condition affects attendance or performance. Propose specific adjustments, such as adjusted hours, different duties, or home-working. Refer to the Equality Act 2010 and your employer’s obligations. Always make requests for adjustments in writing and keep copies. If a manager refuses an adjustment, ask for the reasons in writing.
  
  

• Keep a record of meetings and decisions. Write down what was discussed and agreed after each meeting. If important points are missing from follow-up letters, write back to correct or clarify.
  
  

• Use representation and support. Take a union rep or colleague to formal meetings if the policy allows. Share key documents with them in advance. Unions at these employers often have experience with similar cases and can provide template letters or support.
  
  

• Consider a grievance if necessary. If you believe the process is being applied unfairly or without proper consideration of adjustments, a formal grievance can bring the issue onto the record. If you see a pattern of similar treatment, consider a group or collective grievance.

These steps are not about being obstructive. They are about making sure your employer genuinely considers the alternatives before treating dismissal as inevitable.

Thinking about your options if dismissal is on the horizon

If you are facing a final capability hearing, pressure to accept redeployment, or suggestions of a settlement agreement or ill-health retirement, keep these in mind. Unfair dismissal claims have strict time limits (normally three months less one day from dismissal). You do not have to wait for a grievance to finish before starting ACAS Early Conciliation.

Disability discrimination claims can run alongside unfair dismissal. Settlement agreements can provide certainty and avoid the stress of litigation, but you must receive independent legal advice. Ill-health retirement depends on pension-scheme rules and medical assessments. It should not be used simply to push you out quickly. Most cases settle before a hearing, but you should still prepare your evidence as if you will need to prove your case.

Using Caira to understand letters, policies and your options

Attendance and capability processes generate a lot of paperwork. Understanding how they fit together is crucial. Caira is an AI-powered, privacy-first legal assistant for people dealing with law and procedure in England and Wales, UK. It can help you upload attendance policies, capability letters, OH reports, grievance documents, and draft settlement agreements.

You can ask specific questions about whether letters follow policy, what OH reports say, or where policies mention disability or adjustments. Caira can generate draft written responses, meeting notes, grievances, and questions for HR, union reps, or advisers. It can also compare two documents side by side and highlight key differences. Caira’s privacy-first approach means your documents are not shared or used to train public AI models.

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute financial, legal, tax or medical advice. All information is based on the law and policy in England and Wales as at the date of publication.