A nurse with diabetes has been awarded almost £40,000 by an employment tribunal after she was sacked from a GP practice for taking drugs from the surgery to avoid a “hypo”.
Clair McCluskey was fired from her job as a practice nurse at the Armadale Group Practice in Bathgate where “doctors took paracetamol from stocks and it was not an issue of concern”.
The tribunal judge said it was “astonishing” that Ms McCluskey had been dismissed without being referred to regulators, the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC).
The nurse was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes when she was 17 and was also a patient at the surgery.
The surgery was aware of her condition and that it had led to her being admitted to A&E in December 2020.
She told the tribunal she recognises when she is at risk of hypoglycemia – when blood sugar levels drop too low – and takes fast-acting sugary snacks or glucogel, which is made up of glucose and water.
She said that in previous jobs she had made use of the drugs available in her workplaces when necessary and that “there were never any issues with her employers”.
She said she used glucogel from the surgery’s stocks when she did have any of her own supplies with her and “she never made any secret of this”.
The tribunal was told that at no point prior to disciplinary proceedings being instigated was she told she should not use any medicinal supplies from the practice for her own use.
The surgery did not have a policy regarding staff use of medicinal supplies such as plasters, bandages, and paracetamol during working hours and did not give any guidance to staff.
The nurse was suspended by letter on February 9 “pending an investigation into allegations of gross misconduct”.
During the subsequent investigation she apologised for taking the medication but said she had “never been told off” and said: “I’ve seen GPs taking paracetamol from the cupboard in the treatment room – what is the difference?”
She was dismissed for taking glucogel, which the surgery said amounted to gross misconduct.
Tribunal judge Amanda Jones said it was deeply concerning that the practice had dismissed Ms McCluskey without alerting the NMC and said the investigation by the practice was “fundamentally flawed”.
She said: “The respondent had a duty to investigate the motivations of the claimant and whether she had been dishonest.
“They did not do so and instead characterised her conduct as premeditated and dishonest, although there was no evidence to suggest that she had ever tried to conceal her use of glucogel.”
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.