IBM employee on sick leave since 2008 sues firm for no salary hike

After remaining on sick leave for the last 15 years, a senior IT worker, Ian Clifford, has now dragged his employer to court for not receiving a hike in his salary since then. According to a Telegraph report, Clifford, who has been unwell since 2008, took “medical retirement” in 2013 and has been receiving a portion of his salary every month to date. Speaking of which, the report further added that the IBM employee sued the company on the grounds of being a victim of “disability discrimination”, adding that his salary had not been hiked in the last 15 years he was off-duty. According to IBM’s health plan, an employee who is unable to work due to medical reasons is not dismissed but continues to remain an employee with ’no obligation to work’. As a part of this, the employee has the ‘right’ until recovery, retirement, or death if earlier, and will be paid 75 per cent of agreed earnings. However, in the case of Ian Clifford, the senior employee didn’t seem quite happy with the same as he argued that the company’s health plan was ’not generous enough’, adding that his salary will wither over time due to inflation. Presently, he receives over 54,000 pounds (Rs 55,30,556) a year and is guaranteed to receive the salary until he is 65. IBM employee sues company for no pay raise As per the Telegraph report, Clifford in February last year took IBM to an employment tribunal, claiming himself to be a victim of disability discrimination. “The point of the plan was to give security to employees not able to work - that was not achieved if payments were forever frozen,” he added in his argument. While giving details of the entire series of events, Clifford said that he went on sick leave in September 2008, following which he raised a grievance in 2013. In response to this, IBM also offered him a ‘compromise agreement’, adding him to the company’s disability plan. Unsatisfied by this, Clifford sued the company last year, seeking a hike in his pay. However, things didn’t go according to his plan and his claims were dismissed by an employment tribunal judge who told him he has been given a “very substantial benefit” and “favourable treatment”. Noting that active employees receive pay rises, and not inactive employees do not, the judge added, “In my judgment, it is not a detriment caused by something arising from disability. This contention is not sustainable because only the disabled person can benefit from the plan. It is not disability discrimination that the plan is not even more generous. Even if the value of the £50,000 a year halved over 30 years, it is still a very substantial benefit.’’ Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News, India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.