A man who was out sick for 15 years took his employer to court for discrimination after he was refused a pay rise.
Ian Clifford, who is a senior IT worker, alleged that he was the victim of "disability discrimination" by tech giant IBM after failing to get a salary increase since 2008, The Daily Record reported.
He takes home £54,000 per annum and is guaranteed it until 65 - as part of a health plan, which will see him pocket more than £1.5 million.
Read More: Longford crash victim remembered as 'gentle giant' as motorcyclist named locally
A judge said he had "very substantial benefit" and "favourable treatment".
During the tribunal in Reading, Berkshire, the court heard Mr Clifford - who studied at King's College London - sbegan at Lotus Development in 2000 before it was taken over by IBM.
He took sick leave in September 2008 until 2013, when he raised a grievance.
He brought up a lack of a pay rise and holiday pay during that period.
In April 2013, when Mr Clifford was in his mid-30s, a "compromise agreement" was established and he was put on the company's disability plan.
This means those who can't work are not dismissed, and are still "an employee" who has "no obligation to work".
The plan allows for employees to be paid 75 per cent of agreed earnings, despite ill health.
His salary was £72,037 - meaning from 2013 he would be paid £54,028 per year after 25 per cent was deducted.
The plan was also set for a 30 year period. He was also paid £8,685 to settle his holiday pay complaints in 2013.
However, Mr Clifford took IBM to an employment tribunal with new disability discrimination claims.
He stated that he was treated 'unfavourably' with no salary increase since 2013.
He said: "The point of the plan was to give security to employees not able to work - that was not achieved if payments were forever frozen."
Employment Judge Paul Housego dismissed his case.
Judge Housego said: "Active employees may get pay rises, but inactive employees do not, it is a difference, but is not, in my judgement, a detriment caused by something arising from disability.
"The complaint is in fact that the benefit of being an inactive employee on the Plan is not generous enough, because the payments have been at a fixed level since April 6, 2013, now 10 years, and may remain so.
"This contention is not sustainable because only the disabled can benefit from the plan. It is not disability discrimination that the Plan is not even more generous."
READ NEXT:
- Sandwith Street scenes condemned as Gardai confirm arrest
- Ukrainian Eurovision entry hometown reportedly hit by missiles moments before performance
- Phillip Schofield branded 'obnoxious, horrible man' by TV star amid co-star 'feud'
- Gardaí appeal for witnesses following fatal collision involving 'tractor and motorcycle' in Longford
- Urgent recall of Tesco chicken goujons due to Salmonella fears
Get news updates direct to your inbox by signing up to our daily newsletter here
