Ian Clifford: Critically ill worker sues IBM for not raising his pay while he was off work for 15 years
BERKSHIRE, UK: A critically ill worker sued IBM for not raising his pay of $67,500 for the 15 years he was on sick leave. Ian Clifford, 50, said that "it's not greedy to want a pay rise" as he detailed his fears for his family's finances. Clifford was diagnosed with stage four leukemia in 2012 after he signed off work in 2008 on mental health grounds.
Clifford is likely to get more than $1.8 million as he is guaranteed to receive $67,500 per year under the tech giant's health plan until the age of 65. However, Clifford sued the company for disability discrimination as IBM has not revised his pay since 2013. His claim was dismissed in an employment tribunal in Reading, Berkshire and a judge told him that he had been given a "very substantial benefit" and "favorable treatment".
READ MORE
Joanne Noriega: Abbott Labs faces lawsuit over alleged misleading height claims of PediaSure
The IBM employee said that he wanted to make sure that his son was taken care of as chances are slim that he survives beyond the age of 65.
'It was more for my family'
"I am on chemotherapy and have been for many years and have been extremely unwell," he told The Telegraph. "Your salary affects your debt service, pension, and everything else, it was more for my family. People may think, yes, it's generous, but firstly those amounts are gross not taxed... I do pay national insurance on those amounts. I have a son [who is] off to university. Your mortgage doesn't go down because you are sick."
IBM's compromise offer
Clifford started to work for the company Lotus Development in 2000 before it was bought out by IBM five years later for around $3.6 billion. He went on sick leave in September 2008, and in 2013, he voiced his concerns regarding not getting a pay rise or holiday pay in that half a decade.
IBM offered a "compromise agreement" in 2013, which allowed Clifford to come under the company's disability banner that prevents a person who is unable to work from getting fired. Employees receive their monthly payment under the plan and have "no obligation" to work. They even have the right to be paid 75 per cent of their agreed earnings until recovery, retirement, or death.
Clifford is on reduced salary
The former worker's initial agreed salary was $90,000 but he received $67,500 after the deduction. The plan was to remain fixed for more than three decades, until he reached the retirement age of 65. In 2013, he was paid almost $11,000 to settle his holiday pay complaints and agreed to never complain about the same issues.
However, it did not last for long as he took the software company to an employment tribunal in February 2022 with new disability claims which were similar to his previous claims. Clifford said that he was treated "unfavorably" with no salary hike since the start of the disability plan. He argued that inflation was running at over 10 per cent and the value of the payments would soon diminish. "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 said, according to Daily Mail.
Judge dismisses the case
Clifford's case was rejected by employment judge Paul Housego. "The claim is that the absence of salary increase is disability discrimination because it is less favorable treatment than afforded those not disabled," he said. "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. Even if the value of the £50,000 a year halved over 30 years, it is still a very substantial benefit." The judge continued, "However, this is not the issue for, fundamentally, the terms of something given as a benefit to the disabled, and not available to those not disabled, cannot be less favorable treatment related to disability. It is more favorable treatment, not less."