I have read and re-read this from end to end and to think that a boss is employed with a major company in this case is actually appaling..
I suspect that none of this case has reached Corporate level, as by now both of these 2 bosses' would have been fired for "Gross Misconduct"!!!
For my sins I am a Health, Safety and Disaster Management Advisor, and continuously strive to ensure that any person who has a disability, whether it is physically seen or hidden is covered by the same rights and regulations for all members of staff (I am Type 2 diabetic).. but we do have Type 1 in the workforce (albeit all volunteers), same coverage..
Myself i would recommend, the CAB, but not only that the DDA was replaced by the Equality and Diversity Act 2010, and this gives more force for those who are being discriminated against.. It also allows for more range in being able to make not only Tribunals aware but it has teeth, and can be used against "Bullies"..
One thing that most people haven't covered in this with their advice, is that you can bring the Police into this matter.. Disability Hate Crime, is severly illegal and can bring not only fines but imprisonment..
Although the vulnerability of a victim is an aggravating factor leading to enhanced sentences in any event, where there is an extra factor of hostility based on disability, it is important that this is identified and the court invited to apply the provisions of s.146 so that the offence is properly dealt with for what it is - a hate crime.
In the absence of a precise legal definition of hostility, consideration should be given to ordinary dictionary definitions, which include ill-will, ill-feeling, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment, and dislike.
There will be cases in which there is no other reasonable explanation, other than that the offender's hostility was based on disability. This is particularly so in cases of abuse, violence or other offensive conduct as these offences tend to carry inbuilt within them the demonstration of hostility. For that hostility to be based on disability is but a short evidential step in many cases.
The above statements are taken from the CPS's Disability Hate Crime pages.. It does make interesting reading.. Effectively your boss or bosses are guilty of some if not more than one of these incidents..
The First-Aider has a duty of care, this is written into his qualification to be a 1st aider.. If he or she is not compling with that care then they are not capable of being a 1st aider and it need reporting to the relevant organising body.. If they have taken a 1st aid course with St. John Ambulance then they are covered by St. John Ambulance regulations in the duty of care set by their course and their exam, and their insurance.. However if they are being seen or are reported as not with-holding the duties that a first aider (at work) or (responsible person) then they run the risk of being incapable of those duties, and can have their 1st aid qualification removed (legally), which in turn could effect their employment within a company..
I would love to get my hands on your 2 bosses, 1to repeatedly drum into them the unforseen conclusions of disabled persons in the workplace and what can happen if they don't take notice, and 2 to place them both in the position of a Type 1/2 diabetic suffering from a Hypo to see how they would react..
Please let us know how you get on..