A former police officer who claimed he was effectively demoted because senior officers thought he might develop heart disease due to the pressure of his job was not discriminated against, it has been ruled.Retired Sergeant Ian DeAllie said he was transferred from Criminal Intelligence to Police Operations in 2006 after his superiors had learned that the officer had a family history of heart disease and a stressful home life.At a four-day Human Rights Commission hearing, lawyer Allan Doughty argued that Mr DeAllie was discriminated against because of a “perceived disability” — that commanding officers demoted him in the belief that he could develop a heart condition if he remained in his post.But yesterday a HRC board of inquiry panel ruled that, rather than discriminate against Mr DeAllie, the Bermuda Police Service had adopted a “compassionate approach” to him.They concluded that Mr DeAllie’s transfer did not constitute a demotion as his new position would carry responsibilities suitable for an experienced officer.And they highlighted the fact that an offer by police to provide Mr DeAllie with some support through a welfare officer, was used against them as evidence of discrimination.“The question this board had to ask itself was, was the transfer from Criminal Intelligence to Police Operations a dismissal? Was it a demotion?”, panel chairman Wendell Hollis said in his ruling.“We have deemed that it wasn’t. There was no loss of rank, no loss of pay and no change in benefits.”Mr DeAllie’s transfer came about after he left work for the day on Friday, June 9, 2006 — before he had completed an assignment. The hearing heard how he could not be reached by his superior officer, Acting Superintendent Paul Wright, by telephone that evening and as a result, was summoned to a meeting the following week to discuss his absence. It was at that meeting, according to police, that Mr DeAllie became “combative and confrontational” and said he was only willing to work to rule. Consequently, a recommendation was made that he be transferred from the Criminal Intelligence crime desk.The hearing heard that, ten days after that meeting, Acting Superintendent Wright learned that Mr DeAllie had been under stress at home. As a result he was offered the support of a welfare officer.Lawyer Alan Dunch, representing the Police Commissioner at the hearing, maintained that the decision to transfer Mr DeAllie was purely an operational one, and was made well before any red flags were raised about Mr DeAllie’s well-being.But the complainant disputed that claim.“Specifically, he [Mr DeAllie] learned that he was transferred as it was felt that he could not perform his job on account of the stress that he was under given that he was visibly obese, sweating profusely and had a family history of heart disease,” Mr Doughty had said in his opening remarks.“There was also a comment that he needed to be referred to a nutritionist. This, we submit, is the smoking gun.”The panel disagreed, ruling that police had not demoted Mr DeAllie and had even offered to help him.“The Bermuda Police Service clearly went to great lengths to assist him through its welfare programme and all of this was rejected by Mr DeAllie,” Mr Hollis said.“What was clearly a compassionate approach by the Bermuda Police Service has been used against them and was used in these proceedings to beat the service with.”“We believe that the events in this matter present a human tragedy — but are not a breach of the Human Rights Act.”Following his transfer, Mr DeAllie went on sick leave and eventually retired from the force on medical grounds.