How-to guide: How to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments in the workplace (UK)

Introduction

This how-to guide provides in-house counsel, private practice lawyers and human resources professionals with guidance relating to the duty to make reasonable adjustments for individuals with a disability in England, Wales and Scotland (GB). This guide does not cover the law in Northern Ireland.

This how-to guide covers:

Triggers for the duty to make reasonable adjustments
Substantial disadvantage
Employer’s knowledge
Reasonableness of an adjustment

This guide can be used in conjunction with the following How-to guides: Overview of workplace discrimination and harassment law and How to avoid disability discrimination in the workplace and Quick view: Protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

Employers should be aware that the Employment Rights Bill 2024, introduced on 10 October 2024, aims to significantly enhance worker protections in the UK. Key provisions include granting day-one rights for unfair dismissal, paternity, parental, and bereavement leave, changes to sick pay and flexible working rights, protections against zero-hours contracts and restrictions on the use of ‘fire and rehire’ practices. New legislation will be introduced throughout 2025 and 2026. Further information can be found at UK Parliament: Employment rights bill and Employment Rights Bill: factsheets.

Section 1 – Triggers for the duty to make reasonable adjustments

The duty to make a reasonable adjustments recognises that treating everyone the same might not necessarily result in equal outcomes; in some cases, differential treatment or additional measures are required to achieve fairness. Under section 20 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), employers are legally obligated to make reasonable adjustments in situations where a disabled person is at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled individuals.

For information about the definition of a disability and the other types of disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 see How-to guide: How to avoid disability discrimination in the workplace . For an overview of discrimination law generally in GB including the categories of person to whom the EqA 2010 applies, see How-to guide: Overview of workplace discrimination and harassment law.

The duty to make reasonable adjustments arises in the three main scenarios set out below.

A provision, criterion or practice (PCP) the employer operates that may put a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage.
The physical layout or design of a workplace that places a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage.
A disabled person might need an employer to provide auxiliary aids to help them perform their role.

If the PCP, physical feature or absence of an auxiliary aid gives rise to a substantial disadvantage then the obligation to make reasonable adjustments has been triggered. The assessment of what is reasonable is considered in more detail in section 4 below.

1.1 Understanding PCPs

The concept of a PCP is foundational to the duty to make reasonable adjustments. PCPs are used to describe various mechanisms, policies or operational practices that an employer might have in place. An employment tribunal will construe these terms widely.

The nature of PCPs varies across different organisations, and it is crucial for organisations to regularly review PCPs to ensure that they do not inadvertently create unnecessary barriers for disabled persons. In cases where a PCP does place a disabled person at a disadvantage, the duty to make reasonable adjustments comes into play.

1.1.1 Provision

Provisions refer to provisions of contracts as well as non-contractual policies (such as a disciplinary or grievance policy).

1.1.2 Criterion

Criterion generally means a specific standard, rule or policy by which an individual’s ability or suitability is assessed.

Examples of criterion

Performance criterion: an employer sets a typing-speed requirement for a job that might disadvantage someone with limited manual dexterity.
Attendance criterion: a strict attendance policy that does not accommodate absences for medical treatments or therapies.
Qualification criterion: a job requirement that mandates all candidates must possess a driver’s licence, even if driving isn’t an essential task for the position.

1.1.3 Practice

Practice denotes the typical or habitual ways in which things are done in an organisation. It is interpreted very widely.

Examples of practices

Communication practice: holding team meetings verbally without providing written summaries, disadvantaging those with hearing impairments.
Shift rota practice: a longstanding practice of rotating staff shifts every week, without considering those who might need consistent schedules for disability-related reasons.
Break-time practice: allowing staff only specific, set times for breaks, which might disadvantage someone who needs to take medication outside of those break times.

One-off acts are unlikely to amount to practices, unless the one off act is an example of an underlying practise or an indication it would occur in the future (see Ishola v Transport for London [2020] ICR 1204).

1.2. Physical features of a workplace

The physical features of workplace premises play a pivotal role in ensuring equality for disabled workers.

Physical features include:

Structural elements: aspects such as walls, ceilings, floors, doors, gates, stairs and ramps.
Fixtures: items such as lifts, toilets, lighting, signage and other installed facilities.
Fittings: this might encompass furnishings such as furniture, shelves and other moveable items.
Layout or spatial configuration: how a space is arranged, including corridors, aisles and seating areas.

The design or presence of certain physical features might inadvertently place individuals with disabilities at a disadvantage.

Examples of physical features causing a disadvantage:

Stairs without accompanying ramps or lifts can pose challenges for wheelchair users.
Narrow corridors or doorways might hinder free movement for those with mobility aids.
Absence of tactile flooring can be challenging for visually impaired individuals.
Poor lighting might further disadvantage those with limited vision.

1.3 Auxiliary aids

Auxiliary aids can broadly be described as supportive tools, instruments, devices or services that aid individuals with disabilities in accessing, participating in, or benefiting from services and puts them on par with those without disabilities. The aids serve as bridges, helping to close the gap between the challenges posed by disabilities and the mainstream environment. Employers have an obligation to provide these.

Auxiliary aids fall into the following types:

For hearing impairments: tools such as hearing aids, induction loop systems, infrared systems and sign language interpreters. These cater to the needs of those with hearing loss, ensuring the disabled person can partake in verbal communication or auditory experiences.
For visual impairments: tactile graphics, braille translations, screen readers, large-print documents and magnifiers cater to the visually impaired, enabling them to access written or graphical information.
For physical disabilities: tools such as voice-activated software, specially designed keyboards (Ward v Peninsula Business Services ET 2600520/16) or page-turners aid those with mobility challenges in accessing information or performing tasks.
For cognitive or learning disabilities: aids such as symbol-based communication systems, easy-read documents or certain software that breaks down complex tasks.

Section 2 – Substantial disadvantage

The duty to make reasonable adjustments only arises if the PCP, physical feature or failure to provide an auxiliary aid gives rise to a substantial disadvantage for the disabled person.

In the EqA 2010, ‘substantial’ is defined as ‘more than minor or trivial’ (section 212(1) EqA 2010). While this provides some clarity, there remains a degree of subjectivity when considering substantial disadvantage. Essentially, the disadvantage faced by a disabled person due to a PCP, physical feature of premises or lack of an auxiliary aid should not just be slight or negligible. It should be significant enough to matter in the practical day-to-day life or operations of the person affected.

Employers should ensure that the individual’s input is sought when considering the issue of substantial disadvantage and if the employer and the individual do not agree, expert medical advice should be obtained.

2.1 Context matters

To determine if a disadvantage is ‘substantial’, it is important to look at the bigger picture by assessing the following:

Comparative analysis: the disadvantage should be weighed against the experience of people under the same circumstances who are not disabled.
Practical implications: consideration of how the issue impacts the individual’s daily life, work tasks, or access to a service is essential. For instance, if a wheelchair user has to travel significantly longer to find an accessible entrance, they may be at a substantial disadvantage.
Temporal aspect: the duration or frequency of the disadvantage can also be a determining factor. An occasional minor inconvenience may not be substantial, but if it is recurrent, its cumulative effect might be deemed significant.
Individual experience: ‘substantial disadvantage’ is intrinsically tied to individual experiences. What might be a considerable challenge for one person might not be the same for another, even if they share the same disability. Factors like the nature and extent of the disability, the person’s coping mechanisms, and other individual circumstances play a part.

Section 3 – Employer’s knowledge

The duty to make reasonable adjustments only arises when the employer knows or could reasonably be expected to know that the individual has an impairment and that impairment places them at a substantial disadvantage as a result (Schedule 8, paragraph 20(1) EqA 2010). Employers must therefore do everything they can reasonably be expected to do to find out if an individual such as an employee, worker or job applicant has a disability, but should balance this obligation with the need to avoid asking overly intrusive questions of employees.

For example, before subjecting an employee to disciplinary action for poor attendance, an employer should give the employee an opportunity to provide an explanation for their poor attendance. This gives the employee the chance to inform the employer of any disability-related reason for their absence, therefore enabling the employer to consider whether the duty to make adjustments has been triggered.

It is best practice for employers undertaking a recruitment process to invite applicants to flag any reasonable adjustments they might require during the process.

Section 4 – Reasonableness of an adjustment

A reasonable adjustment should be aimed at alleviating the disadvantage suffered by the disabled individual and not an exercise in changing the role or work premises for the sake of it. When employers are tasked with making adjustments to accommodate disabled individuals, understanding what is deemed ‘reasonable’ is paramount.

The assessment of what is reasonable is not, however, clear cut and various factors can be relevant. These can include the issues set out below.

4.1 Effectiveness of the adjustment

The primary purpose of any adjustment is to alleviate or remove the disadvantage faced by a disabled individual. Employers should consider how the adjustment would directly benefit the employee in the short term, and compare that with adjustments that might provide long-term or lasting benefits, making them more valuable over time.

4.2 Practicability of implementation

It is crucial to understand how feasible it is for the employer to bring about the proposed change. Give consideration to whether the adjustment would disrupt normal business operations or significantly alter how tasks are performed. In cases where physical alterations to premises are needed, it is vital to consider whether such changes are feasible, especially if the premises are leased or have historical significance.

4.3 Financial cost of the adjustment

While cost should not be the sole determining factor, it is significant when considering reasonable adjustments. Direct costs are the immediate expenses associated with implementing the adjustment, and indirect costs might include ongoing maintenance costs or additional training for staff.

It is essential to weigh the cost of the adjustment against the tangible and intangible benefits it brings. An expensive adjustment that alleviates little of the disadvantage may not be reasonable.

4.4 Resources and size of the organisation

An organisation’s capabilities play a crucial role in determining what adjustments can be reasonably made. Consideration should be given to whether the employer has the necessary personnel to implement and maintain the adjustment. A flourishing enterprise might be expected to invest more in adjustments than a struggling start-up.

4.5 Availability of external support

Sometimes, there are external avenues to ease the process of implementing adjustments. Employers should check if there are governmental or non-profit grants available to support certain adjustments, and collaborative efforts with other organisations or experts can sometimes make adjustments more feasible.

4.6 Potential disruption to other employees or services

It is essential to consider the broader implications of any adjustment. Would the adjustment significantly disrupt the work routines of other employees? If so, are there ways to mitigate this? For service providers, it’s crucial to ensure that adjustments for employees do not adversely affect service delivery to clients.

4.7 Longevity and durability of the adjustment

An adjustment that offers a long-term solution might be more reasonable than a temporary fix. Investing more in a permanent solution might be costlier initially but can be more reasonable in the long run. Employers should consider if the adjustment can be easily adapted or scaled to meet future needs or challenges.

4.8 Precedents and past practices

Reviewing past instances can provide insights for employers. How have similar situations been handled within the organisation before? Observing how similar organisations or industry leaders have addressed similar challenges can also offer valuable lessons.

Additional resources

Filed under

United Kingdom