To feel like some reasonable adjustments are actually unreasonable

I hear you. I've been in a similar situation and in the end I had to voted with my feet.

The constant stress and covering extra workload for others was making me ill.

A good illustration of how it should work, sadly too many managers havn’t the balls to make it work like that and other workers are having to pick up the slack.

Nail on the head!

Genuinely disabled people absolutely should have reasonable adjustments.
The problem is when every neurodivergent Tom, Dick and Harry starts requesting them too. With ND now being diagnosed at higher rate, this issue is going to start causing a lot of problems for employers and other members of staff.

I have autism and get very overwhelmed in certain situations. In no way did I see that as a reason to ask for adjustments. Thats just something that I needed to work with and manage myself. But my chronic bladder condition meaning I would need to make more toilet trips than most, I did request that management be aware that I may disappear to the loo more frequently than most.

They can be in work. But if they can't produce 1000 widgets a day as per their contract, but can only produce 500, they shouldn't be paid the same, surely? Especially if the missing 500 needs to be produced by the person who is already making 1000.

If they can make 1000 widgets a day by being allowed to sit down instead of standing all day, then there's no issue, is there? That's the reasonable adjustment.
What's not reasonable is them not producing 1000 widgets whilst being paid to produce 1000 widgets, and calling "oh do half the work for the same money and let others pick up the slack" a reasonable adjustment is madness.

Time to look for an other job. I wonder how your boss will write the job description for what you do now.

The reasonable adjustments are there to enable the employee to do their job. It’s not to enable less work for the same pay.

Really tough situation. How did you resolve this?

Don't want them taking your tax money and on benefits.

Don't want them in work either.

What the hell are disabled people supposed to do? They can't just stop being disabled and can't just stop needing those adjustments to be able to work. If you think "they can manage without", the you're pretty stupid. No they can't, if they want to stay in work. That's the whole point.

This country really does just want disabled and sick people rotting in the ditch don't they.

Reasonable adjustments should be something put in place that allows a person to do their job as well as everybody else. So a special chair, larger monitor, headset instead of phone for example. If adjustments are required to the point that the person is not even doing the actual job anymore and creates more work for others then, no, this is not reasonable or fair on everybody else. I've had experience of this and it really breeds resentment within the workplace and frankly makes it less likely that someone with those issues would be hired in the future.

Really you're willing to to make 1600 WIDGETS a day, working 4 nights in 10, and the person next to you is only making 400, getting longer breaks than you, is allowed to bring their dog into work, doesn't ever have to do the night shifts and is excused from off site training... Even though you're both contracted to make 1000 a day, both contracted to work 2 nights in 10... and you're all getting paid exactly the same?

Telling somebody else that they have to add to their workload by helping out is not a reasonable adjustment.

This I think.

It’s up to the employer to make reasonable adjustments but they can’t just be passing someone’s work on to a colleague.

And I’m also not sure that not doing your job is a RA!

Also I never advised not declaring epilepsy at all ..

Apologies.

My advice was more job dependant.

What I was trying to say (although admittedly poorly) was for a condition such as autism or ADHD which may require additional screen breaks or less client contact (commonly approved and enforced adjustments depending on the role) then getting the job and declaring t on day one is a commonly used and encouraged strategy by people with disabilities to avoid being discriminated on during the hiring process.

I apologies as I agree for epilepsy this could be more stressful

Totally agree and am facing the same issue. I’m doing the lion’s share of the work, for the same money.

I appreciate we've moved on from here, but 'take the job and tell them in day one' is such terrible advice.

If done by a SQEP person, the 'health and safety assessments' (risk assessments) which make someone with epilepsy unsuited to a role are likely to be things like lone working or operating machinery. Not their fault, but the employer has a duty of care to keep them & others safe.

Following the advice to 'take a job and conceal the condition' the worker in PP post would have rocked up & immediately had to declare herself unable to do the main tasks of the role. Potentially embarrassing for the worker, really unhelpful for the employer and a waste of everyone's time.
Or even worse, may have felt unable to speak up, worked with boiling water and potentially got badly hurt or harmed someone else.

Why would you accept a job which could cause yourself, or others, harm?

also from a business perspective it is easier to give Jeff a lower workload or extra short paid breaks and give his workload to others than risk an employment tribunal

I think it's difficult when you look at acas and disability websites the adjustments seem to be quiet "heavy" ie WFH, extra breaks, less workload, less client meetings, which means companies feel obligated to give them as they are scared of paying out in court.

What it comes down to as far as I can see is that a reasonable adjustment shouldn't be unfair, financially or otherwise, to other employees.

It also shouldn't compromise the financial or operational viability of the business.

That means that a lot of accommodations will be impossible - there are really going to be limits to what they can change.

I think that's actually how it was intended to work, but there are a lot of people who seem to think it should amount to other people having a harder job without fair remuneration for that, or employers having to increase costs or decrease productivity.

And I think there can be a lot of pressure to do those things.

Thank you. That's really kind x

Don't be ashamed to be disabled my friend. If you take a job and they don't provide adjustments then go to acas and go to the emplpyment tribunal. If the judge agrees with you you will get paid out.

People see court as scary but honestly they are there to protect our rights!

I guess I feel like if I went back to work I'd need loads of adjustments, but wouldn't be at all comfortable if they came at the expense of others. I'm such a people pleaser I'd rather get on with colleagues than progress my career. But that's for another thread...

Apparently reasonable adjustments can put people in a better position than they would be in if they weren't disabled.

So although in theory this is true legally it seems like other people do have to pock up the slack for disabled people which I'm okay with personally

No adjustments should mean that other staff have to do more work unpaid.
Your employer needs to sort it out. If people need longer to do things or more mentoring or something then they need to supply that without detriment to other staff.
I think it needs to be addressed in a clinical way, the hours each week or day added on to others workload as a result of this and how it can be managed.
It's certainly fair that disabled staff get adjustments but it should not make any difference to the workload of others.

This is how my workplace does it now. Everyone gets interview questions up front.

This works because there is no reason to spring them on people, and this way everyone is in the same boat. If we only gave them to some, they would have an advantage. And the idea isn't to give some an advantage in order to "make up" for their dyslexia, it's to make sure they all have the same chance to have a fair interview.