Is this disability discrimination?

[oldandknackerd]

My current workplace is relocating to a site that will be at least a 45 drive away which although not ideal is fine (I currently work 10mins away from home and this was one of the reasons I applied.
Unfortunately my car is 14 years old and although very reliable it's age does means a large repair bill could happen if something was to go wrong and there's no way i can afford to pay a large bill without saving up for it ....
I could in theory get public transport to the new site but it would take me 3 buses and a 20 minute walk (total nearly 2 hours each way )
Due to having severe arthritis cold and fatigue are things that make my condition worse (I already have a couple of small 'reasonable adjustments in place to accommodate this)and reality don't think i could manage the journey via public transport if for any reason I couldn't use my car .

My point is could or should my organisation be making a reasonable adjustment under the DDA for the above scenario?

Just for clarity I earn 25k a year as a lone parent so there is no way i can afford to buy a newer car ..

Sounds like your union has been helpful. Has your union negotiated what is considered a reasonable travelling distance with your employer?

as an example, in my previous company, it was agreed at x miles (as the crow flies); however we also had to consider the availability of public transport, from each employees home address- so some individuals became eligible for redundancy based on that.
also when we moved to big out of town sites, we paid for shuttle buses from the nearest train/bus station for x years.

and that was before taking into consideration any disabilities or similar.

hope you are able to come to a good agreement with your employer.

I've reported that comment it was a revolting personal attack.

I expect most people if their workplace suddenly moved a substantial distance would feel that they had been to effectively sacked (constructive dismissal) if no adjustments/compensation were offered.

The attacks on you are totally based in ignorance. Even a longer day out of the house can be really hard to manage with conditions like yours.

You can request a reasonable adjustment of them paying for transport, but if it is more detrimental to the company, they can counter with a different offer.

For example, a disabled employee uses a wheelchair but cannot access upper floor meetings due to no lift. The company do not have to put a lift in, but they do have to make sure the employee can do their job from the lower floors. Eg all meetings they are involved in now move to the lower floor.

In your case, your employer could support salary sacrifice to allow you to upgrade your car to one which might not need frequent repairs.

You could also apply for the access to work grant to pay for transport to and from work.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/access-to-work-factsheet/access-to-work-factsheet-for-customers#:~:text=There%20is%20no%20set%20amount,in%20work%20or%20self%2Demployed.

I came here and asked a perfectly legitimate question and have received some very welcome advice of which I have taken.
ACAS and my union have advised me of my legal rights -if you don't like it then fine but to feel the need to start posting childish insults in response is really quite sad

Well done for keeping calm despite some attacks from some very unpleasant and /ignorant posters

This is the government advice:

When an employer moves, employees with a mobility clause in their contract have to move unless they can prove the request is unreasonable.

When employees have to move
If an employer moves the location of their business, employees should check their employment contract for a ‘mobility clause’.
A mobility clause says employees have to move within certain limits. It means that employers can normally force their employees to move to places allowed by the clause, unless this is completely unreasonable.

There are different options to solve a workplace dispute about what is unreasonable.
Employees without a mobility clause in their contract can choose whether or not to move.

Redundancy
Employers can make their employees redundant if they decide not to move.
Employees may have a right to redundancy pay if:
they match the redundancy criteria - eg they’ve worked for the employer for a certain amount of time

• they’re not getting any compensation from their employer because they decided not to move
• they haven’t ‘unreasonably’ refused an offer of suitable alternative work

‘Unreasonable’ could mean refusing to move even though the new location is nearby and the employee could drive or easily take public transport. However, it may be reasonable to say no if it involves a difficult journey or affects personal matters like children’s education.

Compensation
Employers don’t have to offer employees any compensation for relocating, unless it’s specified in their contract.

Disputes
Employers and employees may have to solve a dispute over issues with relocation, eg if they think someone is being unreasonable and refuse them a redundancy payment.

So. Check to see if you have a "Mobility clause".
If you do then you have to move.

If you don't then you can refuse to move. However if there isn't a job for you in the old place then you can be made redundant.

You could get redundancy pay, however you might be counted in the "unreasonable" category because you can drive and 45 minutes will not count as a difficult journey.

If you're trying for constructive dismissal then the category you would look at is:

• making unreasonable changes to working patterns or place of work without agreement

But the courts would have to decide it was unreasonable. But again I don't think it would be counted as unreasonable. You also need to take steps.

Raise a problem informally by talking to your employer.
If you've already tried to resolve things informally you can raise a grievance. This is where you make a formal complaint to your employer.

If you try talking to your employer and they offer reasonable suggestions then you're not going to get constructive dismissal.

So the first thing you need to do is go and talk to your line manager. You may find that they come out with a solution you haven't thought of but suits you. But if you don't talk to them, then you cannot claim they were being unreasonable.
But if you refuse to move, then they can make you redundant.

This is the third time you’ve mentioned your inability to use public transport.
So drive 🤷🏻‍♀️

Sorry but this is part of the reason why the NHS is in the state that it is. You can drive, have a car and have a responsibility to get to work. If that means getting a better car then so be it.
Surely it isn’t the responsibility of the tax payer to pay for you to get there, other than the odd occasion. It’s a joke.

Exactly! OP is looking for problems when there are none. You have a car, you can drive, from one of your posts you confirmed your employer will pay mileage to the new location for 4 years.

Why are you so determined to cause an issue over this? Or are you just looking for any opportunity to grift a payout out of the NHS?!

OP ACAS can only advise on what information you have given them. You may find that when it goes to arbitration and the employers put their case forwards including that you can drive and have recently sold your car to make yourself unable to get to work that ACAS advise you that you have no case

Talk about mountains out of molehills!

The OP has got ACAS involved, is scrutinising disability discrimination laws and is considering selling her car and being made redundant, over the very small chance that her car might break down on a day when it is too cold for her to use public transport. She is not being forced to use public transport every day to get to work!

Surely a chat to managers about taking leave or wfh in this unlikely event is what most people would do?

If I were you I would start calculating all the figures. How much would you get paid in travel for the 4 years if you drove, if you went on public transport and if you went on taxi. Compare this to the cost of your redundancy. If you were replaced with a new employee would they come in at the same salary as you? Unlikely as you have been there 23 years so they would be on the lowest band point in AfC compared to you, which is presumably at a higher point.

You can get a decent secondhand car with low mileage for £3-4k
You don't have to spend that much on a car all 3 of my kids have got decent cars for under £1000.

I was going to ask if they were going to cover mileage to the new location and I think you're very fortunate that you're getting 4 years of it.
You might find that you can afford a newer car on finance and those payments will help with it.
Your arthritis sounds as though you might need an occupational health assessment as they might be able to suggest recommendations to help you with doing your job. As may Access to Work.
What would help everyone is if your work put on a bus or similar from the current workplace to the new one for the 4 years. Can the unions suggest this?

Thinking about it I don't buy that ACAS/union said this unless they've said it in the context that 'there is potential of' or OP has embellished what she's told them. Like you say there is no issue at present and if they're covering mileage for 4 years I'd take that as a generous offer.

If the only issue with using public transport is cold this covers roughly 4 months of the year. If you're that worried about the cold why not use public transport for 8 months of the year then use your car over the winter? It would greatly reduce the odds of it breaking down if it's only used for 4 months a year. Unless you're classing cold as anything below 20 degrees of course.

Council redundancy varies by nhs is good. My experience is that relocating less than an hour doesn’t get redundancy. I currently have to travel 45 minutes to a different site once a week, but terms and conditions mean I can claim mileage as it’s not my base. The issue you have is you currently have a car so it’s hypothetical. Negotiating hypothetical scenarios is a non starter imo.

You don’t have a legal position to protect.
This is not disability discrimination, whatever ACAS may have told you.
Were they in possession of the full facts when they told you that you “most certainly” have a case for constructive dismissal?

Not it's also fatigue. Travelling 4 hours a day on public transport will adversely impact my disability

Is fatigue a common side effect of arthritis?

ACAS we're given the full facts .
I'm not sure what your legal training is but I'd like to think that both ACAS and my union will have given expert advice re my legal position.

Absolutely - fatigue is a common consequence of any chronic and painful condition.

I would have gained nothing by embellishing the situation and giving biased information about the situation to ACAS. My union is also fully aware of the situation affecting myself and my colleagues, so again, they were aware of the full facts.

So why are you here, asking randoms on the Internet?!

Absolutely. I only wish it wasn't.