Is this workplace discrimination?

[Missmummy88]

I have depression which has been getting worse over the last 6 months. I have had frequent meetings with my gp (bi weekly) for 4 months- in my most recent meeting my go wrote a letter to my employer recommending reduced working hours from 4 days per week to 3, to enable me time to recover. I work in a middle level role, which to be fair has been affected by a period of absence for my depression. My hope is working less hours will prevent me from taking any time off (I mean 6 days over the last 3 months. - not huge chunks of time) naturally they will have to re resource the business and conversations have arisen about me becoming the office manager - a step down in role. Is this discrimination or not? Do I have a right to reduce my hours and keep my job the same?

Is it a temporary change with a end date in mind?

It’s long term x

IANAL but my understanding is that employers have to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities.

In this case they would have to demonstrate that the adjustment of having your role as three days was unreasonable.

So in short, they can refuse your request, but would have to justify it.

What process did they go through?

From what I remember from when I was managing a team.... this is technically a flexible working request. Although the gp has sent a letter it is only a recommendation, the gp cannot make the business do it.

You are really putting in a flexible working request to reduce your hours. With these type of requests the business can refuse it if it would be detrimental to the business. Which in this case it might be as they may struggle to find someone to cover the 1 day you wouldnt be there. They have suggested an alternative for you so I presume that is them trying to accommodate your request.

I would suggest you request a meeting with HR and your line manager and discuss all of the options available.

Hope you feel better soon.

As far as I am aware. If it's a permanent change and they have business reasons, they dont have to keep you in the same role.

It is not discrimination. They haven't sacked you. They have balanced your needs with those of the company and offered you a role consumate with the restrictions you and your GP outlined.

Think of it from the other side: if 'accommodation' meant leaving you in your job on reduced hours, same salary etc then the business would suffer. Multiply that by any number of other staff members who may need similar adjustments and you can see why employers are not obliged to do that.

The most important things is that they make their reasonable adjustments in an open way, following all of the proper guidelines. Did they do this?

www.acas.org.uk/article/6074/Reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace

www.nhshealthatwork.co.uk/images/library/files/Government%20policy/Mental_Health_Adjustments_Guidance_May_2012.pdf

OP, maybe you should think about whether this role would actually suit you better? Of course you need to consider your employee rights too. But it would be silly to resist this move if you might find that it is less stressful and would allow your mental health to improve?

Some of this depends on whether your MH condition is (under the relevant law) a disability. If it is, they need to make “reasonable adjustments”.

If you’re not in a union you might be able to get information/advice from ACAS helpline or a MH charity, eg Mind.

Curious, you can’t be sure it’s not discrimination. OP is being demoted.

I think MH issues are classed as a protected characteristic, so reasonable adjustments should be made but they could argue a reduction in hours is unreasonable for your current role for business reasons.

They have a business to run and need to protect that for the benefit of all employees, not just one. They also need to look after the other staff - you’ve already said your role has been impacted by your absence and I assume others are picking up the slack (or they’ve had the additional cost of recruiting cover). Neither will be sustainable.

I’m not trying to be mean here but is the role too much for you ? You don’t say what it is but is it impacting your MH ? Is it just one more thing to worry about ? I know you say office manager is a step down but do you need that - ego aside ?

It sounds to me like they are trying to find a solutions to keep you by considering alternative roles. It’s better than them point blank refusing your request and looking to terminate down the line due to extended absence (or managing you out). You don’t really indicate if you have a good or bad relationship with them but the current situation can’t really continue indefinitely.

sounds like they are trying to find a solution for you, following your own request - that doesn't seem like discrimination at all

What is “reasonable” depends on things like the specific business/work of the organisation and how big the organisation is - if it’s a large organisation they might have resources to cover OP working PT, for example.

A PP has linked to relevant guidelines.

Here, we have limited info so posters can’t give an informed opinion on whether the employer is being reasonable or potentially discriminatory.

I have reduced my working hours twice for health reasons. In my case, it was arthritis, but I see no reason why depression should be treated any differently.

However, in my case, it was straightforward for management, they simply reduced my max caseload proportionately. If you can come up with a practical way of managing any difficulties caused by your reduction in hours, it will make it harder for them to say that there is a business case for refusing your request.

Is it feasible for the reduction in costs arising from your (proposed) reduced hours to be used to fund a p/t post to take on some of your current duties?

Some mental health issues would meet the definition of a disability as a protected characteristic, some would not. It very much depends on the expectation as to whether the condition will be long term, and how it affects your day to day life.

Can you suggest a way to minimise disruption to the business if you reduced your hours? It's relatively easy for an employer to show that they considered reducing your hours, but that it would have a significant detriment to the business. It's far more difficult (and beneficial to you) if you demonstrate to them how you can make this work.

@Loopy you are right, there should have been a 'necessarily' in there. My error, my apologies.

My post intended to say just that! It might be the very best that the company can offer, only OP will know if they have gone through the proper procedures, that I linked to, and made a reasonable offer.

No it's not necessarily discrimination, they are within their rights to say the job you currently hold cannot be done on three days a week, and I'd assume justifying that would not be too onerous for them.

It sounds to me also like they are trying to find a solution for you rather than managing you out on a capability termination, which they could also do potentially if they felt the role could not be done in three days a week and they had no other roles available that could.

I don't think it's discrimination.
Yes it is the equivalent of a flexible working request.. and the company can try and honour that. However they do have a right to ask you to change roles if they believe you will not be able to meet the needs of your current role with the new hours you need to be working.

Is it feasible for the reduction in costs arising from your (proposed) reduced hours to be used to fund a p/t post to take on some of your current duties?

This is an option, but the cost of employing an extra person for eg 8 hours will cost far more than the reduction in the OP's salary. There's the one off cost of recruitment, but ongoing you've got NI, insurances, training, sick and maternity entitlement and so on. Plus, it can be pretty difficult to recruit a more experienced/ senior person for a very low hours contract, and once you have to not lose them to alternative employment.

I believe a company have to make reasonable adjustments & a part of this would be to consider if the hours you do not want can be used elsewhere. Would anybody else be willing to have them? They do have the right to refuse if the company will suffer financially as this wouldn’t be considered unreasonable . I wanted to hire a young lady who had CP but we simply could not a accommodate her needs for health & safety reasons such as there was stairs & no lift, it would not have been safe for her. To refuse a request that would be proven to be detrimental to a company’s performance if accepted is not discrimination

Also - I forgot to add! I do hope your feeling better soon Op I hope your employment comes up with a solution for you x

Sounds like they're making changes to accommodate you rather than discriminating

Speak to ACAS and Mind. They would be best to advise. People often post on MN what they think the rules should be without knowing anything about employment law.

This^^ In buckets full!

There are loads of posts in this thread alone which are utterly incorrect and misleading.

I think people get verbal diarrhoea and can't help posting something no matter how wide of the mark and unhelpful...

Join a trade union so you can get professional legal advice and full representation, too. You should never face situations like this at work alone, there's no need.

Don't attend any meetings with your manager or HR unaccompanied, you are always entitled to bring someone with you. Mind and ACAS may be able to provide you with advocacy until you sort your trade union membership out.

www.tuc.org.uk/join-union

How can you predict when you will have an episode and need time off? Reduced working pattern wont prevent sick days.