who is being unreasonable? disabled person 'over sensitive'

[amazeandastonish]

Person A has multiple disabilities and asks if everyone in a group can do something as a reasonable adjustment.
Person B refuses to do so. Person A asks again and explains why adjustment is needed. Person B tells person A they are 'woke', 'over sensitive' and that they (person B) will not be 'dictated to' by someone who doesn't even work here.
Person A complains to me (D&I advisor) and head of HR (my manager).
Neither me, nor manager were present.
Person A is an external disability awareness trainer and the group are a group of staff we had asked them to train on disabilitiy awareness as we had identified a need for it (as you can see!).
We struggled to get sign ups - expecting 30 but only 10 signed up. All other 9 people were positive about the session content.
Head of HR thinks Person A should 'let it go' because we are paying them, they are meant to be teaching us right from wrong, so should have expected that reaction and just dealt with it.
Head of HR thinks Person A was rude to 'single someone out' although neither of us were there to witness it (cause we had 'other things to do' - I did protest!)
I think we should action this but as you can see, my job isn't an easy one!

YABU - the trainer should have expected this / dealt with it themselves
YANBU - the trainer was right to complain and we should do something

God, imagine how powerless person A must have felt, having their (perfectly right and reasonable) instruction to leave their working guide dog alone. A 12 year old would know not to touch a guide dog unless the person with it had said it was ok once they dropped the harness. your person B is a Wanker op and yes, you should take this further.

So, judging from the responses on here, if a visually impaired person said to you “Would you mind describing your appearance to me a little? It really helps me visualise who I’m talking to” the majority of people would refuse, based on ‘feeling uncomfortable’? Not just say “Sure, I’m about 5’3”, have brown hair and wear glasses. I’m wearing a black trouser suit and Doc Martens” or whatever.

I think it was not unreasonable to decline describing appearance. It's not relevant to the relations between two people at work, and while I can see it may be the preference of the trainer I can also see why people would feel uncomfortable or dislike doing it and it's not essential. Physical appearance should not be highlighted at work if people are unwilling. However Person B should have declined politely.

The rest Person B is being massively unreasonable - touching the dog and her rudeness.

Person B is a bellend - are they senior in the organisation? Is that why your boss is reluctant to do anything

Aldo a bit taken aback at ppl not wanting to describe. It’s a perfectly reasonable adjustment plus also (should) help ppl understand just how much they take for granted as a sighted person. All you need to say is ‘I’m a short/tall woman with dark/blonde hair wearing a red dress’ or something

Yes. I think it's totally bizarre to feel "uncomfortable" describing what you look like. Why? Makes no sense.

This. Absolutely horrendous behaviour. She was not only unnecessarily difficult by refusing to describe herself to aid a blind person. But she also interfered with the blind person's "tools" (ie the dog) thereby actually making her life and work more difficult than it already is. It's akin to fiddling with someone's wheelchair while they are using it. Completely unacceptable.

yes I agree that saying you don't feel comfortable describing yourself would be fine without being a dick about it. I'm sure even the trainer would have accepted this although maybe disappointed. I'm really struggling to get people onboard with Disability. It seems they are more interested in other PCs but not disability! It was a battle to even get this training agreed with head of HR!

Person A (trainer) said they wanted to know appearance to know who they are talking to and get an equal experience, as sighted people woudl know what we all look like.

Possibly some guidance on what they wanted to know might have helped, sticking to 'factual' and neutral things - e.g. how tall are you, what colour are your clothes today - might have helped avoid discomfort.

Which firm is this? I want to make sure I never use them!

@amazeandastonish this made me laugh out loud. In a previous life I was a lawyer and one Christmas the equality and diversity team sent out manicure sets to female clients and shoe care sets to male. I may have had words... 🙈

The dog thing is ridiculous, but how long as describing yourself been "a thing"? I've only recently heard about this, so I'm wondering if it's something new. I don't really understand how having a physical description of people makes much difference. It will never be the same as actually seeing someone, and surely voices are usually distinct enough to provide the necessary differentiation between people. I wouldn't mind saying what color I'm wearing, if someone is partially sighted and it would help them tell people apart, but further than that? I don't see the point.

I would have done it to be polite and be inclusive, but actually I hate when people comment on or discuss my physical appearance at work. It tends to be men who do it. What I look like has zero bearings on the reason that I am at work (which is to use my brain and do a good job). If someone felt similar, plus add in some body/ appearance hang ups I can understand it might make them feel uncomfortable. And that should be respected.

I’ve been on the receiving end of hostility when requesting reasonable adjustments for a disability. It is absolutely demoralizing. Trying to just exist in the world is hard enough so I am naturally inclined to have a great amount of sympathy for the trainer.

In this case the trainer was the person in authority, but often the person with a disability is seeking a job, medical attention, transportation, or other necessities. They are in need of the cooperation of the other individual and not getting that cooperation has real, sometimes dire consequences. The trainer is likely aware of this, hence the push that this incident shouldn’t be brushed aside.

Patting the dog?! Fucking idiot 🙄
Staff member B sounds like an absolute nobhead.

Well the majority of people can see someone has long brown hair, blue eyes and is tall so I think it's a very simple and reasonable request

Great, for people who’s defining features are long brown hair and blue eyes.

But what if the obvious things to say are ‘I wear a hijab and have a very prominent birthmark’, for instance. That might be very uncomfortable and (sorry for the wanky phrase) othering to have to draw attention to, or would raise eyebrows/ defeat the point of you didn’t mention them.

In my case, years of eating disorders means that I’m really, really conscious of my appearance and hate anything that draws attention to it (though my colleagues don’t know that).

Petting the guide dog is obviously twatty, though.

As a disabled person I find this really upsetting.

Law firms are the worst. For all sorts of discrimination.
(from a lawyer)

I wish I had replied before I refreshed because I was going to say that I’ve had this in relation to visual impairment. There’s a weird belief that “blind” people need to stay in their lane, and that lane definitely doesn’t lead to work.
theres literally no excuse and if your boss can’t see that they need a quick look at the equality act and another scan for their potential to be sued.
i assume you have no disabled employees.

I would approach this with facts and the fact of the matter is, if person A was an employee and kept a record of these sorts of behaviours from colleagues, proof that HR was approached to intervene and took no action because they didn't see the problem, then person A would have a very strong case at a discrimination tribunal. That's just a fact regardless of how anyone feels about it.

Present it as protecting the company from the actions of person B and people like them.

person B is a manager but not a senior one or director

Who the fuck thinks this shit. God it's so bloody depressing.

Person B is an arse hole who needs more than training.

Why were the group asked to describe themselves? How is this a reasonable adjustment to a visually impaired person?

I sincerely hope person B isn't a line manager or an associate. They sound like bloody minded dinosaur.

But what if the obvious things to say are ‘I wear a hijab and have a very prominent birthmark’, for instance.

That's why neutrally worded questions would be a good approach. Height, colour and style of clothing, for example. You could say 'I'm 5'4 and wearing loose black clothing' for example, without mentioning the hijab if you didn't want to.