To wonder about how employers will deal with benefit cuts?

[iwentjasonwaterfalls]

Yes, IABU to create another benefits thread, but there has been lots of discussion about whether the cuts should happen or not etc - this thread is accepting they're going to happen, rightly or wrongly, but wondering about whether employers will be given more responsibilities and expectations to take on people with disabilities?

I ask this because of this article: https://metro.co.uk/2025/03/23/hr-said-allowed-3-seizures-a-month-22753454/ which really depressed me, to be honest - especially the statistic that 42% of employers surveyed said they wouldn't employ someone with epilepsy, and two thirds of people reporting experiencing disability discrimination relating to epilepsy at work.

Do you think the government will introduce something (either an incentive for those who do or sanctions for those who don't) to encourage better hiring practices and workplace experience for disabled employees? Or will the cuts be "it", and if you fall into that middle ground of disabled but fit for some work, you've got to just hope for the best?

That's very sad to read about epilepsy. My brother has epilepsy although well controlled and works in the probation service with potentially dangerous offenders. I have also worked with someone with epilepsy who worked as a care assistant.

This is the thing that is so frustrating; so many people with epilepsy can live - for want of a better word - a "normal" life and have normal jobs. I know of people who are epileptic but haven't had seizures for 10+ years!

Mine is currently uncontrolled but I'm looking for (mostly WFH) jobs, but it's so disheartening to read about the absence policies and employers not wanting to employ people just because they have epilepsy.

It’s cut throat out there. My friend doesn’t employ anyone who has young children, has a disability, has the possibility of becoming pregnant, requires accommodation for their religion.

Is it illegal? Nope! There are at least 20 candidates for each job. She can always prove she employed the most “qualified” person for the job.

There's no hope for many of us out there unless the government introduces some kind of financial incentive for employers to take on more disabled staff. Otherwise who is realistically going to employ someone with seizures, or in severe pain, or needs the loo every ten minutes, or is too exhausted to concentrate, or can't guarantee they will be well enough to come in on a given day?

It's completely ridiculous and a non starter unless the government places some responsibility at the employers doors.

Hopefully they'll start by removing blanket days in the office rules in the civil service for departments where people being FT wfh has worked successfully since lockdown (some jobs can't be FT WFh and that's fine, but some can)

This is what happens a lot, I think. No one hiring tells the person that they are not being taken on, because of what you have outlined in your post. Nobody can prove otherwise, really, can they?