AIBU to think employers aren’t going nearly far enough with adjustments and that ableist attitudes are still totally normalised?

[coffeeandmycats]

I’m honestly so fed up with how “reasonable adjustments” are treated like some kind of special favour or workplace charity. They’re not. They’re a legal duty under the Equality Act, and they exist because without them, disabled people are shut out of employment or slowly squeezed out once they’re in.
Every time someone says “we couldn’t adjust the role” or “it wouldn’t be fair on the team,” what they usually mean is “we didn’t want to deal with it.” And that’s what drives me mad how often laziness, bias or lack of imagination is brushed off as “just being realistic.” That’s not realism. That’s ableism.
Most jobs can be adjusted. If someone can’t do one task but can do everything else why is the answer to push them out, instead of reshuffling the tasks or offering alternatives? We do this all the time in other settings. You wouldn’t chuck a kid out of school because they struggle with stairs. But in work, suddenly job specs are sacred texts.
And now, with the government trying to push more disabled people back into work (often with threats of benefit sanctions), where is the structural support? Employers still get to decide whether something is “reasonable,” even when they’ve shown time and again that they don’t understand or don’t care. That’s not a system that’s a gamble.
We should be encouraging every disabled person denied adjustments to take their employer straight to tribunal. I don’t care if it’s uncomfortable the law needs to be enforced. But also, it shouldn’t have to get that far. There should be an independent ombudsman-style service that employers must subscribe to something that can assess adjustment requests fairly and quickly, without making the disabled person go to war to be heard.
And honestly? If a business can’t afford to make space for disabled people, whether that’s with flexibility, equipment, transport help or task reallocation, then maybe they shouldn’t be in business. If your model only works when everyone is 100% able-bodied, then your model is broken. Shut it down.
AIBU to think we’ve got this totally backwards? That we’re still treating inclusion like a bonus feature instead of a basic requirement? That people who need adjustments are somehow seen as the problem instead of the systems and attitudes around them?
I’m sure this will rub some people the wrong way. Maybe that’s the point.

Just jumping in to say I’ve actually been through the tribunal process over reasonable adjustments, and I want to say this clearly: I’m not mad, I’m not making things up, and I’m definitely not the only one.
I used to work for a charity in a client-facing role, seeing around five clients a day for hour-long sessions. It was intense, emotionally draining work. I started experiencing really bad anxiety at that point undiagnosed, but very real and seriously affecting me day to day. I asked for short breaks between clients so I could manage it, regroup, and actually function properly in the role. That’s all. Not fewer hours. Not a pay rise. Just short pauses.
They refused. Completely. Said it “wouldn’t be fair on the rota.”
So I went to an Employment Tribunal and I won. The judge ruled they had failed in their duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act. The fact that I didn’t have a formal diagnosis didn’t matter the impact on my ability to work was clear, and that’s what the law looks at. In total I got £35,000.
So for anyone out there thinking people just throw around the word “anxiety” to get special treatment: no. Some of us are just trying to stay in jobs we care about, without wrecking our health in the process. And when employers don’t take that seriously? The law is absolutely on our side.
If you’re struggling and being ignored you’re not being dramatic. You’re probably just ahead of the curve in knowing your rights.

Many years ago when I ran a small company the Governments Business Link service was available, where an actual human would visit and help to support the business. This was a massively valuable service, they would advise companies on how to fulfil their duties, where to apply for funding if necessary, where to go for more detailed advice and support. There was more grants and funding and business loans available to improve businesses.

This sort of government support for business is gone.

I and many in my line of work agree with you on accessibility and doing all we can to get more people back in work, we agree with the increased environmental and health and safety legislation, the rules of conflict minerals, anti slavery etc. etc. etc. what we would campaign for is more government support to achieve these things, not more beating of small business for not doing well enough.

Have you ever tried to have a wee with a 1 year old on your lap, breastfeeding? Have you ever tried to eat a meal while breastfeeding?

Besides employers must provide a private, hygeinic place for mothers to express, you can't keep a place hygeinic while eating your lunch, and feeds could take anywhere from 15 minutes to 45 minutes, sometimes longer, and so when would you expect a breastfeeding employee to take movement breaks or use the bathroom if their breaks are consumed by breastfeeding or expressing.

It is perfectly reasonable for expressing to be cut out completely especially where adequate milk storage isn't available and an acceptable work around for partners to bring the baby to feed directly at the breast.

Honestly, breastfeeding is for such a short period of time, it's good practice for employers to accomodate this for staff retention and reputation.

Caselaw supports this.

That is shocking. No actual diagnosis yet some judge thought reasonable adjustments needed to be made, are you sure you're not missing anything out?

Tbh if you couldn't see 5 charity clients in a day without needing to regroup then maybe the role wasn't for you.

So you took 35000 pounds from a charity? What a lovely human being you are.

This couldn't be more obvious that it's time to change Equalities Act and PIP rules to ensure professional diagnosis required.

Re autism - if one went through school and whatever further education without diagnosis then it's very unlikely their autism (which is spectrum) is so bad that they can claim disability on this. Speaking as someone who was diagnosed and have diagnosed DC. Other countries do brain scans as a part of autism diagnosis to ensure there are no p..s takers like OP and not to dilute support for real cases.

That doesn’t mean they’re lying. It means the system is broken not the person.

Agreed but so many of the cases I've encountered don't even bother trying which I think is problematic.

I got a working diagnosis (PTSD/GAD and severe depression) off the back of one psychiatrist appointment (seen less than a week after I broke down in front of my GP) which was then confirmed at the second appointment. No roadblocks, no delays, just a diagnosis, a CPN and the offer of meds and/or therapy.

Yeah there is what is legal and there is also what most of us know would be making an absolute pain of ourselves. I would never have expected my work to accommodate me breastfeeding my 1 year old 4 times a day. I might legally have been entitled to it but ultimately I wasn’t going to get promoted if i did it.

100% agree. We all have to pay higher taxes because employers think it’s too much hassle to hire people who don’t interview well due to autism or anxiety.

Medium to large employers who aren’t employing disabled staff should pay extra taxes to cover the costs of disabled people who want to work sitting on benefits.

yeah, this bunch seem to target charities specifically. Barefoot uncle forced a small charity to upgrade flooring at a cost of £3k. When he realised he wouldn't win tribunal there because they accommodated he moved on and joined another charity so he's taking (or already taken) them to tribunal. £12k was the amount there IIRC.

It's this family's business model and now OP's advising everyone else to join in.

My brother was diagnosed at 61 after a lifetime of difficulties. Autism wasn’t looked for until relatively recently.

and you know what? many businesses would rather pay more than hire scam like OP

Charities don't have lawyer budgets... that's why. Shameful.

Well I'm very sorry that your workplace would use your breastfeeding as a reason to deny you opportunity for progression and you were forced into that choice.

Many employers wouldn't use breastfeeding as a way to deny someone opportunity. It could be indirect sex discrimination. I certainly wouldn't want to work for an employer with those ethics.

It's entirely your prerogative whether you choose to assert your rights or not but you shouldn't criticise others who do choose to assert their rights and challenge employers on poor practice.

Other countries do brain scans as a part of autism diagnosis to ensure there are no p..s takers like OP and not to dilute support for real cases.

Oh really, do tell us more?

That's why it need professional MDT diagnosis. Not every Tom, Dick and Harry self diagnosing. And all of us paying for this, both in terms of money and extra stress at work.

Honestly, being in Labour shoes I'd review the Act right now and exclude self diagnosis option and leave PIP rules the same. Judging by this thread our welfare bill would be reduced overnight.

Yep, Germany is one of the examples.

Giyooreee.

You're making stuff up.

How does one identify autism on a brain scan?

MRI scan does not identify autism on its own but can be used as a supportive evidence. ASD/ADHD requires MDT to diagnose and MDT in turn use evidences from patients environment, e.g. school. MRI is not used in the UK for this, but in some other developed countries.

The link is just one of the examples.
Structural MRI in Autism Spectrum Disorder - PMC

I'm actually annoyed at this because autism in a new bad back now, anyone can spend a couple of days on the internet and self diagnose and it does take whatever limited resources society has from those genuine cases which absolutely do require a lot of support at every level.

If I have an 8 hour work day and insisted on taking 4 30-45 min break feeding breaks during my day, plus lunch so I was unavailable for half a day then yes I would expect them to deny me a promotion. I had absolutely no issues pumping before and after work. Had I needed to pump dying the day I would have done it during my lunch hour. I may have had the law on my side but I would have not expected my colleagues to pick up my slack because I chose to have a baby.

I agreed with your post until you said this:

And honestly? If a business can’t afford to make space for disabled people, whether that’s with flexibility, equipment, transport help or task reallocation, then maybe they shouldn’t be in business. If your model only works when everyone is 100% able-bodied, then your model is broken. Shut it down.

Have you ever run a business and employed people?

Maybe the reasonable adjustment is that OP gets rid of the cats as having cats in the cafe discriminates against people with cat allergies and people that hate cats.

'Have you ever tried to eat a meal while breastfeeding?'

We all know the challneges of doing anything with a 1yr old around. Bf is of course great and I support it 100% but once back at work bringing in a 1yr old would seem excessive and absolutely unnecessary. Just express and bf at home.

Right - but your starting point in all of this is that employers don’t bother - and yet you keep having to say to posters who give examples - oh well, yes, that wouldn’t work, that wouldn’t be a reasonable adjustment.

It’s almost as though many employers do think it through. I also think you are highly cavalier about how SMEs can practically deal with this.

Basically, your own posts tell me that the law is probably a better judge of this than you are.

I looked up the success rate of disability-based employment tribunals. They are certainly more successful than tribunals based on other PCs - but most still fail. For example, the DWP has lost more disability tribunals than any other employer between 2020 and 2025 - 20 - but they still won 110 cases over the same period.