New manager ignoring reasonable adjustments

[user1890776]

Two years ago when I returned to work after a cancer diagnosis I requested reasonable adjustments of working part time hours. I requested to work 4 mornings a week (16 hours).
Since then a new manager has started and I explained my working pattern, he has told me he wants me to work 2 full day (8 hours per day). I explained that due to fatigue I would struggle with those hours but he is insisting that my hours need to be changed.
He explained that I am needed for full days now, its not fair on the team that I leave early (they have obviously been complaining).
I know I wont manage full days, can anyone advise on how to deal with this please?

It doesnt make any difference if the op still has cancer or not. She has lifetime protection since her diagnosis

Makes no odds whether OP still has a known cancer or not.....once you've had a cancer diagnosis it remains a protected characteristic under the equality act..... fatigue from chemo.or radiotherapy or hormone treatment can last a life time.... don't post if you don't know what you're talking about 🙄

You can still be made redundant through I’ll health rehardless

qeve made we’ve made several staff redundant as they are no longer fit to do the role

you cannot discriminate but you can be deemed unfit

We’ve done it for copd, Parkinson’s etc

Ask him to refer you to occupational health and ask for their view as to whether it’s a reasonable adjustment covered by the Equality Act. If it is, he has to do it.

Alternatively submit a flexible working request for a permanent change in hours. Given that it has already been successfully trialled, it would be hard to decline. This is also a legal right with a clear legal process.

Gov uk makes it perfectly clear that employers only have to make reasonable adjustments if it is reasonable to do so

if they can prove it no longer is then op has no case

same way that parents have right to request flexible working but most don’t get it

business needs change so what was reasonable for them may no longer be

Some of the posters on this thread should read up about Northumberland Tyne & Wear NHS Foundation Trust v Ward [2019] UKEAT. In this case, the claimant, Miss Ward, suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome. The hospital operated a trigger point system, whereby a certain level of absence triggered disciplinary proceedings. The hospital adjusted the way this policy was applied to Miss Ward and this appeared to be successful. However, a new manager decided to withdraw this adjustment, in part due to a lack of documentary evidence to support it. This led to Miss Ward's dismissal. The tribunal found that the hospital had acted unlawfully and awarded Miss Ward some £32k, which represented just under 3 years pay. The hospital appealed but lost the appeal.

Yes, business needs change, but if an adjustment has been reasonable and successful, the employer will need particularly compelling evidence to argue that it is no longer reasonable. "I've changed my mind" doesn't remotely cut it. The justification offered, that it is "not fair on the team" if the OP leaves early, doesn't come close.

Yes, the business could choose to enter into a settlement agreement with the OP to get her out of the business with a suitable payout. But the OP is in a strong position. There is an established adjustment which has worked for 2 years. If the employer insists and the OP takes them to tribunal, I would expect her to win on the information posted here.

Hi I work in the employment law area a employer has to make reasonable adjustments under equality act 2010, what is deemed as reasonable depends on size of employer and cost, whoever the fact you have had this reasonable adjustment and now your employer wants to remove it could be classed as discrimination, unless they have a very good reason to remove it, are you in a trade union? I would contact them for advise. Or drop me a inbox happy to help

Watapalava, you have posted incorrect information on a couple of matters of employment law.

If someone is dismissed on capability grounds, it is not redundancy.

It's not just parents who can make flexible working requests, everyone can.

This thread, like so many others, shows up the woeful knowledge of employment law in (mostly) small firms. An untrained manager says what they want about someone’s job. No referral to anyone who knows the law and no knowledge, it would appear, within the firm. When will employers learn that they need to take advice before they say or do anything? It’s like working in the dark ages and plenty of the responses here show it’s widespread.

if the job can no longer be done mornings only then they can give 3 months notice to change a contract and if person doesn’t agree pay them redundancy

Completely wrong. An employer cannot unilaterally change an employment contract no matter how much notice they give. They need the employee's agreement. They cannot make the employee redundant in this situation. The courts have been clear on multiple occasions that a requirement for more hours is not a redundancy situation. They can dismiss the employee, but they may face a claim for unfair dismissal if the employee has been with them for more than 2 years. If they are really determined to make the change, they would need to offer a settlement agreement whereby the employee agrees not to take them to tribunal in return for a payoff from the employer.

prbridge I imagine you are right but changing contracts with 3 months notice has happened in every single job I’ve had even with UCU involvement at every stage which as you know is a big union

in every case it’s been ‘accept new contract or you leave‘ - they only have to prove a business need and in most places I’ve worked they’ve made a strong ‘fake case‘ even if there hasn’t been one. We have had loads of staff leave under ill health capability despite union involvement

of course they can make a case but in reality fee likely do

@Watapalava whilst you can exit people on Ill health grounds that would not be appropriate in this case.

The OP is not absent from work, she is working part time on her agreed hours and there is no suggestion she is under performing.

The OP is automatically covered by the EA 2010 and the employer would struggle to find an objective justification for not continuing with a reasonable adjustment that has been in place for 2 years. The OP would have a strong case for disability discrimination. Only an ET can determine whether or not an adjustment is reasonable, but in this case there is negligible cost to the employer, there has been no change of business need, the adjustment has worked for 2 years and the only reason to change is colleagues have been moaning. It is highly unlikely an ET would find the adjustments to be unreasonable. If there is a business need for someone to work afternoons, the employer could recruit a job share to specifically work afternoons.

WRT contract changes following meaningful consultation and 3 months notice. This is known as a nuclear option as the business is taking a risk of claims for constructive dismissal. The fact that this rarely happens is because of the length of time to reach ET and most people can’t take the risk of being out of a job.

It’s not good HR practice and in this case you are targeting one employee who is automatically covered by the EA 2010 so the employee can lodge an ET for disability discrimination without leaving.