Reasonable adjustments - how hard to fight?

[lifesabitchandthenyoudie]

I have ME/CFS. Got diagnosed (Finally!) last year and then got sick with a bug, had 3 months off and my work sent me to Occupational Health for an assessment. I work as a support worker in a day centre, with people with profound and multiple disabilities. OH said that after my phased return I should be only working with one or two people, then ‘small groups’.

This has gone ok although I’ve been pushed a bit at times. I’ve been ok working in craft groups, one with 3 members and a PA, one with 4 and another member of staff (although she frequently leaves the room). My work has now decided that a ‘small group’ is 4 because there will also be 3 PAs in it (working with 2 of the members). I disagreed, because the group is to do with growing plants, light gardening etc. No one else knows anything about gardening, so it would be overseeing 7 people to do stuff with things that will die otherwise (I’ve done it before, it was a nightmare!) I was basically told ‘it’s a small group by anyone’s standards’ and ‘if you’re saying you can’t even do that then we will have to get another OH assessment and get your job reviewed’. Or words to that effect. I got too anxious and upset and just had to get home. I don’t know how to argue with them. I don’t have the strength, and I lose all my ability to speak sense under this situation.

Does anyone have information on how to hold employers to their ‘reasonable adjustments’?

Can you ask OH to clarify what they mean by a "small group"?

I’m not sure I understand. Don’t the PAs just act as assistants to your students, so you’re not technically teaching more people, as in you still only have to prepare things for four?

Surely "small group" applies to the service users with any pa as additional support.

I think the key word here is “reasonable.” Very 4 people in a group is a small group in most situations teaching adults.

Your concerns about teaching the PAs could be alleviated perhaps by going through things with them beforehand or delegating tasks. You need to assume they will not need your direct assistance.

The DDA allows employers to balance business needs with reasonable adjustments. A group of 4 is small.

I think the problem will be that, with the best will in the world, there simply isn't a definition of what a small group is and you have no right to adjustments if the employer says they cannot offer them. So if they say that the small groups they need you to work with are XX and you say that is too many, then I am afraid they can turn around and say that you don't have the capacity to do your job and then dismiss you for that. They may not have said it nicely (I can't say as it isn't clear) but it is, I am sorry to tell you, true. OH do not tell the employer what they must do - the advise the employer, who then has to decide whether they can reasonably offer the adjustment. And it sounds like what they are saying now is that they can't continue to allow you to work with 2 or 4 people, because that doesn't meet their business need.

TBH it isn't exactly an argument that I'd want to test either, because 7 is a small group (like I said, who defines it?) and 3 of those are actually other staff supporting members. Can you possibly compromise and find a way of working up to groups of this size? Because if this is what the employer needs, your less palatable alternative may have to be that you aren't capable of doing this job any longer.

Thank you for all your input. I suppose it depends on what is 'small' for my condition and abilities; their point certainly is that as there are other staff supporting then it's not too many. My reaction came from having that decided for me, partly, with no input or acceptance of my input after the fact. Also that it's for a specific task that I KNOW I'll be having to manage the staff as well, as I tried to do a garden group before. There'll also be things to think about like watering through the week, which will be down to me to fit in around my other work because no one else will bother. And they added me into a large group earlier in the day too, instead of my prep time. But they wouldn't let me say all this. I'm left feeling like I don't have a voice, (as many of us do) and they'll just keep pushing me. Maybe they really would rather I left.

I know I'm still up to the job, 1:1 and other work is great; I also know I've tried to find other employment and it's just not happening for me.

Thanks for clarifying things, I expect when I've recovered I'll find a way to manage it all x

I just want to correct one thing you said here. You said it depends on what is small for your condition and abilities. It isn't. It is defined by the employers business requirements. That is the baseline. So if they need 10 people in a small group, it might be reasonable to allow a reduction in those numbers on a limited basis or a phased and increasing return. But, for example, on a permanent basis they still have 10 people. You can only manage, say, 5. That means either a reduction in service or a doubling of costs. That isn't reasonable. If this went to a tribunal, the test isn't what is reasonable for you. It's what is reasonable for the employer.

I agree with the above, it isn’t for you to decide what is “small” and it isn’t based on your abilities. And four people with three assistants is going to be considered small by most people though, even seven would seem pretty small but this is not seven. So I would say that it looks like your employer has tried to make reasonable adjustments. I think you need to be careful you do not make yourself unemployable.

Ok, thank you for your input all. I guess I thought the law supported the person with a disability as long as they could do the job 'with reasonable adjustments'. As there is plenty of scope for 1:1s and small (2 or 3) groups I considered it 'reasonable' to expect I'd be given those sorts of groups/duties.

Just to be clear, it's the nature of the task in this case. I agree the 3 assistants should make it easy, normally; and if any of them had any knowledge or even interest in gardening, it would do! I'd basically be trying to support 7 instead of 2.

What I'll do is a) point out that growing 'food' is not realistic now until the spring in any case, and b) I can and will take on this group basing it more on craft than plants.

The problem is that there is no definition of reasonable, it's entirely down to what the business feels they can accommodate. Eg a multinational billion dollar company having to install a lift would be reasonable, a sole trader with a slim profit margin would not.

All the EA means is that they can't dismiss you without attempting to make adjustments for your condition. If the adjustments they have made are not sufficient then they can argue that you are no longer able to do the job

What I'll do is a) point out that growing 'food' is not realistic now until the spring in any case, and b) I can and will take on this group basing it more on craft than plants.

That sounds very reasonable.

But

From an employer’s POV, I’d find it hard to accommodate your argument that counting the 3 caters as part of your small group was reasonable. A group of 4 is a small group for teaching. That they have caters is not relevant in terms of your work.

Nobody has said that the employer doesn’t have to support the disabled person by making “reasonable adjustments”. On the contrary I think this has been recognised on your thread.

But once more, the point is that there is no definition of “reasonable adjustments”, but that is for the employer to judge not the employee. If the employee disagrees however, they can take it to tribunal and then somebody else will to have judge what is reasonable or not. And, in my opinion, most people would reasonably think a teaching group of four is a small group.

Is it reasonable to allocate watering 'jobs' to the PAs?

I get it, thanks!

@Ariela yeah they won't bother; also the PAs will change and it won't get passed on...or that person might not be in again as they'll go out for a trip... etc etc. I tried before, believe me!