Possible disability discrimination - let it go?

[DarkMoonShine]

I feel like I’ve been discriminated against at work due to my disability:
I’ve been denied most reasonable adjustments (recommended by OH) on the basis that it wouldn’t be fair to other team members.
Another reasonable adjustment that was agreed upon is not consistently stuck to

And now I’ve had unkind remarks made to me about my disability - this is the thing that has upset me the most.
I’m not sure how to move forward, I worry that making a complaint will make everything worse and I can’t afford to lose my job. But not saying anything is causing anxiety as I don’t want to have to face co-workers.
Am I better off just letting this go?

Agree - the OP has no right to know why others are being impacted negatively, the company needs to be able to show detriment to other employees or ability function if taken further, and the OP has to be fit for that role. I don't dispute either of those second points.

You are paying into a union exactly for help in situations like this.

OH recommend adjustments based on your medical needs, they also, if asked the question, would give a judgement if you are covered under the equalities act.

it is for the employer to determine whether those adjustments are reasonable or not. In part this can come down to cost of it is a small company and the cost is substantial or potentially if it conflicts with your job description (ie you can’t do something so it would go to others but they do not have capacity).

it is difficult to judge if these are reasonable or not and it would depend on lots of factors - did you know this requirement of the job when you applied? Others within the team may not be able to increase the site visits for their own personal issues, such as caring responsibilities or that they could not afford child care to cover additional site visits.

Obviously bullying and comments on your disability are unacceptable and you could raise a grievance if you have evidence.

talk to your union on monday

There speaks someone who doesn't understand much about mental illness. There can be a major difference between going somewhere you are used to and go to on a frequent basis, and going to a location that is "other".

Things that could impact this difference include whether the off site is enclosed or very open and/or what the journey is like, which could affect the agoraphobia. For some people with autism meeting new or different people can be very difficult, in fact anything different from the usual routine can be very stress inducing.

For reasonable adjustments to ever be taken seriously, there needs to be consideration about the difference between them causing major issues for the organisation and other team members, and the adjustment being mildly irritating to some.

What if the reasonable adjustments are physical and mean no lifting of heavy objects, and occasionally boxes have to be lifted? The rest of the team may not enjoy having to carry a box extra each, but it hasn't impacted them or the organisation seriously. Otherwise you'd be talking about getting rid of an otherwise good worker on the basis of them not being able to do one occasional part of the role that others can easily cover. On the other hand, a disability that means someone can't do the main part of their role e.g. physical disability when they need to be walking about or on their feet all day, may be grounds for considering capability.

All a matter of degree really - many adjustments can impact others even if it's a parent always having to leave bang on time and others having to do any late work in emergencies,.

I don’t know if OP will come back to this thread or not. The thread perfectly illustrates why it is so so hard for autistic people to work. (I believe the figure is something like 80% of autistic people are not in paid work).

I have skin in the game; I’m AuDHD and I’ve recently changed jobs partly due to not being given the adjustments I asked for. With autism/ADHD it’s inevitable that some adjustments will potentially have an impact on other people. Nobody wants this to impact others negatively, including the person asking for the adjustments. But the alternative to an autistic person working with adjustments in place is the autistic person not working and claiming benefits which nobody wants either!

If society wants autistic people to work, non-autistic people will have to make adjustments to enable this - it’s inevitable. I’m sure it’s much easier - and more REASONABLE - for some people (with no health issues or conflicting family responsibilities) to do an additional off-site visit than it is for an autistic person with agoraphobia to do it. But that’s not what happens in practice. The impact on the autistic person is not considered, or they are blamed / berated for not being able to cope with it. And they face criticism for accepting a job that they apparently knew the weren’t able to do. It’s happened on this thread. Would you like OP to claim benefits instead?

OP - you should not have to put up with discriminatory comments but this sounds like it could be one of those situations that you just can’t win, sadly. There’s no point in taking an employer to a tribunal to force them in to making adjustments for you - once you get to that point the working relationship will have deteriorated beyond repair anyway. It may be worth reporting the comments to HR if you think this will make a positive difference to you. You’re stuck between a rock and a hard place here and I hope you find a way through that works for you.

keep a diary. Your lived experience of your feelings and the impact on you of your work is important evidence, this is a different feature of employment law and is taken seriously by anyone you might involve. This is called contemporaneous evidence, start a diary
and the colleagues and their “lived experience” of the difficulties this could cause them is nothing?
would the court really accept “this extra ask is nothing for them! Why are they complaining?! How awful are they and employers expecting me to do this task!!”

Just give examples please? Honestly from what you’ve said so far, I expect along the lines of “what a surprise you were sick on your offsite visit day… again”

Yep and “lucky me, the work day I had planned had to be binned as I had to pick up the off site”

How many people have zero health issues or family responsibilities though?
You dont get to say its more reasonable as you dont know their health or family needs are neither does the Op @MrsEmmelinePankhurst

If someone chooses mainly a mainly WFH role its likely they have chosen that for a reason.

A reasonable adjustment would be extra time to travel, negotiating a quiet area to work in or a named person to liase with rather than various different people .
A reasonable adjustment is to support the Op to do their job not just avoid it .

Absolutely, that's what they are there for!!

If I were you I'd concentrate on getting the reasonable adjustment that has been agreed on being consistently applied. I would also report the unkind remarks - as you say this has impacted you the most.
As regards not attending offsites - this has been rejected as it's having an impact on other staff. It does impact others if they are having to cover your offsite visit.

Exactly this. Reasonable adjustments are there to ensure that the person doing a particular role that's key to the business function can continue doing that particular role with some adjustments,. It does not simply mean that a key part of their role gets offloaded onto others, and those others have to just get on with it.

Could you do it if you had someone with you? Would access to work cover this?

Having Autism wouldn’t justify not having to do the crappier aspects of the job. Reasonable adjustments need to be something whereby without these adjustments, you physically wouldn’t be able to do the job. It doesn’t sound like that’s the case. I say this as a physically disabled woman and the parent of an autistic girl. So I’m familiar with workplace adjustments and autism.

Reasonable adjustments aren’t just about physical ability.

If there are parts of the job OP isn’t able to do it MAY be reasonable for her to do more of the other tasks instead, but it will depend on the specifics, which none of us know.

So a person can pick and choose what they want to do in a role and others have no choice in picking up the detritus tasks?

Again we're looking at a matter of degree. If a member of the team had a physical disability that means that they couldn't do the off site visits, which lets face it are once a month only, and the other team members are perfectly capable, would you all be so adamant that the physically disabled person should either do the visits or quit?

We are talking about one of presumably many tasks that takes up around 1/20 of the time for each staff member. I mentioned parenting above - I've worked with parents who are never able to work a single minute past their official finish time despite there being occasional later finishes needing to be done. I've worked with parents who between them book every school break off so I could never take my holidays when I wanted but only to fit around them. So I was very inconvenienced by the adjustments made for them.

At one place I worked, there was an arrangement whereby the parent in the team could take their lunch break at 3pm so they could do the school pick up then work from home afterwards, which meant others in the team had to arrange their day around that, which again could cause inconvenience for those who had to work until finish time on their days in office. I'm not having a go at parents here (I endorsed and helped push for the late lunch to allow for school pick ups), but minor inconveniences like this are perfectly normal to make allowances for other's difficulties. But suddenly when it's a mental illness or diversity (both of which the OP has), this kind of standard give & take isn't seen as reasonable any more.

It ultimately depends on what the employer agrees is reasonable

I’m sorry I don’t know what the answer is, but it didn’t surprise me when you said your disability was autism and mental health. And the adjustments are in relation to distribution of tasks.

i think that other colleagues do find that more difficult to understand and accommodate then say, physical adjustments to the environment because of a physical disability.

not saying it’s right, but it’s the reality.

prob a good thing to ask before applying/accepting a job.. how much of other people’s work will get dumped on me…

You seem to believe the world is a binary of autistic people who find work hard, and NT people who can take whatever they are asked to handle

In this instance the colleagues being asked to do extra may have physical disabilities, caring responsibilities, mental health conditions of their own....

That could happen for any reason, not just reasonable adjustments for disability.

I’d be much happier covering for someone with a disability than for someone constantly taking time off for kids because their partner has a Big Job and won’t / can’t take on their share.

That isn't what's being said and you know it. Again, change the mental illness or diversity for a physical disability and you can see just how ridiculous you sound.

I don't "pick & choose" in my job to not carry heavy boxes, it causes so much pain that I'm incapacitated for hours or even a couple of days after. It isn't a major part of the role and it's only occasional, so the reasonable adjustment is put in place around it. They aren't saying I'm no use in my job that otherwise I do very well because of that one minor element. And the OP is requesting that literally around one twentieth of the role has adjustments set around it, an element that causes her significant distress and possibly even cause her to become very unwell, not picking & choosing what she does or doesn't like.

Absolutely no one should be carrying heavy boxes anyway.
Manual handling regulations state appropriate equipment should be used to minimise the risks

Absolutely rather than “x says can’t do that job do you have to… or you’re awful and discriminating “

What you're describing does sound reasonable. Might well piss off the rest of the team but that refusal would be making me nervous if I was looking at this case. Worth involving the union if you want, but I do think it's worth seeing how you can wrangle it without that first.

If I were you I would be trying to talk to my manager to basically say "look, I really want to do the best job I possibly can. I am going to deliver you more and higher quality work if we play to my strengths. My strengths are X, Y and Z. These changes will mean A, B and C in terms of delivery. I'm also aware I've ended up being unable to attend the off-site visits due to the high level of anxiety I experienced as a result of my disability. I'm aware this will have been really inconvenient because you'll have had to find short notice cover for this - so I thought overall it might be less complex to plan that I won't be able to attend. If that's not possible, what alternatives could we think about to get to a point where I can attend?" And then you could suggest other options perhaps - like planning for both you and a colleague to attend for the next six months until your anxiety drops?