Reasonable accomodation and reduced hours?

LegacyUser

Hi all,
I'm in a permanent job with a company. I was diagnosed with a progressive illness a while back, after I'd been here a while.
I work a 39 hour week, over 5 days.

The position I'm in has become far busier and more stressful recently due to some changes in how things are being done. This stress, plus the progressive nature of my illness has lead me to wonder if working part time would be in my best interests.

As my condition is very unpredictable I asked my manager and HR dept about reducing my hours. I was told no, it was too busy. When I asked about it as a means of reasonable accommodation for my disability I was told that it wasn't really how it worked and that reduced hours is a means to getting someone who is off sick back to work full time by increasing their hours gradually over an agreed period.

I was told I could submit the part time application and it would be discussed but with things in my department being so busy, it's unlikely I'd be successful. And if I were, I wouldn't be able to return full time without a full time position coming available and me applying for it. I explained that as my condition is unpredictable, it could be a day, a month or a year til I recover or maybe never. I said I didn't want to throw away my full time job just for something that might be temporary and was told that they couldn't have a situation where the dept was overstaffed.

I'm really upset by all this. I'm not asking to reduce my hours for the craic. It's affecting my health and my life. I'm constantly exhausted. My illness is a recognised disability. I really thought asking for reduced hours would fall within the remit of reasonable accommodation as it's not costing the company anything.
I felt like they weren't appreciating how much of an effect it has on my life, to the point where the HR person made comments about me being very well at present and about things being very positive for me. Which couldn't be further from the truth.

Are there any other options available to me in terms of reasonable accommodations under the equality act? I really don't want to come to a point where I end up having to give up work completely when I know I can still manage 25-30 hours per week.

Nody

what's_ reasonable? wrote: »

Hi all,
I'm in a permanent job with a company. I was diagnosed with a progressive illness a while back, after I'd been here a while.
I work a 39 hour week, over 5 days.

The position I'm in has become far busier and more stressful recently due to some changes in how things are being done. This stress, plus the progressive nature of my illness has lead me to wonder if working part time would be in my best interests.

As my condition is very unpredictable I asked my manager and HR dept about reducing my hours. I was told no, it was too busy. When I asked about it as a means of reasonable accommodation for my disability I was told that it wasn't really how it worked and that reduced hours is a means to getting someone who is off sick back to work full time by increasing their hours gradually over an agreed period.

I was told I could submit the part time application and it would be discussed but with things in my department being so busy, it's unlikely I'd be successful. And if I were, I wouldn't be able to return full time without a full time position coming available and me applying for it. I explained that as my condition is unpredictable, it could be a day, a month or a year til I recover or maybe never. I said I didn't want to throw away my full time job just for something that might be temporary and was told that they couldn't have a situation where the dept was overstaffed.

I'm really upset by all this. I'm not asking to reduce my hours for the craic. It's affecting my health and my life. I'm constantly exhausted. My illness is a recognised disability. I really thought asking for reduced hours would fall within the remit of reasonable accommodation as it's not costing the company anything.
I felt like they weren't appreciating how much of an effect it has on my life, to the point where the HR person made comments about me being very well at present and about things being very positive for me. Which couldn't be further from the truth.

Are there any other options available to me in terms of reasonable accommodations under the equality act? I really don't want to come to a point where I end up having to give up work completely when I know I can still manage 25-30 hours per week.

That's where you're wrong. First of all they would need to hire a second person; this involves the whole recruitment process, adding further people to the payroll system etc. which is far from free.

Then when they have finally hired someone, trained them, and agreed working days (which will be difficult on it's own as per your own words they would need someone for 10 to 15 hours a week). You'd need to account for the fact that two people doing 20h each are not as productive as one person doing 40h; hence they would possibly need to up the hours further to compensate the loss due to the split nature of the roll.

This is coming from someone who thought exactly as you that 2x 20h is same as 1x 40h and it would be a great idea; but from a management point of (and cost point of view) it's a nightmare.

LegacyUser

Nody wrote: »

That's where you're wrong. First of all they would need to hire a second person; this involves the whole recruitment process, adding further people to the payroll system etc. which is far from free.

Then when they have finally hired someone, trained them, and agreed working days (which will be difficult on it's own as per your own words they would need someone for 10 to 15 hours a week). You'd need to account for the fact that two people doing 20h each are not as productive as one person doing 40h; hence they would possibly need to up the hours further to compensate the loss due to the split nature of the roll.

This is coming from someone who thought exactly as you that 2x 20h is same as 1x 40h and it would be a great idea; but from a management point of (and cost point of view) it's a nightmare.

OK, I'll rephrase it.

According to equality legislation

"The measures put in place must be reasonable and practical.

There is a provision however, where employers do not have to put in place an accommodation if it is deemed to constitute a ‘disproportionate burden’. What constitutes a disproportionate burden under the legislation depends on the cost of the accommodation, the size and resources of the employer, and any grants or public funding that may be available."

For a large, multinational, million dollar company with thousands of employees, I don't think that it's a disproportionate burden for them to adjust my working hours/reduce them to accommodate my disability.

It's not just a case of me wanting to reduce my hours for the sake of it. There will come a time when I just will not be able to manage a full week and if they refuse to reduce my hours, I'll be forced to resign completely.
They may also end up having t make structural changes to the building as it's not currently wheelchair friendly so however the disability ends up affecting me, I am going to need their support and some adjustments.
They've been really good about it til now so I was a bit taken aback at the lack of flexibility around this matter. At the moment I miss a lot of time anyway for appointments and treatments and that's been ok. I though if anything, the fact that I'd be scheduled out of the office as opposed to missing days here and there would suit them more as it wouldn't be so ad hoc.

Eoin

My feeling is that you've understood the legislation correctly - exactly how our HR dept explained it to line managers in my company anyway. But what I or anyone else here thinks is irrelevant.

My illness is a recognised disability.

This is the key part - it sounds like they're treating this as sick leave, not a disability and there's a difference in your rights as you've pointed out. Could you start off by providing them with the relevant excerpts and links to the statutes to show them their obligation? Failing that, you might need to get assistance from a legal and/or medical professional (or union rep, if there's a union in your place).

LegacyUser

Eoin wrote: »

it sounds like they're treating this as sick leave, not a disability and there's a difference in your rights as you've pointed out. Could you start off by providing them with the relevant excerpts and links to the statutes to show them their obligation? Failing that, you might need to get assistance from a legal and/or medical professional (or union rep, if there's a union in your place).

Yes, maybe it's just a misunderstanding on HRs part. I was here when I first became ill and when I was diagnosed so they've always known I've had this health issue (since I had it). But perhaps they don't understand that it's a disability, not just an illness.

ElleEm

Is there an organisation that gives support and advice in relation to your illness?
I know when I was diagnosed with MS, a support worker from MS Ireland offered to speak with my job about various schemes that were in place to allow me to continue working there.