Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments at Work

Failure to make reasonable adjustments occurs when an employer does not take appropriate steps to remove or reduce workplace disadvantages faced by a disabled employee, job applicant, or worker. This obligation arises under the Equality Act 2010, which places a positive legal duty on employers in England and Wales to ensure disabled individuals are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with non-disabled colleagues.

Where an employer fails to comply, the conduct is treated as disability discrimination. Claims are commonly brought before an employment tribunal and can result in compensation for financial loss and injury to feelings.

Legal Framework: Equality Act 2010

The duty to make reasonable adjustments is set out in sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010. A breach occurs when an employer fails to take reasonable steps to avoid a substantial disadvantage caused by:

• A provision, criterion or practice (PCP), such as workplace policies or procedures
• A physical feature of the workplace
• A lack of auxiliary aids or support

The duty applies to recruitment, employment terms, working conditions, promotion, training, and dismissal processes.

A failure to comply is legally classified as discrimination.

When a Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments Occurs

A breach typically arises where:

1. Adjustments are refused

An employer rejects a request without proper consideration, evidence, or consultation.

2. Adjustments are delayed

Even where adjustments are eventually implemented, excessive delay can still constitute a breach if the employee suffers disadvantage during the interim period.

3. Inadequate adjustments are provided

Employers may implement changes that do not effectively remove the disadvantage.

4. No proactive steps are taken

Employers have a duty to act once they know, or reasonably ought to know, about a disability and resulting disadvantage.

Employer Knowledge and the Trigger for Liability

The duty arises when an employer:

• Knows about the disability, or
• Ought reasonably to know about it

Once triggered, employers are expected to engage in a meaningful assessment of adjustments. Failure to investigate or respond appropriately can itself amount to discrimination.

Tribunals often focus on whether the employer took a reasonable, evidence-based approach rather than whether the employee's preferred adjustment was adopted.

What Counts as a Failure in Practice

Employment tribunals assess failure to make reasonable adjustments by examining the employer's conduct in context. Common examples include:

Failure to consult properly

Ignoring medical advice, occupational health recommendations, or employee input.

Relying on incorrect assumptions

For example, assuming a disability does not affect performance without evidence.

Delegating responsibility improperly

Expecting external schemes (such as Access to Work) to implement adjustments instead of the employer taking responsibility.

Applying rigid policies

Enforcing attendance rules, performance targets, or workplace requirements without flexibility for disability-related needs.

Case law demonstrates that employers can be liable where they fail to implement recommended support or incorrectly delay adjustments, even where some steps are eventually taken.

Examples of Reasonable Adjustments That Were Not Made

Failures commonly involve:

• Refusal of flexible working patterns for health-related conditions
• Failure to provide assistive technology or adapted equipment
• Ignoring the need for additional breaks or reduced workload
• Not adjusting performance targets linked to disability-related absence
• Lack of accessible working environments
• Failure to allow remote or hybrid working where feasible

Legal Tests Applied by Employment Tribunals

Tribunals apply a structured test under the Equality Act 2010:

1. Did the employee have a disability?
2. Did the employer apply a PCP, physical feature, or lack of support?
3. Did this place the employee at a substantial disadvantage?
4. Did the employer take reasonable steps to avoid that disadvantage?

If the answer to step 4 is no, liability is usually established.

The assessment of “reasonableness” includes:

• Cost and financial resources of the employer
• Effectiveness of the adjustment
• Practicality and disruption
• Availability of external support
• Size and administrative capacity of the organisation

Employment Tribunal Claims

Bringing a claim

A claim is usually brought under the Equality Act 2010 for:

• Failure to make reasonable adjustments
• Disability discrimination

Time limits

Claims must normally be issued within:

• 3 months less one day from the discriminatory act or last in a series of acts

ACAS Early Conciliation

Before issuing proceedings, claimants must generally notify ACAS and complete Early Conciliation. This pauses limitation deadlines.

Remedies and Compensation

If a tribunal finds that an employer failed to make reasonable adjustments, it may award:

Financial compensation

• Loss of earnings (past and future)
• Pension loss
• Other financial losses linked to the discrimination

Injury to feelings

Compensation for distress, humiliation, and impact on mental health, assessed using established bands.

Aggravated damages (rare)

Awarded where employer conduct is particularly unreasonable or oppressive.

Compensation in discrimination claims is uncapped, meaning awards can be significant depending on severity and duration.

Constructive Dismissal Linked to Failure to Adjust

In some cases, repeated failure to make reasonable adjustments may contribute to:

• Resignation due to intolerable working conditions
• A claim for constructive unfair dismissal

Tribunals examine whether the employer's conduct fundamentally breached trust and confidence, particularly where disability-related needs were ignored over time.

Common Employer Defences

Employers often argue:

• The employee was not legally disabled under the Equality Act definition
• They did not know and could not reasonably have known about the disability
• The requested adjustment was not reasonable or effective
• Implementation would cause disproportionate cost or disruption

However, employers are not allowed to justify a failure once the duty applies; the focus remains on reasonableness at the time.

Key Case Law Principles

Tribunal decisions consistently confirm that:

• The duty is proactive, not reactive
• Employers must consider adjustments individually, not rely on blanket policies
• Delays can amount to discrimination where they cause ongoing disadvantage
• Failure to implement recommended adjustments may be unlawful even if partially addressed later

Recent tribunal outcomes show successful claims where employers failed to implement or properly assess recommended workplace support, resulting in awards for injury to feelings and financial loss.

Practical Impact for Employers

Non-compliance can lead to:

• Tribunal claims with uncapped compensation exposure
• Reputational harm
• Increased staff turnover and absence
• Potential regulatory scrutiny in certain sectors
• Higher legal and HR costs

Common Questions from our Readers

Is delay in making adjustments unlawful?

It can be. If delay causes disadvantage or distress, it may amount to a breach of duty.

Can an employer refuse adjustments due to cost?

Cost is a factor, but not an automatic justification. Employers must still show they considered alternatives.

Does the duty apply before someone is employed?

Yes. It applies during recruitment and selection processes.

What if the adjustment does not fully resolve the issue?

Employers may still be in breach if they fail to explore further reasonable alternatives.

Key Takeaways

Failure to make reasonable adjustments occurs when an employer does not take appropriate steps to remove workplace disadvantages experienced by a disabled person. Under the Equality Act 2010, this constitutes unlawful discrimination. Employers must act proactively, consider individual needs, and implement reasonable measures where feasible. Claims can be brought in the employment tribunal, with compensation potentially including financial loss and injury to feelings.