an article published in IDS Employment Law Brief HR Number 1077 (September 2017)
Arthritis affects around 10 million people in the United Kingdom. It can be a debilitating disease, causing the sufferer immense pain and limited movement and often affecting his or her ability to work.
If a person’s arthritis satisfies the definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010, the employer concerned will be under a duty to take steps to alleviate the effect of the condition. This feature [which is not available online that I can discover] highlights a number of cases that provide examples of adjustments that have been deemed reasonable for employers to make for employees suffering from arthritis.
I have picked out some quotes which I found helpful, or which made my blood boil!
… However, the service manager’s attitude was that if S was not 100% fit to return to full duties she should not return at all.
Ultimately awarded compensation for unfair dismissal.
By contrast, in …, the tribunal found that MS [the employer] had made reasonable attempts to redeploy C. [The employee had not cooperated with this process.]
Jobs requiring travel are often contentious as adjustments may require the expenditure of money which the employer may not be prepared to agree. For example, first class on trains or business class on planes may be seen as a perk not a requirement.
Not allocating a car parking space to allow an employee a short walk into the building where she worked was also seen as a failure to make reasonable adjustments.
And then we get the employer who argued that the employee was not unable to work without the required adjustments but was unwilling to do so.
[At this point I would have told my employer where to go but the article does not go beyond the tribunal decision that the employer was wrong not to implement reasonable adjustments.]
======================
Not much to cheer about here, unfortunately, but it is only the cases that made it to a tribunal that are reported. There is no information as to how many employers have made reasonable adjustments which have worked well.
Showing posts with label reasonable_adjustments. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reasonable_adjustments. Show all posts
Tuesday, 7 November 2017
Friday, 28 June 2013
An evaluation of the Statement of Fitness for Work (fit note): a survey of employees
DWP Research Report No 840: A report of research carried out by the Office for National Statistics on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions
Summary
Background
The Government introduced the Statement of Fitness for Work or ‘fit note’ in April 2010, to replace the previous medical statement (known as the ‘sick note’). GPs use fit notes to assess whether their patient ‘may be fit for work’ or is ‘not fit for work’. The patient and their employer can discuss the advice on the fit note to identify possible changes that could facilitate a return to work.
Methods
The Fit Note Survey was carried out by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) between January and June 2012. The sample used was comprised of 1,398 eligible adults consenting to be interviewed. The survey included only individuals who were over the age of 16, in employment, and who had had a period of sickness absence from work that was covered by a fit note in the last 12 months. Individuals were interviewed mainly by telephone. Respondents were asked to recall any discussions relating to their sickness absence with their GP and employer in the last 12 months.
Key findings
Respondents were asked to rate how helpful the fit note was:
Overall, the majority of individuals returned to work following their sickness absence (82 per cent). It was also found that: non-disabled respondents were most likely to return to work (88 per cent); most sickness absences lasted between eight and 14 days; and mental health conditions were the most common health condition specified on fit notes, followed by injuries and other musculoskeletal conditions.
Ninety-six per cent of first (or only) fit notes and 81 per cent of secondary fit notes recorded that the individual was ‘not fit for work’. When fit notes had advised that an individual ‘may be fit for work’, 78 per cent ticked the box suggesting a phased return to work, 52 per cent suggested amended duties, 49 per cent altered hours and 21 per cent workplace adaptations.
Around three-quarters of the total changes discussed by respondents with their employers were consequently made by respondents’ employers. The most common change made by employers was modified days or reduced working hours (59%).
Full text (PDF 115pp)
Summary
Background
The Government introduced the Statement of Fitness for Work or ‘fit note’ in April 2010, to replace the previous medical statement (known as the ‘sick note’). GPs use fit notes to assess whether their patient ‘may be fit for work’ or is ‘not fit for work’. The patient and their employer can discuss the advice on the fit note to identify possible changes that could facilitate a return to work.
Methods
The Fit Note Survey was carried out by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) between January and June 2012. The sample used was comprised of 1,398 eligible adults consenting to be interviewed. The survey included only individuals who were over the age of 16, in employment, and who had had a period of sickness absence from work that was covered by a fit note in the last 12 months. Individuals were interviewed mainly by telephone. Respondents were asked to recall any discussions relating to their sickness absence with their GP and employer in the last 12 months.
Key findings
Respondents were asked to rate how helpful the fit note was:
- seventy-one per cent of respondents agreed that the fit note was helpful;
- around two-thirds of respondents agreed that the fit note and discussions with their GP helped them to discuss changes with their employer;
- around half of respondents agreed that the fit note and discussions with their GP made a difference to their employer’s willingness to make changes to help them return to work;
- the majority of respondents agreed both that GPs and employers had understood the types of changes in work that would be helpful to them (70 and 82 per cent respectively).
Overall, the majority of individuals returned to work following their sickness absence (82 per cent). It was also found that: non-disabled respondents were most likely to return to work (88 per cent); most sickness absences lasted between eight and 14 days; and mental health conditions were the most common health condition specified on fit notes, followed by injuries and other musculoskeletal conditions.
Ninety-six per cent of first (or only) fit notes and 81 per cent of secondary fit notes recorded that the individual was ‘not fit for work’. When fit notes had advised that an individual ‘may be fit for work’, 78 per cent ticked the box suggesting a phased return to work, 52 per cent suggested amended duties, 49 per cent altered hours and 21 per cent workplace adaptations.
Around three-quarters of the total changes discussed by respondents with their employers were consequently made by respondents’ employers. The most common change made by employers was modified days or reduced working hours (59%).
Full text (PDF 115pp)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
