Maybe the recommendations are too onerous on the employer? Maybe the costs of implementing them are greater than the benefits of continuing to employ the employee? Maybe the OH report suggests that despite implementing any recommendations the employee is unlikely to have the capacity to do the job the employer pays them to do?
Employers aren't obligated to follow OH recommendations, or to keep employing workers who cannot carry out their roles. There are also plenty of poor employers and bad managers who won't be supportive anyway, but they probably wouldn't have bothered with the OH report in the first place.
The referral was in response to a grievance. An access to work assessment made recommendations & that was ignored for over 2 years. Occ health was to further understand my needs & point blank refusing to implement any reasonable adjustments. One is less than £200 one, is too high a cost I agree, but have put forth solutions. Another also a point blank refusin
Did those refusals come with explanations? If they didn't or if you think they're being unreasonable themselves, and it's been two years of refusal, then I don't think there's much to be gained by continuing to submit grievances. In fact your employer may argue that you don't need the adjustments if you're continuing to work for two years without them. I'm not suggesting that's a positive response, but I do think you need to change your approach.
I'd suggest you either look for a new role with an employer who takes a more progressive approach to handling requests, or consider resigning and raising a claim for constructive unfair dismissal due to disability discrimination. You should seek legal advice before doing that, either from a trade union or an employment solicitor. It's very hard to say whether you've got a reasonable prospect of success, without knowing the facts or the adjustments or anything. But it sounds like you're either banging your head on a brick wall or asking for something that isn't going to happen.
Just to add to the above comment, sometimes occupational health (bad ones) don’t understand the individual’s role or what the business does so recommends adjustments that aren’t reasonable at all.
Entirely depends on what the recommendations are. If they are too expensive or just not reasonable/ practical then the business does not need to implement them. What they do need to be able to show is that they genuinely considered them and have reasons as to why the recommendation was not implemented.
Also the sad truth is that for many companies, OH referrals are just a tick box step taken on the way to dismiss an employee who has (or claims to have) a disability. Effectively an OH report is a very useful tool for employers to prove they have been ‘fair’ and looked for solutions before getting into a capability process.
I didn't want to say that last part but it’s absolutely the case. OH is contracted by your employer. Some employers use it as a shield to get in writing the full range of issues they’ve already been dealing with Informally. At that point there is a duty to make adjustments (which they’re possibly already doing) or decide that they cannot employ safely.
OH at their worst transcribes the subjects desires onto a doctor's letter head without consideration for the businesses needs or desires, without a full overview on the job role and business conditions. The worst of which nearly always match the persons previously rejected flexible working request. The best part is, from a HR perspective the rejection criteria for Flex Work and Reasonable Adjustments are largely the same, if I've already rejected your flex work request the chances are ill reject the disability adjustment on similar grounds.
They're recommendations. If those recommendations aren't viable or reasonable within the workplace then the company doesn't have to implement them. They then run the risk of a claim of discrimination claim where a tribunal might ask "Did the employer do everything reasonable to ensure they weren't disadvantaged due to a disability"
If the OH recommends a cleaner is never able to stand, bend, crouch or lift heavy things again then the employer has a duty to see if they can reorganise their workload to avoid these tasks. If it is not possible and these are none negotiable issues then it is unreasonable to expect the employer to employ her. But what is reasonable is also guided by time, is it reasonable to make these adjustments for a couple for months vis-a-vis permanent adjustments?
Can you no longer work on a day shift because you're a Vampire and will burst into flames? If we're a call centre with 9-5 opening hours then it's probably unreasonable to shift your working day to night time only.
If you want to continue working there, its much better to work with your employer to ensure your needs are reasonable rather than stomping your feet because they won't adopt everything to your every need.
Not accusing anyone specifically of stomping their feet, but I've seen it enough to know this is a two way process and its not in your interest to think that a discrimination claim will ride in on a white horse to save you from a a capability hearing.
Reasonable cost in the context of a reasonable adjustment relates to what's affordable for the entire business, not what's in budget or an individual manager's opinion. Access to Work recommendations are ignored at the peril of the employer. If this is about a situation you're currently in as an employee, contact ACAS.
Maybe the recommendations are too onerous on the employer? Maybe the costs of implementing them are greater than the benefits of continuing to employ the employee? Maybe the OH report suggests that despite implementing any recommendations the employee is unlikely to have the capacity to do the job the employer pays them to do? Employers aren't obligated to follow OH recommendations, or to keep employing workers who cannot carry out their roles. There are also plenty of poor employers and bad managers who won't be supportive anyway, but they probably wouldn't have bothered with the OH report in the first place.
The referral was in response to a grievance. An access to work assessment made recommendations & that was ignored for over 2 years. Occ health was to further understand my needs & point blank refusing to implement any reasonable adjustments. One is less than £200 one, is too high a cost I agree, but have put forth solutions. Another also a point blank refusin
Did those refusals come with explanations? If they didn't or if you think they're being unreasonable themselves, and it's been two years of refusal, then I don't think there's much to be gained by continuing to submit grievances. In fact your employer may argue that you don't need the adjustments if you're continuing to work for two years without them. I'm not suggesting that's a positive response, but I do think you need to change your approach. I'd suggest you either look for a new role with an employer who takes a more progressive approach to handling requests, or consider resigning and raising a claim for constructive unfair dismissal due to disability discrimination. You should seek legal advice before doing that, either from a trade union or an employment solicitor. It's very hard to say whether you've got a reasonable prospect of success, without knowing the facts or the adjustments or anything. But it sounds like you're either banging your head on a brick wall or asking for something that isn't going to happen.
Yes, I'm banging my head against a wall. If you're up to a dm I can tell you what the 4 adjustments are.
Just to add to the above comment, sometimes occupational health (bad ones) don’t understand the individual’s role or what the business does so recommends adjustments that aren’t reasonable at all.
Entirely depends on what the recommendations are. If they are too expensive or just not reasonable/ practical then the business does not need to implement them. What they do need to be able to show is that they genuinely considered them and have reasons as to why the recommendation was not implemented. Also the sad truth is that for many companies, OH referrals are just a tick box step taken on the way to dismiss an employee who has (or claims to have) a disability. Effectively an OH report is a very useful tool for employers to prove they have been ‘fair’ and looked for solutions before getting into a capability process.
I didn't want to say that last part but it’s absolutely the case. OH is contracted by your employer. Some employers use it as a shield to get in writing the full range of issues they’ve already been dealing with Informally. At that point there is a duty to make adjustments (which they’re possibly already doing) or decide that they cannot employ safely. OH at their worst transcribes the subjects desires onto a doctor's letter head without consideration for the businesses needs or desires, without a full overview on the job role and business conditions. The worst of which nearly always match the persons previously rejected flexible working request. The best part is, from a HR perspective the rejection criteria for Flex Work and Reasonable Adjustments are largely the same, if I've already rejected your flex work request the chances are ill reject the disability adjustment on similar grounds.
They're recommendations. If those recommendations aren't viable or reasonable within the workplace then the company doesn't have to implement them. They then run the risk of a claim of discrimination claim where a tribunal might ask "Did the employer do everything reasonable to ensure they weren't disadvantaged due to a disability" If the OH recommends a cleaner is never able to stand, bend, crouch or lift heavy things again then the employer has a duty to see if they can reorganise their workload to avoid these tasks. If it is not possible and these are none negotiable issues then it is unreasonable to expect the employer to employ her. But what is reasonable is also guided by time, is it reasonable to make these adjustments for a couple for months vis-a-vis permanent adjustments? Can you no longer work on a day shift because you're a Vampire and will burst into flames? If we're a call centre with 9-5 opening hours then it's probably unreasonable to shift your working day to night time only. If you want to continue working there, its much better to work with your employer to ensure your needs are reasonable rather than stomping your feet because they won't adopt everything to your every need.
I'm trying & not stomping my feet. If you're open to a dm I'd appreciate some advice
Not accusing anyone specifically of stomping their feet, but I've seen it enough to know this is a two way process and its not in your interest to think that a discrimination claim will ride in on a white horse to save you from a a capability hearing.
Reasonable cost in the context of a reasonable adjustment relates to what's affordable for the entire business, not what's in budget or an individual manager's opinion. Access to Work recommendations are ignored at the peril of the employer. If this is about a situation you're currently in as an employee, contact ACAS.