In Tait v Holiday Extras, it was found that temporary measures in place of permanent reasonable adjustments do not satisfy the duty to make reasonable adjustments.
Facts
The claimant is employed as a home-based travel consultant selling insurance policies. The job requires them to communicate with clients via a variety of channels, including webchat, email and telephone. Consultants are allocated a channel to work in, which varies according to the needs of the shift that day, but are sometimes moved when demand is high. Voice calls form the core of the job role, accounting for 70-80% of the interactions with customers. They are also required to participate in video calls during training and other interactions with the respondent.
The claimant has anxiety, ADHD and autism. They also developed gastro-intestinal problems during their employment, exacerbated by anxiety, thought to be Irritable Bowel Syndrome. They repeatedly told their manager that focusing on live chat and email significantly reduced their anxiety symptoms as it allowed for more time to formulate responses and process information. During their employment, their health deteriorated resulting in sickness absence linked to stress and anxiety. The claimant raised during a five-week absence that their manager’s failure to discuss adjustments or a phased return further heightened their anxiety. Temporary plans were then made as part of a phased return.
Throughout this time, the claimant requested to have two to three days a week allocated to just chat and email work rather than voice calls, informing the respondent that this would enable them to work full time. Medical evidence including doctor’s notes, an Occupational Health report and communication from the claimant’s counsellor were also provided as evidence that the claimant’s disabilities were long-term.
In response, the respondent told the claimant that chat and email shifts must be shared fairly across their team, and that voice calls were the primary need. They refused to offer permanent guarantees of chat and email work, arguing that the claimant needed to be experienced across all communication channels, work needed to be allocated fairly, and voice calls were the main means of contacting customers.
Instead of the permanent guarantees the claimant asked for, the respondent offered only temporary adjustments by allocating a greater proportion of chat and email work. Unable to continue in this situation, the claimant reduced their hours.
A settlement agreement was proposed to the claimant, and it was made clear that permanent adjustments were not going to be offered. There was some discussion of temporary adjustments, but this was vague and not confirmed in writing. The claimant was told that if they were unable to fulfil their responsibilities then it might be necessary to address the issue as one of capability.
Declining the settlement, the claimant raised a grievance that was not upheld. A further grievance relating to the failure to make reasonable adjustments and the impact that had on their health was raised. In the response, the following adjustments were agreed to: one set day off per week, a Bluetooth headset and camera off in meetings. No guarantees were made about the balance between the channels of working, despite the claimant asking for more chat and email work.
A claim was brought for failure to make reasonable adjustments.
Employment Tribunal (ET)
The ET upheld the claim. Whilst it was found that the respondent put some adjustments in place for the claimant, they were temporary and mostly connected with the phased return to work. Permanent reasonable adjustments were sought by the claimant so that they could be confident of being able to successfully do their job going forward. The temporary measures put in place by the respondent, in the ET’s view, were inadequate and permanent solutions should have been considered, given the claimant’s ongoing disabilities. Through its actions, the ET found, the claimant had been put at a substantial disadvantage because of their disabilities and this failure contributed to their increased sickness absence and prevented them from returning to work.
