WRC finds breach of obligations to make reasonable accommodation by refusing work from home

The Workplace Relations Commission has found an employer in breach of its obligations to make reasonable accommodation for an employee with epilepsy by not allowing her work from home.

The complaint surrounded a solicitor with epilepsy who sought to work from home for one day per week following medical advice that any measures to manage stress and fatigue within the limits of her work should be accommodated.   Her disability was not disputed, nor was her competency. She made six requests to work from home over three years, however was refused on the basis of the ‘frontline’ nature of her work and independent medical advice that the stress reduction would be minimal.

The Adjudication Officer acknowledged that unusually, “the accommodation being sought is, in a way a negative, or at least something with an uncertain connection to the objective; it is aimed at reducing the possibility of a further epileptic attack.” Generally reasonable accommodation is seen as a positive act which enables tasks to be undertaken more easily. The Adjudication Officer, however, did not see any reason the removal of an obstacle should be regarded as different.

The Adjudication Officer considered it significant that the new working arrangement was refused before a medical opinion was presented, and that there was no attempt to assess how the suggested accommodation might work. The Adjudication Officer noted that the nature of the work and the flexible attitude of the complainant would have permitted her to work from home. This suggested the decision was made as a matter of entrenched policy.

The Adjudication Officer agreed that the medical evidence was not decisive, however, given the life threatening risk to the complainant of experiencing a ‘grand mal’ seizure, even a minimal contribution to avoiding such a risk was valid accommodation. The employer appeared either indifferent or happy to accept this risk and, due to this failure to meaningfully engage, the complainant was awarded €30,000.

Click here for the decision of the WRC.

Share

Resources

Sustaining Partners