Failure to make reasonable adjustments

The positive duty on every employer to take steps that remove or reduce a substantial disadvantage a disabled worker faces. Failing to comply is a standalone form of disability discrimination — and the duty is anticipatory, not reactive.

Does my employer have to make an adjustment if it costs a lot of money?

Not necessarily, but cost alone is rarely a complete defence. The Equality Act 2010 requires the employer to consider what is reasonable, and cost is one factor among many. A large employer with significant resources is expected to spend more than a small business on the same adjustment. If a low-cost adjustment would remove the disadvantage — for example a chair, a screen reader, or adjusted hours — cost provides no defence at all.

I have not told my employer about my disability. Can I still claim?

The duty to make reasonable adjustments is triggered when the employer knows, or could reasonably be expected to know, that you are disabled and likely to be placed at a substantial disadvantage. If your disability is not obvious and you have not disclosed it, the employer may not be in breach. In practice, if your condition affects your work and your employer has not asked or noticed, it is usually in your interest to tell them — the duty then clearly arises.

My employer offered an adjustment but it did not actually help. Are they still liable?

Quite possibly yes. The duty requires the employer to take steps that are effective in removing or reducing the substantial disadvantage — not just steps that look reasonable in the abstract. If the adjustment offered was inadequate and the employer knew or should have known it would not work, the duty has not been fully discharged. A claimant can argue the employer should have gone further or tried a different approach.

Can a reasonable adjustment include moving me to a completely different job?

Yes. The House of Lords confirmed in Archibald v Fife Council [2004] that the duty to make reasonable adjustments can require an employer to place a disabled employee into a different post without a competitive interview, even if sighted (non-disabled) employees would have to compete for that role. This is one of the most significant features of the duty: it can reverse the usual obligation to treat everyone the same.

My employer says my condition does not meet the legal definition of disability. What now?

Disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 has a specific meaning: a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Long-term means it has lasted or is likely to last 12 months or more. Some conditions — cancer, HIV, MS — are automatically disabilities from diagnosis. If your employer disputes disability status, medical evidence and, if necessary, an occupational health report will be central to your claim.

Does the duty apply before I start a job, for example at the interview stage?

Yes. The anticipatory duty means an employer must consider what adjustments a disabled applicant might need and have a process for making them — before any specific person asks. At interview, if you disclose a disability and request an adjustment (extra time, a ground-floor room, a BSL interpreter), the employer is obliged to make it if reasonable. Refusing to do so, or withdrawing an offer because you made such a request, would be unlawful.

Reasonable adjustments

Start My Claim — UK Legal Case Builder

Build and run your own employment tribunal, small claims, scam refund or renters' rights case with Start My Claim.

Glossary · Employment Tribunal

Failure to make reasonable adjustments

Last reviewed: May 2026

Employment Tribunal track

duty to make reasonable adjustments

under sections 20–21 of the Equality Act 2010 requires an employer to take positive steps to remove or reduce a

substantial disadvantage

that a disabled worker faces because of a provision, criterion or practice, a physical feature, or the absence of an auxiliary aid — failure to comply is a distinct form of

disability discrimination

Where this comes from

Equality Act 2010, ss.20–21

— the three requirements and the duty to comply; Schedule 8 applies the duty to employers specifically.

Equality Act 2010, s.6 and Schedule 1

— definition of disability: physical or mental impairment with substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.

Archibald v Fife Council [2004] UKHL 32

— House of Lords: duty can require redeployment to a different post without competitive interview, even reversing the obligation to treat everyone equally.

Environment Agency v Rowan [2008] ICR 218 (EAT)

— the structured approach: tribunal must identify the PCP, the non-disabled comparator, and whether the adjustment would remove the disadvantage.

O'Brien v Bolton St Catherine's Academy [2017] EWCA Civ 145

— phased return to work following long-term sickness absence can be a reasonable adjustment; employer must consider it proactively.

EHRC — Employing disabled people and people with health conditions

— Equality and Human Rights Commission practical guidance for employers and workers.

— government grant scheme that can fund adjustments; availability is relevant to whether an employer can claim cost as a defence.

Most discrimination law is about stopping employers from treating disabled people worse than others. The reasonable adjustments duty is different: it is a positive obligation. It requires the employer to

— to take active steps to level the playing field. That makes it unique.

The duty is triggered whenever a disabled worker is placed at a

— more than minor or trivial — in comparison to non-disabled colleagues, because of a provision, criterion or practice (PCP), a physical feature of the premises, or the absence of an auxiliary aid. Once triggered, the employer must take such steps as are reasonable to remove or reduce that disadvantage.

Crucially, the duty is

. An employer does not need to wait until a disabled employee asks before thinking about adjustments. They should be planning for the possibility that any employee — or job applicant — might be disabled and might need support. Failing to have any adjustment process in place, so that when a disabled worker does ask the employer is unprepared, can itself be a breach.

A key point confirmed in

Archibald v Fife Council

[2004] is that the duty can require preferential treatment. Where a disabled worker can no longer carry out their existing role because of their disability, the employer may be required to move them to a different job — even without putting them through the competitive interview that other candidates would face. This reversal of the usual equal-treatment principle is deliberate: the duty is designed to achieve substantive equality, not just formal equality.

Provisions, criteria and practices (PCPs)

A PCP is any rule, policy or way of doing things that the employer applies — or would apply — to everyone. A PCP places a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage when following it is much harder for them than for someone without their impairment.

A physical feature of the premises — steps, narrow doorways, the layout of a workstation — can place a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage. The employer must take reasonable steps to remove or avoid the feature, or provide a reasonable means of avoiding it.

Examples include providing a ramp or lift access for a wheelchair user, moving a workstation to the ground floor, or arranging for a home working arrangement where the building cannot reasonably be adapted.

An auxiliary aid is anything that helps a disabled person carry out their work: assistive software, an ergonomic keyboard, a sign-language interpreter, or a note-taker for meetings. Where the absence of such an aid places a disabled worker at a substantial disadvantage, the employer must take reasonable steps to provide it.

The government's Access to Work scheme can fund many aids and adaptations. Where a publicly available grant would cover the cost of an adjustment, an employer who refuses to apply for it — or refuses to make the adjustment pending the grant — is unlikely to be able to rely on cost as a defence.

What makes an adjustment "reasonable"?

There is no statutory list. Instead, the Employment Appeal Tribunal in

Environment Agency v Rowan

[2008] set out the structured analysis a tribunal must apply: identify the PCP, the disadvantage it causes, and whether the proposed adjustment would remove or reduce it. Whether an adjustment is reasonable involves weighing several factors.

of the adjustment matters most. An adjustment that would not actually remove the disadvantage cannot be required, however cheap it is. Conversely, a costly adjustment that would completely remove the disadvantage may still be reasonable for a large employer.

Other relevant factors include: the

cost and practicality

of making the adjustment; the employer's

and size; the extent of any

to the employer's operations; whether adjustments have already been made; and the availability of financial assistance such as Access to Work. A micro-business is not expected to match the adjustments a national employer could provide.

How it works in practice

Daniel has been working as a data analyst for three years. He is diagnosed with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. His condition causes episodes of fatigue and cognitive fog, typically lasting two to three days, occurring every six to eight weeks. He provides medical evidence to HR and requests two adjustments: permission to work from home during episodes, and removal from the Bradford Factor absence-monitoring scheme during MS-related absences.

His manager refuses both requests, citing the company policy that all employees must work on-site and that the absence-monitoring scheme applies to everyone equally. Daniel receives a first written warning after his fourth MS-related absence. He resigns and claims constructive dismissal and failure to make reasonable adjustments.

Disability? (MS, long-term, substantial effect)

PCP 1 — on-site attendance requirement

Substantial disadvantage

PCP 2 — Bradford Factor scheme

Home-working during episodes — reasonable?

Almost certainly yes

Exempting disability absences — reasonable?

Yes — well-established practice

Failure to make reasonable adjustments?

Neither adjustment requested was costly or operationally complex. Exempting disability-related absences from Bradford Factor triggers is widely recognised as a reasonable adjustment in tribunal decisions. Allowing home-working during defined episodes imposes minimal disruption for a data analyst role. The employer's reliance on uniform application of its policies — treating everyone the same — is precisely what the duty to make adjustments is designed to override.

At tribunal, Daniel would be entitled to compensation for injury to feelings (assessed on the

) and for financial loss flowing from the constructive dismissal, including any gap in earnings while finding a new role.

Common pitfalls for claimants

Frequently asked questions

Sources & further reading

Was your employer required to support you?

Start My Claim helps you map the adjustments you requested, how the employer responded, and the disadvantage you faced — the building blocks of a disability discrimination claim.

Last reviewed: May 2026.

Statutory references checked against the Equality Act 2010 as in force on 28 May 2026. Case citations verified via BAILII. EHRC guidance current as at May 2026.

This page is explanatory only and is not legal advice. Start My Claim is self-service software, not a law firm — its tools help you build and run your own case.