Background
Commercial
Private
Partners
News
Newsletters
& Updates
Seminars
& Training
Vacancies
Track My Case
Contact
Links
 
  You are currently here: Home > News

2nd March 2004

Plan now for the Disability Discrimination Act


image - Jeya Thiruchelvam


By Jeya Thiruchelvam, employment law specialist at award winning Harding Evans Solicitors.

All employers are aware that it is unlawful to discriminate against employees who have a disability. But it is imperative that employers remain alive to this obligation at all times since a single slip up may result in having to pay out thousands of pounds in compensation.


But it is not only employers who need to take note. Present obligations will grow more onerous on 1st October 2004 when all service providers will be required to consider and make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to ensure that their premises are accessible to disabled people. All businesses regardless of size will all have to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that their premises or the way in which their service is delivered does not create unreasonable difficulties for disabled clients or customers.

The duty to make reasonable adjustments extends beyond placing a ramp at the front entrance of the business premises. Service providers must look at all aspects of their service, and consider what changes they need to make to the physical features of their premises, including entrances and exits, toilet and washing facilities, exterior services and paving, parking areas, lighting, ventilation etc. Whether or not an adjustment is reasonable will depend on a variety of different factors including its potential effectiveness, how practicable it is, and the financial (and other) costs involved. So what might be reasonable for a global chain such as Starbucks or Coffee Republic may not be reasonable for a small “greasy spoon” café. In addition a refusal to provide a service to a disabled person, or providing a lower standard of service will also render a service provider guilty of discrimination.

It is also crucial that employers realise that a failure to comply with the above duty will constitute disability discrimination, and as such will be actionable in the Employment Tribunal. This duty is obviously an extension of the existing duty requiring employers to make reasonable adjustments to help employees minimise the impact of their disability.

A reasonable adjustment may involve altering an employee’s hours or allowing him to work flexible hours and overcome the fatigue arising from his disability. Or it may involve making physical changes by widening a doorway, moving furniture for a wheelchair user, relocating light switches, door handles, or shelves for someone who has difficulty reaching. It is clear to see that the possibilities are endless.

As with service providers, discrimination in the field of employment may take two forms - a failure to make reasonable adjustments or the (unjustifiable) less favourable treatment of an employee on the grounds of their disability. Employers ignore either form of discrimination at their peril.

Legoland Windsor was recently ordered to pay £20,000 compensation after a disabled employee who was presented with a model of himself with a paralysed arm successfully claimed disability discrimination. Mr Jenkins, who has a withered arm as a result of a motorcycle crash as a teenager, was presented with the model at a company awards ceremony. His discrimination claim was upheld on the grounds that his figure was the only one not to depict him by reference to his job.

Service providers and employers cannot afford to ignore their duties under the Disability Discrimination Act as those which do may find themselves having to defend a disability discrimination claim. It is imperative that service providers and employers begin to plan how they will discharge their duty to alter their premises to resolve access for disabled employees and clients/customers now. The duty comes into force on 1st October 2004 and the courts may well take into account what planning and preparation employers and service providers have undertaken prior to that date when determining whether or not they have breached their legal obligations.