New Zealand: Employment Law Bulletin — [2007] ELB 116

Disability And Discrimination — The Employer’s Duty To Accommodate

As a major proponent and one of the first signatories to the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, New Zealand has recognised the need to do more to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability and to ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided to persons with disabilities in the workplace. Although our domestic law has long provided for these matters, the extent to which it does so is virtually untested.

Discrimination in the employment setting is prohibited by both the Employment Relations Act 2000 ("ERA") and the Human Rights Act 1993 ("HRA"). An employee who is subjected to unjustified treatment by reason of discrimination may pursue a remedy under either Act. A job seeker who is rejected as a result of unlawful discrimination will have to rely on the HRA, no employment relationship having been created.1

Among the prohibited grounds of discrimination is disability, defined in s 21(1) of the HRA to include: physical and psychiatric illness; physical, intellectual or physiological impairment; any other abnormality of psychological, physiological or anatomical structure or function; reliance on remedial means such as a wheelchair or guide dog, and the presence in the body of organisms capable of causing illness. The definition also contemplates that the affliction will be of a permanent or at least long-term nature.2

The prohibition is not, however, an absolute bar to discriminatory treatment. Section 106 of the ERA imports s 29 of the HRA to provide that nothing in s 104 of the ERA, prohibiting discrimination, prevents different treatment based on disability if either of two situations exists.

The first is where the employment position is such that the person could perform the duties satisfactorily only with the aid of special services or facilities which it is not reasonable to expect the employer to provide.

The second is where the person could only perform them at the risk of causing harm to themselves or others and it is not reasonable either to take the risk or to take measures to reduce it to a normal level.

Section 29 accordingly imposes a duty on employers to accommodate a disabled employee's special needs by providing special services or facilities and/or by taking steps to reduce any associated risk of harm, but only to the extent it is reasonable to expect them to do so.

Just how the reasonableness of an employer’s actions and the circumstances in which different treatment will be justified are to be assessed for these purposes is not at all clear. The Acts themselves provide no guidance as to the factors that should be taken into account and the terms "services" and "facilities" are undefined.

Section 29 has seldom been considered in either the employment or human rights jurisdictions. In particular the extent of the legal obligation to provide special services or facilities, in the absence of risk, has yet to be considered in a reported decision. This is perhaps surprising; given the 413,200 New Zealanders aged 15 to 64 who reported some form of disability in the 2001 census, and indications that half of them required assistance as a result.

An explanation may lie in the mediation model pursued by the Human Rights Commission, which will investigate and settle claims at no cost to the complainant — but other factors are surely at play. It may be that people with disabilities are unaware of any real duty to accommodate their needs, or are simply reluctant to challenge those who discriminate against them. Employers and employees alike may be doubtful that an obligation imposed in such a roundabout manner — as a qualification to an exception to a general prohibition — is even likely to be enforced.

Case law does establish that the risk of harm to the employee will justify discrimination on the basis of disability where that risk is "significant, appreciable or substantial" and it is "not really possible or reasonable" to expect the employer to take the steps that are required to reduce it.3 The acceptable level of risk is accordingly not high, which is consistent with normal health and safety requirements.

When called on to apply the other anti-discrimination provisions of the HRA the courts have consistently referred to the Act's special character and the need to give it a fair, large and liberal interpretation, rather than a literal or technical one. In Director of Human Rights Proceedings v NZ Thoroughbred Racing Inc4 the majority of the Court of Appeal held that its savings provisions, being exceptions to the basic prohibitions on discriminatory action, are to be read narrowly. This should be read as requiring a fair, large and liberal interpretation of the employer’s duty to accommodate, which itself serves to narrow the exceptions provided by s 29.

The issues surrounding the duty to accommodate have been and continue to be extensively litigated in other jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States of America and Australia. Given the common purpose of human rights law internationally, it may be expected that authorities in those jurisdictions will be of some assistance to the New Zealand courts when called upon to decide whether or not s 29 should be applied in a particular case to excuse discriminatory treatment based on disability.

The United Kingdom’s Disability Discrimination Act 1995 ("DDA") is instructive in that it sets out the factors which must be taken into account when deciding whether or not it is reasonable to expect particular steps to be taken in any case:

[18B Reasonable adjustments: supplementary

  1. In determining whether it is reasonable for a person to have to take a particular step in order to comply with a duty to make reasonable adjustments, regard shall be had, in particular, to —

  1. the extent to which taking the step would prevent the effect in relation to which the duty is imposed;
  2. the extent to which it is practicable for him to take the step;
  3. the financial and other costs which would be incurred by him in taking the step and the extent to which taking it would disrupt any of his activities;
  4. the extent of his financial and other resources;
  5. the availability to him of financial or other assistance with respect to taking the step;
  6. the nature of his activities and the size of his undertaking;
  7. where the step would be taken in relation to a private household, the extent to which taking it would

  1. disrupt that household, or
  2. disturb any person residing there.

The Act also provides examples of the kinds of adjustments an employer might reasonably be required to make:

  1. The following are examples of steps which a person may need to take in relation to a disabled person in order to comply with a duty to make reasonable adjustments —

  1. making adjustments to premises;
  2. allocating some of the disabled person's duties to another person;transferring him to fill an existing vacancy;
  3. altering his hours of working or training;
  4. assigning him to a different place of work or training;
  5. allowing him to be absent during working or training hours for rehabilitation, assessment or treatment;
  6. giving, or arranging for, training or mentoring (whether for the disabled person or any other person);
  7. acquiring or modifying equipment;
  8. modifying instructions or reference manuals;
  9. modifying procedures for testing or assessment;
  10. providing a reader or interpreter;
  11. providing supervision or other support.

The Act also provides that a breach of the above provisions is not itself actionable, being applicable only for the purpose of determining whether a disabled person has been discriminated against.

Under the DDA the duty to make reasonable adjustments arises in all employment situations where less favourable treatment could arise as a result of a disability. The need then is firstly to establish what accommodation is required by the legal duty and secondly whether, if that was met, there would still be a relevant and substantial reason for treating the disabled person differently to others. As Lord Rodger of Earlsferry put it in the leading case of Archibald v Fife Council:5

In broad terms, the idea is that, if an employer leaves a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage from his arrangements, when he should have taken steps to shield her from that disadvantage, he discriminates against her.

In that case an employee had become disabled in a way that made it impossible for her to carry out the essential functions of her job as a road sweeper, namely walking and sweeping. After retraining her for an office job and considering (but declining) her applications for suitable vacancies as they arose, the Council eventually dismissed her on the grounds she was unable to perform the duties of her position. Mrs Archibald complained that it should not have made her compete for a suitable office job, which the Council believed it had to do by virtue of other legislation. In its view, her dismissal was the result of her inability to carry out the essential functions of the job she had been hired for, which was not something it could change by making reasonable adjustments. That view prevailed all the way to the House of Lords, which allowed Mrs Archibald’s appeal.

This marks a step beyond the rejection of discrimination per se and towards positive discrimination in favour of the disabled employee. As Baroness Hale of Richmond explained, the law does not regard the differences between able and disabled people as irrelevant in the sense that sex or race is treated as irrelevant when deciding whether someone has been discriminated against on those grounds.

Treating someone more favourably on the basis of their sex or race is prohibited because doing so necessarily discriminates against people of the opposite sex or a different race, who should be treated equally. By contrast, the DDA expects reasonable adjustments to be made to cater for the special needs of disabled people, which necessarily entails an element of more favourable treatment. The question before the House was: when the obligation to make those adjustments arises, and how far it goes?

Their lordships held that Mrs Archibald’s employment contract included, as part of the employer’s arrangements, an implied term that she was liable to be dismissed if she became unable to carry out the essential functions of the job for which she was employed.

The question then became whether that aspect of the employment arrangement placed Mrs Archibald at a substantial disadvantage compared to other employees who were not disabled, but who were subject to the same arrangements. Clearly it did, as they were not unable to do their jobs and hence not liable to be dismissed.

Because the Act imposed a duty to prevent that term of her employment contract from placing her at that substantial disadvantage, the Council may well have been obliged to simply put her into another job that she could do (as a reasonable accommodation), rather than merely giving her the opportunity to apply for it and appointing her if her application was successful. Whether or not that obligation arose would depend on what was reasonable in all the circumstances of the case, which was a matter for the Employment Tribunal to decide.

New Zealand's prohibition of discrimination against disabled persons in the employment setting is expressed in extremely simple terms by comparison to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (UK), but many of the complex questions that have arisen under that Act underlie any consideration of discrimination by reason of disability and what should reasonably be expected by way of accommodation.

What is the correct comparator group to be used when deciding whether different treatment has occurred by reason of disability?6 This issue is addressed, however, in s 22(1)(c) HRA by its references to "other employees employed on work of that description". Can disadvantage or dismissal by reason of disability be substantively justified even when unreasonable?7 Is reasonableness to be assessed from the perspective of the employer, the employee, or on an entirely objective basis?8

Although specific legislation may be expected to eventually flow from New Zealand’s acceptance of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the obligation to give effect to its purposes already exists. Given the breadth of the definition of disability in the HRA, it is perhaps surprising that the duty to accommodate disabled employees remains so unexplored.


1 John Hughes "Editorial: Challenging discrimination" [2006] ELB 125.

2 NZ Amalgamated Engineering Printing & Manufacturing Union Inc v Air New Zealand Ltd [2004] 1 ERNZ 614; (2004) 2 NZELR 157.

3 Proceedings Commissioner and Canterbury Frozen Meat Co Ltd (CRT, Decision No 19-98 CRT14-98, 26 November 1998, SC Bathgate, Chairperson, MK Shields and WL Dearsley, Members).

4 Director of Human Rights Proceedings v NZ Thoroughbred Racing Inc [2002] 3 NZLR 333.

5 Archibald v Fife Council [2004] UKHL 32; [2004] IRLR 651; [2004] 4 All ER 303.

6 Smith v Churchill Lifts Plc [2005] EWCA Civ 1220; [2006] ICR 524; [2006] IRLR 41.

7 Collins v Royal National Theatre Board [2004] EWCA Civ 144; [2004] 2 All ER 851.

8 Collins v Royal National Theatre Board, as above.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.