Employers are required to make reasonable adjustments where a provision, criterion or practice ("PCP") places a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage. Disputes over the reasonableness of a particular adjustment often arise when employers are considering redeploying disabled employees. In Archibald v Fife Council (2004) the House of Lords held that it might be a reasonable adjustment to appoint a disabled person to an alternative post even if that person is not the best candidate, or to disapply a competitive interview process. The EAT has considered similar issues in Wade v Sheffield Hallam University, where a disabled employee claimed that it was a reasonable adjustment to waive the requirement for a competitive interview.
Ms Wade suffered from an allergic condition which amounted to a disability and Sheffield Hallam University made various adjustments for her, including allowing her to work from home. Whilst she was absent due to sickness and then garden leave, her post was deleted in a major restructuring exercise. After attending a competitive interview, she was rejected for an alternative role because she clearly lacked several of the essential criteria required for that position.
Ms Wade claimed in the Employment Tribunal that the University had breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments by requiring her to go through the competitive interview process. She also argued that the job criteria should have been waived for her because of her disability and her long absence from the workplace.
The Tribunal held that the competitive interview process did constitute a PCP which put Ms Wade at a substantial disadvantage. However, it was not a reasonable adjustment to give her the role without a competitive interview. This decision was upheld by the EAT. Referring to Archibald v Fife Council, the EAT noted that the question of reasonableness depends on the particular circumstances. In this case, the adjustment requested by Ms Wade was tantamount to requiring that the University should automatically appoint her when it genuinely did not believe that she was appointable.
It is comforting for employers to know that the duty to make reasonable adjustments does not necessarily mean that they have to waive an interview process or the essential requirements of a role. However, it is important to follow a genuine and well-documented evaluation process in order to be able to demonstrate precisely why an employee is not suitable for a particular post.
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.
