Mental Health Awareness Week: Taking Action on Reasonable Adjustments at Work

This year, Mental Health Awareness Week is centred on the theme of “taking action”, a focus that is particularly relevant in an employment context. Whilst the discussion around mental health at work continues to widen, many of the issues that arise in practice stem not from a lack of understanding, but from uncertainty about what practical steps should follow.

From the perspective of an experienced employment lawyer, the concept of reasonable adjustments is where that uncertainty can become most apparent. It is also where early, considered action can make a significant difference in avoiding more complex workplace disputes.

What does the law say on reasonable adjustments?

Under the Equality Act 2010, a mental health condition can constitute a disability if it has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on an individual’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The definition of “long-term” is that the condition has lasted a year or is likely to last a year. Conditions such as depression, anxiety disorders and PTSD can frequently meet this threshold, although there is no legal requirement for a formal medical diagnosis.

The duty to make reasonable adjustments arises where an employer knows, or could reasonably be expected to know, that an individual is disabled, and where the individual is placed at a disadvantage by a workplace provision, criterion or practice or a physical feature of the premises. In those circumstances, an employer is expected to take reasonable steps to reduce that disadvantage.

The law does not prescribe what adjustments must be made. Instead, it adopts a deliberately flexible approach. What is considered “reasonable” will depend on several factors, including the nature of the role, the size and resources of the organisation, the practicality of the adjustment, and its likely effectiveness.

But importantly, the duty is an ongoing one. It may arise at different points during employment and can require reconsideration as circumstances change. There is no requirement for an employee to use specific legal language to trigger the obligation, although in practice the issue often arises through discussions about health, absence, or performance.

Where the duty applies and is not met, an employer may face a claim in the Employment Tribunal which can be uncapped in value and potentially damaging both financially and reputationally.

Practical Steps

The effectiveness of any adjustment process depends in large part on communication. Employers who engage openly and at an early stage are generally better placed to identify workable solutions.

For employees, engagement can also influence outcomes. While decisions about disclosure and participation will vary, a degree of input into what may assist in practice can help shape more realistic arrangements.

Reasonable adjustments frequently arise in the context of performance management or sickness absence. This overlap can create challenges, particularly where there are operational pressures.

A strictly procedural approach to performance or absence, without consideration of underlying factors, can lead to difficulties. Equally, a lack of structure can result in inconsistency. In practice, organisations often need to combine established processes with a degree of flexibility.

However, legal compliance should be seen as the baseline. The most effective organisations will recognise that proactively supporting good mental health can improve retention, engagement and productivity.

If you would benefit from employment law advice or training in your organisation, please contact Alice Kinder. alicekinder@bexleybeaumont.com  |  07526372580