In a recent case an employee lodged and Adverse Action claim stating that the business discriminated against him when it did not provide him with the specific ergonomic chair he requested for use in his home office.
The employee, who had sustained an out of work spinal injury 5 years earlier, was working from home during COVID and complained to the employer that his home office set up was exacerbating his condition. He requested the business provide him with a specific ergonomic chair. The business, through their insurer, provided an ergonomic chair, however as it was not the one that the employee had requested specifically he lodged a discrimination claim.
The employee claimed that the business’s failure to accommodate his disability, by providing a proper chair, followed by its requirement to provide a medical certificate even when he indicated he was unable to do so, was discriminatory.
The business disputed his claims.
The tribunal concurred with the business in this case, highlighting that the employees condition was not a factor in the treatment he received.
“There is, however, no evidence which establishes that any of the events that occurred, and about which he complains, was because of his disability,” they said.
“The [worker] has not experienced any less favourable treatment compared to a person in the same circumstances who did not possess his disability because the university was not purchasing specialised or ergonomic equipment for employees who were requested to work from home between May and August 2020.”
“Even if he had been treated differently, or in the way he insists he should have been, that it is unlikely to have resulted in the [worker] being provided with an ergonomic chair that the [worker] found suitable earlier than he was provided with one,” they said.
Learnings for all businesses
“Key in this case is that the business acknowledged the employees condition and responded with clear and reasonable steps to facilitate reasonable adjustments. In this case the employee did not comply with reasonable evidence requests and hampered the provision of a reasonable ergonomic chair, simply because he wanted a different one”, explains ACAPMAs Elisha Radwanowski.
“The outcome in this case is due to the business being able to demonstrate clearly that it had followed its own, and reasonable processes and had, in all aspects, considered the employee’s condition and accommodated it as best as it reasonably could”, concluded Elisha.
Here to Help
ACAPMA members are reminded that ACAPMA has a series of resources from Quick Reference Guides to template letters and investigation and reporting checklists that can assist with ensuring compliant and consistent responses in this area, and can call on the advice and support of the ACAPMA Employment Professionals via employment@acapma.com.au .
HR Highlights are things to consider, implement and watch out for in your business.
They are provided as general advice and you should seek further advice on your situation by emailing employment@acapma.com.au it’s free for members.
ACAPMA Membership is affordable at only $860 per year for a single site and valuable with sites gaining HR advice support and representation as well as a raft of other benefits and discounts. Click here to learn more about ACAPMA Membership.
Elisha Radwanowski BCom(HRM&IR)
ACAPMA
