Who Is Entitled to Reasonable Adjustments at Work?
In the UK, entitlement to reasonable adjustments is clearer than many people assume. What causes confusion is not the law, but persistent myths about diagnosis, labels, and who is seen as “disabled enough”.
In Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland), the duty comes from the Equality Act 2010. Employers must make reasonable adjustments when a disabled person is placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with others, and that disadvantage comes from workplace rules, the physical environment, or missing support or equipment.
Northern Ireland has different legislation (the Disability Discrimination Act 1995), so the details are not identical.
The short answer: who qualifies?
Someone is generally entitled to reasonable adjustments at work if:
They meet the Equality Act definition of disability (or are likely to), and
They are at a substantial disadvantage at work because of a workplace practice, a physical feature, or lack of an aid or service.
The duty can apply to more people than “employees” too. The Equality Act duty covers employees and workers, and can also extend to job applicants, contractors, and self-employed individuals in relevant work arrangements.
What counts as a disability under the Equality Act 2010?
The Equality Act definition is broad. A disability is a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term negative effect on someone’s ability to do normal day-to-day activities.
Two key bits matter:
“Substantial” means more than minor or trivial.
“Long-term” usually means it has lasted (or is likely to last) 12 months or more, or is likely to recur.
This is why entitlement often includes people with fluctuating or non-visible conditions. And it’s why many people are entitled even if they would never personally use the word “disabled”.
Do you need a formal diagnosis to be entitled?
Not always, and treating diagnosis as a gatekeeping requirement is one of the most common mistakes.
The EHRC’s statutory Employment Code makes the principle very clear: what matters is the effect of the impairment, not whether someone can prove a medically diagnosed cause. P#
In real workplaces, this often means you can trial an adjustment to see if it reduces the disadvantage, without turning the request into a paperwork marathon.
What if you haven’t disclosed your disability?
This is the awkward bit. You’re not legally forced to disclose, but the duty to make reasonable adjustments usually only arises once an employer knows, or could reasonably be expected to know, that someone is disabled.
So culture matters. If people don’t feel safe disclosing, the organisation may never “see” the need, and nothing changes. That dynamic is one reason adjustments remain patchy in practice.
Which situations trigger the duty to make reasonable adjustments?
In simple terms: the duty is triggered when a disabled person is put at a substantial disadvantage by one of these:
1) A rule, policy, or “way we do things”
The legal phrase is “provision, criterion or practice” (often shortened to PCP).
Examples: rigid start times, inflexible break policies, informal performance management, absence triggers.
2) A physical feature of the workplace
Examples: stairs, lighting, noise levels, desk setup, access to quiet space.
3) Missing equipment, support, or services
The law refers to an “auxiliary aid or service”.
Examples: assistive software, captioning, specialist equipment, support worker arrangements.
Who is entitled during recruitment?
Applicants can be entitled too. The duty covers recruitment and selection processes, not just life after someone starts the job.
Common recruitment adjustments include:
alternative interview formats
extra time for assessments
questions in advance
a different way to demonstrate competence (where appropriate)
Who is entitled once employed?
Employees and workers can be entitled at any stage: onboarding, training, performance conversations, promotions, restructures, and return-to-work.
A useful mental model is this: adjustments are not a one-off event. People’s roles change, health changes, teams change, offices change. A good process expects reviews.
Common myths that block adjustments
“You’re not disabled enough”
This attitude shows up a lot in lived experience and is a classic route into legal risk. The law does not require someone to look a certain way, or to have the “right kind” of condition.
“Bring me proof first”
Over-reliance on medical evidence slows down support and misses the point. The statutory guidance is impact-first, not diagnosis-first.
“We don’t do adjustments here”
If the disadvantage exists and the adjustment is reasonable, “company policy” is often the very thing that needs adjusting.
Practical next steps (employee and manager)
If you’re an employee: focus your request on the barrier at work and the change that would remove it. Keep it specific and testable.
If you’re a manager or HR lead: your biggest risk is not a malicious refusal. It’s delay, vagueness, and forgetting what was agreed. Systems beat good intentions.
