Forced to resign due to disability - need advice

Genuineguy03

Marliepanda - granted, in my reply, that you qouted, to those disagreeing with my advice in my original post in this thread. I may have missread the the thread or got confused with one of the other threads, where there is a current ongoing debate as to what are protected characteristic and what reasonable adjustments the employer is required to make (unless exceptions in law appply).

However that doesn't change the fact they my original post was accurate in law.

Genuineguy03

Ozzuk - where was the "insisting"?

They could just as easily pass on some of the OPs work load and/or duties to a current employee. Whether they (employer) choose that option or employ another person (likely with HR experience to negate the need for training from scratch and presumded expense). Is up to the employer. Either way they have to make a reasonable adjustment, as I can't see any exceptions in law that would apply here.

marliepanda

Genuineguy03 wrote: »

Ozzuk - where was the "insisting"?

They could just as easily pass on some of the OPs work load and/or duties to a current employee. Whether they (employer) choose that option or employ another person (likely with HR experience to negate the need for training from scratch and presumded expense). Is up to the employer. Either way they have to make a reasonable adjustment, as I can't see any exceptions in law that would apply here.

A reasonable adjustment is categorically NOT giving the work to someone else!! They could choose to, but that is not reasonable. Not at all.

Sorry but no disabled person has the right to expect their work to simply be given to someone else when they dont want to/cant do it.

The employer has to make a reasonable adjustment, which so far they appear to have. Your insistence that they 'HAVE' to allow them to work part time is incorrect. Your insistence that they 'HAVE' to lower their workload is incorrect.

nicechap

marliepanda wrote: »

A reasonable adjustment is categorically NOT giving the work to someone else!! They could choose to, but that is not reasonable. Not at all.

Sorry but no disabled person has the right to expect their work to simply be given to someone else when they dont want to/cant do it.

The employer has to make a reasonable adjustment, which so far they appear to have. Your insistence that they 'HAVE' to allow them to work part time is incorrect. Your insistence that they 'HAVE' to lower their workload is incorrect.

They do seem to struggle with everyday understanding of words.

May & Must; Could & Can; Should & Shall; Ill & Disabled; Rights & Obligations; Work & Employment;

Ozzuk

Genuineguy03 wrote: »

Ozzuk - where was the "insisting"?

They could just as easily pass on some of the OPs work load and/or duties to a current employee. Whether they (employer) choose that option or employ another person (likely with HR experience to negate the need for training from scratch and presumded expense). Is up to the employer. Either way they have to make a reasonable adjustment, as I can't see any exceptions in law that would apply here.

"has to" "there's no reason" take your pick.

Again you are muddying the waters with strange advice. Now you have somehow assessed the capacity in the OPs team as you've gone off the temp idea. This is just strange.

FBaby

I think your priority is to push for the investigation to take place to receive treatment for endometriosis. Have you been referred? Do you have an appointment? Has it been confirmed that you are waiting for surgery?

It might be that if you boss had confidence that if this issue was resolved, you could return to your working hours and you can show you are doing everything to speed the process up, they might be more sympathetic and prepared to be patient or at least be supportive of you going for another job there.

I wish you good luck, you are clearly been through a tough time.

Masomnia

marliepanda wrote: »

A reasonable adjustment is categorically NOT giving the work to someone else!! They could choose to, but that is not reasonable. Not at all.

Sorry but no disabled person has the right to expect their work to simply be given to someone else when they dont want to/cant do it.

The employer has to make a reasonable adjustment, which so far they appear to have. Your insistence that they 'HAVE' to allow them to work part time is incorrect. Your insistence that they 'HAVE' to lower their workload is incorrect.

A lesser workload/lower targets quite often is a reasonable adjustment.

tooldle

Hi, i am University staff (not HR). Our HR department does have a lot of part time staff and job shares. In many ways they set the flexibility example for the other departments to follow. Quite a few working early starts, to accommodate school pick ups etc.
Would you be able to sustain attendance if your position became a job share?
My only other advice is to hang in there. Do not resign. In my institution it can be years and years before anyone is sacked. Our HR department is very cautious about such things. I am aware of positions that are being held open for staff who are into their fourth year of sickness (unpaid of course).
Good luck OP, i hope you can get this resolved.

marliepanda

Masomnia wrote: »

A lesser workload/lower targets quite often is a reasonable adjustment.

It ‘could’ be of course.

It is categorically not required if it doesn’t fit business requirements.

Genuineguy03

Mariepanda - "have" as in make reasonable adjustments - what those are is up to the employer decide, which be any of the options I mentioned previously. Also a phased return to work in itself is not a reasonable adjustment if the employees condition is still ongoing and preventing returning full time.

@ozzuk

Again "has to" make reasonable adjustments. And "there's no reason" as in why they can't make reasonable adjustments such as the options that I've mention earlier in the thread. Reason why there's no reason not to make reasonable adjustment is because they have to unless the an exception in law applies to them. Which I doubt they have any exception in law that applies to them (the employer) in the OPs case