Today, I am thrilled to welcome Dan Morgan-Williams from Visualise Training and Consultancy Ltd back to The Eye Care Advocate to discuss the crucial topic of reasonable adjustments.

This is a subject that is fundamental to creating an inclusive and equitable workplace, yet it is often misunderstood and poorly managed. All too often, disabled employees face a battle to get the support they are legally entitled to, turning a right into a struggle.

This article is a vital read for both employees and employers. It sheds light on the gatekeeping that can block progress and champions a more collaborative approach to implementing reasonable adjustments.

Dan’s expert insight is essential for anyone navigating the complexities of reasonable adjustments and seeking to build a better, more supportive working environment for everyone.

Gatekeepers, Power Trips, and the Subjectivity of ‘Reasonable’: Rethinking Workplace Adjustments

Working in the workplace adjustment space, we see this all too often. An employee requests an adjustment to remove a barrier, and instead of a constructive conversation, the request is blocked.

The justification usually sounds familiar: “It’s not reasonable,” or “If we do it for you, we’ll have to do it for everyone.” But too often, what’s really happening isn’t about reasonableness at all — it’s about control.

Line managers and HR teams can act as gatekeepers, making subjective calls on what counts as ‘reasonable’. And yet, under Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010, it isn’t ultimately their decision to define what is reasonable — it’s the courts’.

This article explores the gatekeeping behaviours that can turn reasonable adjustments into a power struggle, and the subjectivity trap of defining what “reasonable” really means.

The Gatekeeper Problem and Its Impact on Reasonable Adjustments

Many disabled employees describe the process of requesting reasonable adjustments as daunting and exhausting. Rather than feeling supported, they feel they must convince a panel of sceptics. In too many cases, the people making the decision — often line managers or HR staff — are not experts in disability. Instead, they rely on personal judgement, assumptions, or organisational culture.

The result is gatekeeping. Reasonable adjustments are seen not as legal rights but as optional benefits that must be justified and rationed. Phrases like “if we let you, everyone will want it” or “we’ve never done that before” become shields against change. While often presented as protecting fairness, these decisions can be about maintaining control or avoiding the complexity of disability.

When Control Outweighs Inclusion

In practice, this gatekeeping can feel like a power trip. An employee discloses their condition, explains the barrier they face, and instead of collaboration, they are met with resistance.

For example, a member of staff with tinnitus asks to work from home two days a week to avoid a noisy open-plan office. The request is refused because “it wouldn’t be fair to the rest of the team.”

Another example could be an employee with a visual impairment asks for screen magnification software, and the manager says, “It’s too expensive,” without checking the actual cost (which can be less than £100!).

In each case, the employee is left feeling dismissed. The adjustment itself may have been a low-cost, simple, and entirely reasonable solution. But the refusal becomes a statement of power: “I decide what you get.” This fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of reasonable adjustments.

Understanding Your Rights to Reasonable Adjustments Under the Law

The Equality Act 2010 is clear: employers have a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments where a disabled worker would otherwise be placed at a substantial disadvantage. These adjustments are not perks; they are legal entitlements.

The Act uses the term “reasonable” to allow for flexibility. What is reasonable for a small business may differ from what is reasonable for a multinational corporation. Factors include cost, practicality, and the effectiveness of the adjustment.

However, the law also makes it clear that it is not a line manager’s subjective opinion that decides reasonableness. If challenged, it is for an Employment Tribunal to determine whether an employer has complied with their duty. Too often, employers act as though they alone define the terms, forgetting their decisions can be scrutinised externally.

Why Blocking Reasonable Adjustments Backfires

Blocking reasonable adjustments has significant consequences for any business.

Firstly, there is a clear legal risk. Employees can and do challenge refusals at a tribunal, with employers facing damages, costs, and significant reputational harm.

Secondly, there is a direct business impact. Skilled and talented employees will leave organisations that do not support them, leading to high recruitment costs and a loss of valuable expertise.

Perhaps most importantly, it creates a toxic workplace culture. Staff lose trust in leaders who dismiss their needs. This creates a culture of fear and disengagement, where employees are afraid to ask for the support they need to do their jobs effectively. It tells disabled staff that their contributions are undervalued.

The Role of Workplace Assessments

One of the most effective ways to avoid disputes and ensure legal compliance is through professional workplace assessments, such as that offered by my business: Visualise Training and Consultancy.

These assessments provide an independent, expert view of what adjustments are appropriate and effective. Rather than relying on the subjective judgement of an individual, employers receive a clear, objective report on what is a reasonable adjustment. This outlines the barriers an employee is facing, provides a list of practical solutions, and details any associated costs.

At Visualise Training and Consultancy, we see time and again that minor, simple adjustments make a huge difference. Assessments bring objectivity to a process that is too often clouded by personal opinion and power dynamics. They are a practical, positive step towards finding a solution.

From Gatekeepers to Enablers: A Cultural Shift

The fundamental shift required is a cultural one. Employers must move away from seeing reasonable adjustments as optional benefits controlled by gatekeepers. They need to recognise them as legal rights that enable true inclusion.

HR professionals and line managers should position themselves not as guards, but as enablers. Their role should be to work collaboratively with employees to remove barriers to success. This means listening without judgement, seeking expert advice when needed, and being genuinely open to change.

It also means understanding that fairness is not about treating everyone the same. It is about providing everyone with the tools they need to thrive. True fairness is about equity, and reasonable adjustments are a cornerstone of an equitable workplace.

About the Author

Visualise Training and Consultancy Ltd was established in 2014 by Daniel Williams, who founded the company despite experiencing gradual vision loss due to retinitis pigmentosa.

What began as a focused approach centred on sight loss and its associated challenges has since grown to encompass all forms of sensory loss. To see how Daniel can help you, or your team, support integrating accessibility and inclusion into your lives, you can visit his website: https://visualisetrainingandconsultancy.com

Dan has also kindly submitted several articles including Advocating for Better Support for a Sight Loss Diagnosis.

A Final Word from The Eye Care Advocate

I want to extend my sincere and personal thanks to Dan for sharing another powerful and essential article. His voice is so important because he speaks not only as a professional advocating for a more inclusive world, but also as someone with lived experience of vision loss. For any employee navigating their rights, this article is a vital resource for understanding reasonable adjustments. For employers, it is a clear guide on how to build a supportive and legally compliant environment.

And for us, as eye care professionals, this is a profound reminder of our duty. Our role as advocates doesn’t end when a patient leaves the test room. We must be prepared to support them in their wider lives, including championing the reasonable adjustments they need to thrive at work. Dan’s insights show that creating a culture that embraces reasonable adjustments is not just a legal requirement; it’s a moral one. Let’s all commit to ensuring our patients get the reasonable adjustments they are entitled to.

Please consider sharing this post with your networks.