markielock
Senior Member
- Messages
- 319
Hi guys,
I am worried I am being indirectly discriminated at work because I have chronic fatigue syndrome. I am not sure what to do ☹. I am not sure how detailed I should be about this situation but I shall try to communicate my predicament as clearly as possible.
I would be so grateful for any feedback if you’ve had or know of any similar experiences.
This is rather long so TLDR; I think I am being indirectly discriminated against because my institution has an unwritten policy (that contradicts their written policy) to resist and reject working from home as a flexible working option. This policy, although applied to all, particularly disadvantages me because of who I am. The institution is also not willing to explore any situation where their policies put individuals at a particular disadvantage. This has resulted in the institution not properly and fully exploring my options for flexible working and how they may benefit me and their business. This is negatively impacting my health and my work performance.
A bit of background:
I have worked for this institution for just over a year now. Despite the fact this job is difficult for me to maintain, this is the first time I have been able to hold down a job since getting CFS 7 years ago, because it has been part time. I have had two roles at the institution since being employed:
· An assistant role where I help customers and troubleshoot their I.T. issues. This was an irregular timetable and out of hours (weekends and evenings) for 18 hours a week.
· My new role that I have been in since January: delivering web support and troubleshooting for the institution website, this is 20 hours a week, 5 hours a day for 4 days a week.
I have steadily realised over the last year that a part time commuting job where I must be present in the office is still unsustainable for me to maintain over the long term. I find myself trying to ‘push’ through my symptoms, which causes me to get worse and worse and leads to more and more sick days until I suffer a mini-relapse and am off for a month (which has happened twice now). Even when I am off for this amount of time, I never fully recover. I feel like a ticking time bomb, hitting a lot of ‘sickness leave triggers’, waiting to be fired. I also worry about a much bigger relapse, which feels like an increasing possibility as my symptoms worsen.
On top of this, my quality of life and wellbeing is always a struggle to maintain because getting to work and working in the office takes a lot of my resources. It’s not a very fun existence a lot of the time and I feel like I lose a lot of time for ‘me’. This is leading me to a lot more stress and anxiety, which never helps.
My main problem:
My main problem is the commuting and being in the office. I find the work fun and I am regularly praised for being good at it. The work I do is also entirely done in a web browser and could be completed from any location. There is no tangible reason for being in the office to do my day-to-day service. Any physical appointments, such as meetings and any training sessions I need to conduct are scheduled ahead of time.
If I had the option for more flexible working options, such as the autonomy to work from home on days/weeks that I am feeling worse, it would save a lot of my energy resources, improve my wellbeing and quality of life and make me more productive. I am not very productive in the office and only have a good ‘2 hours’ before my performance declines. It also leaves me very limited for the rest of the day. This is before the delayed fatigue and worsening of the symptoms kicks in!
Why I feel I’m being discriminated against:
I have tried to approach them on these issues twice (the first time in my first role, and in the last couple of weeks in my second role) but have met resistance before I have been able to communicate the severity of the situation to them. I am quite concerned because my employer advertises themselves as an inclusive employer. They have their own disability services for customers and staff and have policies on their website for flexible working, which include home working as an option.
My employer has been reluctant and even out-right rejected to properly and fully explore my situation and flexible working options with me. On both occasions of trying to sort out this issue, Occupational Health and HR have presented inappropriate 'set solutions’ for me without exploring my individual situation.
I feel it is important to note that if my employer had explored the option of home-working with me and presented a very good and provable business reason for why this wasn’t possible, I would completely understand. I would be very happy to try different, appropriate and reasonable options that we discovered in the discovery process. The problem is they didn’t explore my situation and their set solutions were not suitable.
First time, toward the end of last year:
In my first role, I had hit so many sickness ‘triggers’ as defined by their sickness policy, and was asked to see Occupational Health (OH) to discuss any ‘reasonable adjustments’ that could be made.
I came to the OH meeting with a lot of information about CFS (information regarding my symptoms and the action for ME guide “An employer’s guide to ME”), my complete medical history and hospital diagnosis. I also brought in a list of solutions based on my experience with working the job and living with CFS:
· Fixed shift pattern and hours. My pattern at the time was irregular at the time and a fixed shift pattern could have allowed me something to get ‘used’ to and manage down time around.
· Working from home when possible because, although this role did involve more face to face contact, a big part of the job was working on our remote service desk, which I could do from home.
· Being held accountable in a different way from the sickness absence policy, which works well for catching out people ‘abusing’ being off sick but puts me at a disadvantage and penalises me for having a disability.
In the meeting the OH advisor was reluctant to explore any of the material I presented and didn’t directly ask me about my disability or what my day-to-day life is like at work with my disability. When offered, they were not interested in reviewing my diagnosis or medical history. They refused to medically explore the flexible working option of working from home because “the institution would not like it”. Despite my insistence, they were not willing to put flexible working options in the report and said that the idea of home working “had been through the unions” and it was generally frowned upon. They also were not willing to explore how the sickness absence policy could put me at a disadvantage. They then went on to assert that the “fact” that if the business was smaller they could “treat staff more fairly” but managing the fair employment of 5000 people is a lot harder and “broad strokes must be made”.
The perceived resolution to this incident was that I got fixed shift pattern/hours. However, this isn’t true because it was a coincidence that I was moving to a new location within the institution that needed me to have a more fixed timetable when working in that location.
I made a complaint to HR about my experience and the result, but the HR officer was quite defensive and said they were confident occupational health had explored all appropriate reasonable adjustments.
I personally think the institution could have made a compelling business reason as to why certain flexible working options, such as home working, would be unsuitable in this job role. But the fact they weren’t willing to explore all my options in the first place, regardless of my situation or even my job role, put me at an unnecessary disadvantage.
Second time:
In my new role, I am working a regular shift pattern in an office and, as I said earlier, my work is done entirely in a web browser with no human contact unless I have scheduled in a meeting. I applied again for flexible working with my new line manager. I applied for the autonomy/option to work from home if my symptoms had grown more problematic and would affect my future performance and physical attendance over a longer period if forced to come in to the office. Upon discussion, I laid out the options and the benefits this could have on the team and my own productivity. He was worried about ‘setting a precedent’ with other members of the team because he didn’t trust some members of staff to work from home. However, he was happy with letting me try and wanted to trial it for 6 months.
On my next shift, I was called to an unexpected meeting with my line manager who had been in touch with the same HR Officer that had been involved with the first incident. The decision to trial it had seemingly been reversed by HR. I wasn’t explicitly told that I couldn’t work from home but it was implicit that the option wasn’t favourable and that the trial wasn’t taking place. Instead, I was told that I should explore some other options instead, which were presented to me. The options were to either start later in the day or do 4 hours shifts over 5 days instead of 5 hour shifts over 4 days, which are both unsuitable and miss the point of my individual situation of living with CFS. Again, my individual situation hasn’t been acknowledged, my options have not been explored properly and I am put at a disadvantage.
I am currently off on sick leave because my symptoms have worsened, which could have been avoided if better flexible working options were in place sooner. The stress of having the trial that I thought would help my situation snatched away suddenly is also not helping.
Worryingly, this has led to some discussion at work as to whether CFS is a disability, despite the fact the Equality act 2010, which they also have a PDF outlining on their own website, uses CFS as an example of disability.
Their concerns as managers were that it could be a ‘health and safety’ risk if I am working from home sick when I should be resting to be well enough to get in to work, which again misses the point about having a fluctuating disability, which the Equality Act clearly defines. It’s boggling to see how little is understood about the condition and disability.
EDIT: I feel it is important to add in that my manager suggested what I do outside my job could be held against me because 'it is impacting my job role', although I do little but day-to-day tasks on account of not having much energy from working. Should this even relevant to them?
In conclusion
I feel there is a lot of communication that needs to be had with the institution. Whether it is suitable I can work from home or not, there is some clear bias and lack of understanding within the institution that prevents them from making a clear assessment as to whether a potential solution is reasonable or not.
Has anyone had any similar issues?? I’m not sure what my next steps are. I’m worried about losing my job and annoying people. I feel as if I have done something wrong by merely suggesting the idea of flexible working. Is there anything I could be doing better to communicate my situation??
Thanks so much for taking the time to read through this.
Kindest Regards,
Mark
I am worried I am being indirectly discriminated at work because I have chronic fatigue syndrome. I am not sure what to do ☹. I am not sure how detailed I should be about this situation but I shall try to communicate my predicament as clearly as possible.
I would be so grateful for any feedback if you’ve had or know of any similar experiences.
This is rather long so TLDR; I think I am being indirectly discriminated against because my institution has an unwritten policy (that contradicts their written policy) to resist and reject working from home as a flexible working option. This policy, although applied to all, particularly disadvantages me because of who I am. The institution is also not willing to explore any situation where their policies put individuals at a particular disadvantage. This has resulted in the institution not properly and fully exploring my options for flexible working and how they may benefit me and their business. This is negatively impacting my health and my work performance.
A bit of background:
I have worked for this institution for just over a year now. Despite the fact this job is difficult for me to maintain, this is the first time I have been able to hold down a job since getting CFS 7 years ago, because it has been part time. I have had two roles at the institution since being employed:
· An assistant role where I help customers and troubleshoot their I.T. issues. This was an irregular timetable and out of hours (weekends and evenings) for 18 hours a week.
· My new role that I have been in since January: delivering web support and troubleshooting for the institution website, this is 20 hours a week, 5 hours a day for 4 days a week.
I have steadily realised over the last year that a part time commuting job where I must be present in the office is still unsustainable for me to maintain over the long term. I find myself trying to ‘push’ through my symptoms, which causes me to get worse and worse and leads to more and more sick days until I suffer a mini-relapse and am off for a month (which has happened twice now). Even when I am off for this amount of time, I never fully recover. I feel like a ticking time bomb, hitting a lot of ‘sickness leave triggers’, waiting to be fired. I also worry about a much bigger relapse, which feels like an increasing possibility as my symptoms worsen.
On top of this, my quality of life and wellbeing is always a struggle to maintain because getting to work and working in the office takes a lot of my resources. It’s not a very fun existence a lot of the time and I feel like I lose a lot of time for ‘me’. This is leading me to a lot more stress and anxiety, which never helps.
My main problem:
My main problem is the commuting and being in the office. I find the work fun and I am regularly praised for being good at it. The work I do is also entirely done in a web browser and could be completed from any location. There is no tangible reason for being in the office to do my day-to-day service. Any physical appointments, such as meetings and any training sessions I need to conduct are scheduled ahead of time.
If I had the option for more flexible working options, such as the autonomy to work from home on days/weeks that I am feeling worse, it would save a lot of my energy resources, improve my wellbeing and quality of life and make me more productive. I am not very productive in the office and only have a good ‘2 hours’ before my performance declines. It also leaves me very limited for the rest of the day. This is before the delayed fatigue and worsening of the symptoms kicks in!
Why I feel I’m being discriminated against:
I have tried to approach them on these issues twice (the first time in my first role, and in the last couple of weeks in my second role) but have met resistance before I have been able to communicate the severity of the situation to them. I am quite concerned because my employer advertises themselves as an inclusive employer. They have their own disability services for customers and staff and have policies on their website for flexible working, which include home working as an option.
My employer has been reluctant and even out-right rejected to properly and fully explore my situation and flexible working options with me. On both occasions of trying to sort out this issue, Occupational Health and HR have presented inappropriate 'set solutions’ for me without exploring my individual situation.
I feel it is important to note that if my employer had explored the option of home-working with me and presented a very good and provable business reason for why this wasn’t possible, I would completely understand. I would be very happy to try different, appropriate and reasonable options that we discovered in the discovery process. The problem is they didn’t explore my situation and their set solutions were not suitable.
First time, toward the end of last year:
In my first role, I had hit so many sickness ‘triggers’ as defined by their sickness policy, and was asked to see Occupational Health (OH) to discuss any ‘reasonable adjustments’ that could be made.
I came to the OH meeting with a lot of information about CFS (information regarding my symptoms and the action for ME guide “An employer’s guide to ME”), my complete medical history and hospital diagnosis. I also brought in a list of solutions based on my experience with working the job and living with CFS:
· Fixed shift pattern and hours. My pattern at the time was irregular at the time and a fixed shift pattern could have allowed me something to get ‘used’ to and manage down time around.
· Working from home when possible because, although this role did involve more face to face contact, a big part of the job was working on our remote service desk, which I could do from home.
· Being held accountable in a different way from the sickness absence policy, which works well for catching out people ‘abusing’ being off sick but puts me at a disadvantage and penalises me for having a disability.
In the meeting the OH advisor was reluctant to explore any of the material I presented and didn’t directly ask me about my disability or what my day-to-day life is like at work with my disability. When offered, they were not interested in reviewing my diagnosis or medical history. They refused to medically explore the flexible working option of working from home because “the institution would not like it”. Despite my insistence, they were not willing to put flexible working options in the report and said that the idea of home working “had been through the unions” and it was generally frowned upon. They also were not willing to explore how the sickness absence policy could put me at a disadvantage. They then went on to assert that the “fact” that if the business was smaller they could “treat staff more fairly” but managing the fair employment of 5000 people is a lot harder and “broad strokes must be made”.
The perceived resolution to this incident was that I got fixed shift pattern/hours. However, this isn’t true because it was a coincidence that I was moving to a new location within the institution that needed me to have a more fixed timetable when working in that location.
I made a complaint to HR about my experience and the result, but the HR officer was quite defensive and said they were confident occupational health had explored all appropriate reasonable adjustments.
I personally think the institution could have made a compelling business reason as to why certain flexible working options, such as home working, would be unsuitable in this job role. But the fact they weren’t willing to explore all my options in the first place, regardless of my situation or even my job role, put me at an unnecessary disadvantage.
Second time:
In my new role, I am working a regular shift pattern in an office and, as I said earlier, my work is done entirely in a web browser with no human contact unless I have scheduled in a meeting. I applied again for flexible working with my new line manager. I applied for the autonomy/option to work from home if my symptoms had grown more problematic and would affect my future performance and physical attendance over a longer period if forced to come in to the office. Upon discussion, I laid out the options and the benefits this could have on the team and my own productivity. He was worried about ‘setting a precedent’ with other members of the team because he didn’t trust some members of staff to work from home. However, he was happy with letting me try and wanted to trial it for 6 months.
On my next shift, I was called to an unexpected meeting with my line manager who had been in touch with the same HR Officer that had been involved with the first incident. The decision to trial it had seemingly been reversed by HR. I wasn’t explicitly told that I couldn’t work from home but it was implicit that the option wasn’t favourable and that the trial wasn’t taking place. Instead, I was told that I should explore some other options instead, which were presented to me. The options were to either start later in the day or do 4 hours shifts over 5 days instead of 5 hour shifts over 4 days, which are both unsuitable and miss the point of my individual situation of living with CFS. Again, my individual situation hasn’t been acknowledged, my options have not been explored properly and I am put at a disadvantage.
I am currently off on sick leave because my symptoms have worsened, which could have been avoided if better flexible working options were in place sooner. The stress of having the trial that I thought would help my situation snatched away suddenly is also not helping.
Worryingly, this has led to some discussion at work as to whether CFS is a disability, despite the fact the Equality act 2010, which they also have a PDF outlining on their own website, uses CFS as an example of disability.
Their concerns as managers were that it could be a ‘health and safety’ risk if I am working from home sick when I should be resting to be well enough to get in to work, which again misses the point about having a fluctuating disability, which the Equality Act clearly defines. It’s boggling to see how little is understood about the condition and disability.
EDIT: I feel it is important to add in that my manager suggested what I do outside my job could be held against me because 'it is impacting my job role', although I do little but day-to-day tasks on account of not having much energy from working. Should this even relevant to them?
In conclusion
I feel there is a lot of communication that needs to be had with the institution. Whether it is suitable I can work from home or not, there is some clear bias and lack of understanding within the institution that prevents them from making a clear assessment as to whether a potential solution is reasonable or not.
Has anyone had any similar issues?? I’m not sure what my next steps are. I’m worried about losing my job and annoying people. I feel as if I have done something wrong by merely suggesting the idea of flexible working. Is there anything I could be doing better to communicate my situation??
Thanks so much for taking the time to read through this.
Kindest Regards,
Mark
Last edited:
.