Workplace Accommodation Guidelines

I am starting to hear it daily from candidates we are trying to help. Candidates, especially those with disabilities, are becoming disillusioned. See, the thing is, it is ridiculously short-sighted. I know what companies are thinking at the moment: there are a lot of candidates out of work, big numbers. We have the pick of masses. Just because you have a big number to pick from doesn't mean you can afford to drop your standards and think you can have a slap-dash recruitment process. It will come back to bite you. Do you know why? It's because the tides will turn again. It always does in recruitment. At some point, there will not be as many candidates to hire, and it's these times that people will remember. Candidates talk, and news travels fast. They remember the bad experience way more than the good experience. For candidates with disabilities, these experiences can be even more impactful. An inclusive and accessible recruitment process is not just about fairness; it's about respect and common courtesy. Here are some steps to make the process more inclusive: 1. Accessible Job Descriptions: Ensure job descriptions are available in accessible formats, including screen reader-compatible text and large print versions. 2. Inclusive Communication: Use clear, simple language and provide multiple ways for candidates to reach out or ask questions. 3. Flexible Interview Formats: Offer alternatives such as virtual interviews, written responses, or extended time for assessments. 4. Physical Accessibility: Ensure interview locations are accessible, including ramps, elevators, and accessible restrooms. 5. Assistive Technologies: Provide necessary assistive technologies for candidates during interviews and assessments. 6. Training for Hiring Teams: Educate hiring teams on disability awareness and inclusive practices. 7. Feedback Mechanism: Establish a feedback mechanism where candidates can share their experiences and suggest improvements. So let’s clean up our act and start putting candidate experience first. Prioritizing accessibility and inclusivity can lead to a richer, more diverse workforce and a stronger organizational reputation. A respectful, inclusive process is common courtesy. Cheers ID: "A social media post by Puneet Singh Singhal with the handle @puneetsiinghal. The post reads, 'Excluding talent due to inaccessible hiring practices is short-sighted and costly. #DisabilityPrideMonth'" #DisabilityPrideMonth #SDGs #AXSChat #Accessibility #Equity #Hiring #HR #Leadership #WeAreBillionStrong

Here’s the thing about reasonable accommodations: The law frames them as “reasonable.” The process calls them “interactive.” But depending on whether management engages in good faith, they can either be empowering… or soul-crushing. For many disabled professionals, the first physical reaction is anxiety. Every ping in the inbox brings the dread of having to re-prove what has already been proven. The process can feel less like collaboration and more like erosion, slowly wearing people down. Whether leadership engages in good faith makes all the difference. And here’s the painful truth: nothing changes about an employee’s ability to do their job. They’re still the stellar hire management believed in, still delivering results. The only shift is that they ask for support to keep doing the job well, and suddenly the ground moves beneath them. Trust erodes, and that’s gut-wrenching. Disabled employees know this feeling: the endless re-justification, the sense of being undervalued, the quiet fear of not being believed. And managers? Believe your employees when they ask for an accommodation. Make it easy. They’re not asking for special treatment, they’re asking for what they need to keep doing the job you already knew they could do. Extra scrutiny doesn’t help anyone. It breaks trust, fuels turnover, and makes good employees want to leave. Work with your people, not against them. That’s how accessibility works. #ReasonableAccommodation, #Disabled #DisabilityAtWork #InteractiveProcess #NothingABoutUsWithoutUs #WorkplacePolicy

Accessibility culture isn’t just about what organizations say or do. It’s about what organizations allow to happen, what they excuse, and what they stay silent about. Accessibility culture isn’t built through statements or slogans. It’s built through hundreds of daily choices made by staff members at your organization, especially the uncomfortable ones. The things your organization tolerates define your organization’s true stance on inclusion. Your organization's culture is revealed in what it permits, not the public image it promotes. If your organization allows inaccessible products to ship because “we don’t have time to fix it,” that’s your organization's accessibility culture. If your organization contracts with third-party vendors and then fails to hold them accountable for meeting stated accessibility requirements because “it’s too expensive,” that’s your organization's accessibility culture. If your organization's accommodations process deliberately overwhelms employees, hoping they will drop out or not bother making the request, that is also part of your organization's accessibility culture. If your organization's leaders stay silent when staff dismiss accessibility concerns, that’s also a big part of your organization's accessibility culture. All of these actions (and inactions) can result in litigation. These issues may be invisible within the organization, but believe me when I say they are most definitely visible to disabled employees, regulators, and courts. Before your organization ignores yet another opportunity to improve its accessibility culture, leaders should be asking themselves, are we prepared for the consequences? #Culture #Accessibility #Disability #Consequences

What happens when an employer ignores the definition of "disability" under the ADA? A lawsuit—and a lesson in what not to do. A recent 6th Circuit decision highlights how important it is to get the definition right—and why denying a reasonable accommodation like a job transfer can land you in legal trouble. In Simon v. University Hospitals, the plaintiff requested a transfer to another location after experiencing heightened PTSD, anxiety, and depression following a miscarriage. Her impairments weren't just workplace-related; they impacted her ability to sleep, think, concentrate, and interact with others—key "major life activities" under the ADA. The employer denied her request, citing a blanket policy against transfers, and terminated her for not returning to work. The district court sided with the employer, saying she wasn't "disabled" because her condition didn't substantially limit her ability to work. But the 6th Circuit reversed. Why? Because the ADA doesn't just look at "working" when defining a disability. It's about whether an impairment substantially limits any major life activity. And here, the plaintiff presented plenty of evidence of how her condition affected her daily life beyond work. Equally important: the employer's refusal to even consider a transfer as a reasonable accommodation. The ADA requires employers to explore reasonable ways to help employees perform their jobs—including transferring to an open position when the circumstances call for it. Blanket policies that preclude this are, simply put, illegal. Employers, if you're not considering the full scope of an employee's condition and how it impacts their life, you're missing the point of the ADA. And denying a reasonable accommodation like a transfer without even considering it? That's a fast track to litigation.

Recently, I ran a poll asking employers how confident they are that their interview processes support all accommodation needs. Thank you to everyone who participated. The numbers say a lot. Most organizations unintentionally create barriers for candidates with disabilities. In my poll, 81% of respondents weren't confident their process fully supports accommodations. Only 19% believe they do. But it’s rarely about bad intentions from the hiring team. The barriers come from the system, not from people. Processes have gaps, interviewers often lack training, and technology isn’t always ready. Reports, like the one by the European Disability Forum funded by Google, confirm this: Only 1 in 4 employers has developed accessible recruitment processes. 81% of employers have no policy for acquiring assistive technology. One of the stories I’ve heard is about Andrea Dalzell MSN-ED, RN, a nurse and disability advocate. She shared on the Changing Minds & Changing Lives Podcast how she went through 76 interviews just to land a clinical placement during the height of Covid-19 - and how subtle bias still shaped the process, even though no one was openly discriminatory. If you want to listen to the full podcast, the link is in the comments. But fixing it doesn’t have to be complicated. A few practical steps can make a real difference (Harvard Business Review & Disability Solutions): 📍 Call out bias where it exists. Focus on what candidates can do, not assumptions about their abilities. 📍 Make accommodations clear and easy. Mention them early and let job seekers know that requesting them is expected and encouraged. 📍 Offer accommodations early. Make it part of your standard communication before interviews even happen. 📍 Train interviewers. Not just on the law, but on perception, tone, and empathy. 📍 Audit your tech. Ensure your hiring tools and AI systems don’t reinforce bias. 📍 Humanize the process. Include real‑life stories like Andrea Dalzell’s in your DEI training to connect the policy to the person. Organizations that prioritize inclusion are 2x more likely to meet or exceed financial targets (McKinsey & Company). Accessible workplaces also reduce turnover - employees with disabilities are more likely to stay when supported. The gap between how hiring should work and how it actually works is wide, but I see it’s narrowing. Employers are starting to see the direction to move in. This is good news for candidates and a smart strategy for businesses tapping into a market of talented job seekers that is too often overlooked. What's your opinion on this? #AccessibleHiring #DisabilityInclusion #InclusiveWorkplace #DiversityAndInclusion

She asked for help. She documented the harm. Days later, she was gone. Dr. Antoinette “Bonnie” Candia-Bailey — Lincoln University of Missouri Vice President, proud HBCU alumna, and Alpha Kappa Alpha sister — died by suicide at 49 after months of documented workplace bullying, harassment, and distress that went unaddressed. She reported it to HR. She appealed to the Board. She requested mental health accommodations. Her final words: “You intentionally harassed and bullied me… You’ve caused enough harm and mental damage.” Those are not abstract words. They are the words of someone who felt unheard. A Life Spent Studying the Barriers She Later Faced. Long before her death, Dr. Bailey dedicated years to research on the very forces that constrained her own career. Her doctoral dissertation, My Sister, Myself: The Identification of Sociocultural Factors That Affect the Advancement of African-American Women into Senior-Level Administrative Positions examined the structural and sociocultural barriers Black women encounter in leadership roles. Read and download it here: https://lnkd.in/e5fcU7pN She studied the pressures. She documented the obstacles. And she lived them. This Is What Retaliation Looks Like. Workplace retaliation does not always look like a firing or a lawsuit. Sometimes it looks like: • Isolation • Undermining credibility • Ignoring reports of harm • Denying reasonable accommodations • Dismissing concerns as personality issues And when those tactics go unchecked, the consequences can be devastating — especially for Black women who are already navigating racial and gendered bias at work. The BE HEARD Act (S.3865 / H.R.7583) would end forced arbitration, limit silencing NDAs, and strengthen anti-retaliation protections. The Protections and Transparency in the Workplace Act would increase transparency and oversight of workplace misconduct claims. These reforms aim to ensure reports of harm cannot be quietly dismissed. These safeguards ensure voices are heard before it’s too late. TAKE ACTION TODAY In 2024, Dr. Antoinette “Bonnie” Candia-Bailey died after documenting workplace bullying and asking for help. Call or email your U.S. Reps and Senators today. 📞 (202) 224-3121 🔗 congress.gov/members Say or write: “I’m a Black woman professional calling about the 2024 death of Dr. Antoinette Candia-Bailey. Her case shows what happens when workplace reports are ignored. Please support the BE HEARD Act and the Protections and Transparency in the Workplace Act. We need stronger anti-retaliation protections and independent investigations.” No professional — let alone a Black woman leader with decades of experience — should be pushed to a point where the only way out of harm is through tragedy. Dr. Candia-Bailey’s voice cannot speak for itself anymore. But ours can. Rest in power, Dr. Bonnie. We will finish what you started. #JusticeForBonnie #BEHEARDAct #BlackWomenInAcademia #WorkplaceBullying #EndRetaliation

Jamie Dimon’s recent town hall comments about JPMorgan Chase’s RTO policy are a textbook example of Executive Debt—the organizational drag created by rigid leadership decisions that fail to account for long-term consequences. In the leaked audio, Dimon dismissed flexibility outright: “There is no chance that I will leave it up to managers… Zero chance. The abuse that took place is extraordinary.” This signals a leadership approach rooted in control rather than adaptability. Instead of trusting managers to balance productivity and flexibility, the decision imposes a one-size-fits-all mandate, creating cultural and talent retention liabilities. Compounding this issue is JPMorgan’s dismissal of an employee petition advocating for flexible work. When employees organize and formally request change—only to be ignored—it sends a clear message: “Your opinions don’t matter.” In Executive Debt, I discuss how dismissing employee concerns erodes engagement: “When employees feel unheard, they disengage. When they feel powerless, they stop taking ownership. And when they feel disrespected, they leave.” Dimon can now expect: 🔹 Erosion of Loyalty – Employees no longer feel a mutual commitment with the company. 🔹 Loss of Motivation – Productivity shifts to meeting minimum expectations rather than striving for excellence. 🔹 Cultural Decay – Ignored employees become resentful, cynical, and disengaged, impacting long-term performance. By enforcing in-office attendance and dismissing employee concerns, Mr. Dimon is making a withdrawal against trust that will demand repayment—through higher attrition, lower engagement, and a weakened employer brand. Executive Debt isn’t just about financial missteps—it’s about how leadership decisions today impact an organization’s resilience tomorrow. Chase risks a quiet exodus of top talent, proving that rigid policies rarely age well. Executives should ask: Are we enforcing control or fostering alignment? Managing for productivity today or retention tomorrow? Short-sighted policies create long-term debt. And if leaders aren’t careful, they’ll realize too late that the real cost wasn’t in office attendance—it was in the talent they drove away. #executivedebt #leadership

Forcing people back into the office doesn’t improve performance. It exposes control. She was hired fully remote. That wasn’t a perk. That was the job description. She crushed it. Great results. Consistently praised. Working from home made her better at her job. Less noise. No commute. Just like for so many people. Then leadership rolled out a new policy. Mandatory office attendance. Effective immediately. No exceptions. She requested accommodation. The company rejected it, citing “business needs.” Two weeks later, her performance was “under review.” For the first time in five years. A few weeks later, she was terminated. Because the work-from-home job she accepted was rewritten to justify empty office space. Not because productivity dropped. Here’s what I see as an employment attorney: This is a pattern. Blanket RTO policies roll out. Employees can’t comply for protected reasons. Accommodation requests follow. Performance concerns appear. Parents who built childcare around remote work. Disabled workers who finally had access. If you’re in this situation: Save your job posting and offer letter. Preserve performance feedback from before the policy change. Get new expectations in writing. Track timing carefully. Also, remember: If working from home connects to a medical condition or disability, you can request it as a reasonable accommodation. Have you seen this pattern where you work? #EmploymentLaw #RemoteWork #WorkplaceRights Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Employment rights vary by jurisdiction and circumstances. Reading this post does not create an attorney-client relationship.

⚖️ Ignore Disability Accommodation at Your Peril ⚠️ Labour Court steps in to protect employee's wellbeing 🔹 An employee diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and major depression submitted expert medical reports recommending reasonable workplace accommodation. 🔹 The employer failed to meaningfully implement these recommendations and instead pushed for further medical testing and performance management. 🔹 Medical experts warned that continued inaction posed a serious risk to the employee’s mental health. 🔹 The Labour Court confirmed it can grant urgent interim relief where there is a real risk of serious harm, even before CCMA processes are finalised. 🔹 The Court ruled that employer-initiated medical testing is intrusive and unlawful unless properly justified under the Employment Equity Act. 🔹 Performance management before reasonable accommodation = unfair. Employers must first create a lawful, supportive work framework. 🔹 Recordings of workplace meetings made by an employee were held to be admissible. 🔹 The employer was ordered to implement interim accommodation, stop medical testing, halt performance management, and cease disability-linked harassment. 📌 Employer takeaway: Reasonable accommodation is not optional. Delay, deflection or pressure tactics can trigger urgent court intervention.

I was asked recently in the context of disability, the following question: “Which inclusion steps should be standard in every workplace?” As a lawyer, my starting point is always the legal framework. Many people don’t realise that in employment, there is no anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments (unlike in the context of service providers or schools). The duty at work is individual, it arises when an employer knows, or ought reasonably to know, that an employee is disabled and facing a substantial disadvantage. However, that doesn’t mean employers should be passive or reactive. Far from it. There are several inclusion steps that should be standard across all workplaces, regardless of whether the reasonable adjustments duty has been triggered. 1. A clear and consistent HR process for reasonable adjustments. Employers can (and should) create straightforward processes that make it easy to know how to make reasonable adjustments when that duty is triggered. It helps employers and employees. Tools like the #TalemTemplate help organisations assess and implement adjustments in a structured, legally-sound way. 2. Proper training for managers and HR. Awareness days and training of certain conditions are helpful, but legal understanding is essential. Managers need to understand the legal framework - not just concepts like harassment, victimisation and making reasonable adjustments but also how to avoid inadvertently discriminatory practices such as discrimination arising from disability or indirect discrimination. That is where robust training, beyond surface-level “awareness” really matters and can be of assistance if matters escalate into tribunal proceedings. 3. Well-drafted policies. Many organisations will have equal opportunity policies (some are better than others) but few have a clear reasonable adjustments policy. In my view, this is one policy that I regard as really important, particularly if supported by regular wider staff learning as it helps build a culture where employees know how to access support and trust the process from the outset. Employers may not have an anticipatory reasonable adjustments duty, but they do have the opportunity to build environments where inclusion is embedded through proactive processes, informed people, and clear policies. #LinkedInNewsEurope #IDPD #LinkedInNews #Disability #TalemToolkit #TalemTraining #TalemLearning #Inclusion #Workplace Sean Kennedy Talem Law