disability

[stupidboy]

can someome please outline exactly what your basic rights are if you have a disability under the equalities act.
my DOM is adamant that he doesn't have to create a duty for me and basically if theres no duty in the office that i can do then its ill health retirement.
i'm currently awaiting an ATOS assessment. royal mail are ignoring my last ATOS report which stated what i can and cannot do and are also ignoring my doctors fit to work note.
i know they are desperate to get me out but i must have some rights,i'm being penalised for having something wrong with me

[TrueBlueTerrier]

This page is aimed at Managers/Businesses but should help

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advi ... -apply-to/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In particular, the need to make adjustments for an individual worker:

must not be a reason not to promote a worker if they are the best person for the job with the adjustments in place
must not be a reason to dismiss a worker
must be considered in relation to every aspect of a workers job
provided the adjustments are reasonable for you to make.

can someome please outline exactly what your basic rights are if you have a disability under the equalities act.
my DOM is adamant that he doesn't have to create a duty for me and basically if theres no duty in the office that i can do then its ill health retirement.
i'm currently awaiting an ATOS assessment. royal mail are ignoring my last ATOS report which stated what i can and cannot do and are also ignoring my doctors fit to work note.
i know they are desperate to get me out but i must have some rights,i'm being penalised for having something wrong with me

As I see it, he does not have to create a duty for you, but to follow the law he has to make REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS where possible. A reasonable adjustment may be to reduce the length of the delivery, or increase the time allotted for it. It might be reasonable to increase the indoor element. The adjustment depends on the disability, for instance if someone has been diagnosed with a condition that means they need regular and frequent visits to the toilet, it may be reasonable to keep the duty pattern the same but adjust the walk so that they are never further away than 10 minutes from an official toilet stop.

However, it might be seen as unreasonable to move someone from an indoor duty to make way for you, if you don't have the experience of qualifications needed for it. It may also be unreasonable to swap duties with someone if they are on family friendly duties.

As with everything its the context that matters, as well as what limits, if any, that your disability imposes on your working life.

I have found another link that may help as well :

Employment Rights under the Equality Act 2010: A Brief Guide for Disabled People http://www.dls.org.uk/advice/factsheet/ ... %20Act.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[fishtank]

http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... qualit.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are two cases about to go to Tribunal in Bolton.

Both these cases are going to ETs because the CWU advised the members that management were discriminating against disabled employees by not making reasonable adjustments. The emphasis was on discrimination, some reasonable adjustments have been made.

Once the Branch was aware of the problems, the Area Rep was involved with the appeals and a 2 tribunal panellists have looked at the cases following requests from the Branch to Tony Rupa Legal Services Officer CWU.

As the tribunal cases are ongoing I cannot go into more detail, suffice to say I have spoken to the local rep today and will be looking into the matter further.
Ted Stead
Branch Secretary North West No1 & DAC Member

[General Mannerheim]

http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... qualit.pdf

There are two cases about to go to Tribunal in Bolton.

Both these cases are going to ETs because the CWU advised the members that management were discriminating against disabled employees by not making reasonable adjustments. The emphasis was on discrimination, some reasonable adjustments have been made.

Once the Branch was aware of the problems, the Area Rep was involved with the appeals and a 2 tribunal panellists have looked at the cases following requests from the Branch to Tony Rupa Legal Services Officer CWU.

As the tribunal cases are ongoing I cannot go into more detail, suffice to say I have spoken to the local rep today and will be looking into the matter further.
Ted Stead
Branch Secretary North West No1 & DAC Member

All hail the two tribunal panelists!

[liamlayor]

http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... qualit.pdf

There are two cases about to go to Tribunal in Bolton.

Both these cases are going to ETs because the CWU advised the members that management were discriminating against disabled employees by not making reasonable adjustments. The emphasis was on discrimination, some reasonable adjustments have been made.

Once the Branch was aware of the problems, the Area Rep was involved with the appeals and a 2 tribunal panellists have looked at the cases following requests from the Branch to Tony Rupa Legal Services Officer CWU.

As the tribunal cases are ongoing I cannot go into more detail, suffice to say I have spoken to the local rep today and will be looking into the matter further.
Ted Stead
Branch Secretary North West No1 & DAC Member

Does this mean the Union are ACTUALLY ACTING on these people's behalf this time or have they just turned up with the usual, "I know all Weightman's solicitors and think I could get you £500 if you settle now!"
How many of these sorts of cases actually end up being represented all the way to the Tribunal by the Union? Or does Ted Stead just like to jump on the bandwagon at a later stage when the person is left with no alternative but to settle out of court or to go it alone? Come on, Ted, let's hear exactly what the Union are doing for these people? My guess is - SOD ALL!

[Jayfin]

Totally agree with u
Liam . My case is going to et ,and yes I've got a strong case against rm for procedure failures .duty of care ,phantom stage 3 issued when according to hr i
Wasnt on a stage .you've guessed right no backing from the union ,Ive had no help from my union rep or area rep .except for the guys on this forum . So yes I think the solicitors r turning a blind eye and only taken on cases that the public might hear about .