Employers are not obliged to make reasonable adjustments for non-disabled employees "associated" with disabled people
In the case of Hainsworth v The Ministry of Defence [2014], Ms Hainsworth, an employee of the MoD, argued that the they should have transferred her from her teaching role, based in Germany, to the UK to help her meet her disabled daughter’s needs.
Read literally, the Equality Act 2010 does not require an employer to make reasonable adjustments for a non-disabled job applicant or employee, regardless of whether they are “associated” with a disabled person. Ms Hainsworth argued that Article 5 of the Equal Treatment Framework Directive (pursuant to which the disability discrimination provisions of UK law were enacted) applied so that appropriate measures were required to be taken by the MoD by way of reasonable adjustments for an employee “associated” with a disabled person and that the Equality Act must be interpreted as giving effect to the Directive in this regard.
Ms Hainsworth’s daughter, Charlotte, had Down's syndrome. The MoD provided facilities to educate children of employees who worked outside the UK, but these were not designed for children with "significant needs". It followed that Charlotte could not be schooled in the garrison where Ms Hainsworth worked.
The tribunal rejected Ms Hainsworth's claim. It held that the Equality Act only requires an employer to make reasonable adjustments for an employee or job applicant who is disabled. It does not oblige employers to make adjustments for a non-disabled employee who is in some way associated with a disabled person.
On appeal, the EAT upheld the tribunal's decision, concluding that Ms Hainsworth's case was "unarguable".
Ms Hainsworth appealed to the Court of Appeal and was supported in her appeal by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
In support of her argument, Ms Hainsworth drew an analogy with the European Court of Justice's decision in Coleman v Attridge Law [2008] that the Directive requires protection against associative discrimination in respect of direct disability discrimination and harassment.
The Court of Appeal held that the wording of the Equality Act and Article 5 of the Equal Treatment Framework Directive only applies to reasonable adjustments for the assistance of disabled employees or prospective employees, and any attempt to stretch this to cover a disabled person associated with an employee was “doomed to failure”.
Comment
This robust decision by the Court of Appeal makes it clear that employer liability in relation to the duty to make reasonable adjustments is limited to employees and prospective employees only. An employee struggling to cope at work because of a disabled dependent will have to look to flexible working and/or emergency leave rather than expecting an employer to adjust their working practices by way of any obligation to make reasonable adjustments.