The rise of remote working, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, has transformed workplace expectations and obligations, and the recent case of Pryce v. Accountant in Bankruptcy (Scottish Government) offers some insights for employers handling flexible work requests involving remote working.

This Employment Tribunal (ET) judgment, involving John-Paul Pryce, an administrative officer with the Scottish Government’s Debt Arrangement Scheme, sheds light on how tribunals evaluate disability-related requests for remote work, particularly when linked to mental health issues.

Pryce’s severe social anxiety and mysophobia (fear of germs), which developed during the COVID-19 pandemic, made him extremely anxious about in-person interactions.  After successfully working from home for an extended period, Pryce requested to continue working remotely indefinitely.

The Scottish Government refused his request, leading Pryce to file a claim for disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal found in Pryce’s favour, offering useful guidance for employers dealing with similar flexible working requests.

Key Takeaways from Pryce v. Scottish Government

The tribunal's decision provides important lessons for employers regarding their obligations under the Equality Act 2010, particularly concerning disability discrimination and the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

1. Recognition of Disability 

The tribunal confirmed that Pryce’s anxiety and mysophobia were disabilities under the Equality Act 2010. These conditions significantly impacted his daily activities, especially his ability to interact comfortably in a traditional office setting.  This ruling emphasises the importance for employers to recognise mental health conditions as legitimate disabilities, even if the employee appears able to perform their duties while working remotely.

2. Reasonable Adjustments: Remote Working

A key point in this case was whether allowing Pryce to continue working remotely could be considered a reasonable adjustment.  The tribunal found that remote working was reasonable for Mr Pryce, given the success of the existing arrangement.  Employers should note that while remote working may not suit every role, it can be a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act when it specifically addresses an employee's disability-related disadvantages.

The ET stressed that where remote work has been effective, especially over an extended period, employers must seriously consider continuing this arrangement.  In Pryce's case, his successful performance while working remotely negated the argument that in-person presence was essential. 

3. Assessing the Reasonableness of Adjustments 

Determining whether an adjustment is reasonable involves balancing the needs of the employee against the operational requirements of the organisation.  In Pryce, the tribunal emphasised the importance of understanding the employee's individual circumstances, including the nature of their disability and the impact of in-person work on their health.  The ET criticised the Scottish Government for failing to properly consider Pryce’s health needs.

Employers should approach requests for reasonable adjustments with an open mind, recognising that what may initially seem impractical could be feasible.  Remote working can often be facilitated through the use of technology or restructured workflows that meet both the employee’s and organisation’s needs.

4. Procedural Fairness in Handling Requests 

The ET also criticised the Scottish Government for its handling of Pryce’s request, noting their insufficient consideration of his health needs and the lack of an individualised assessment. 

This case underlines the importance of employers carefully reviewing each flexible working request based on the employee's role, circumstances, and medical needs. Engaging in an open, case-by-case assessment is essential to ensure a fair and legally compliant decision-making process.

Employers should engage in meaningful dialogue with employees, seek medical evidence where appropriate, and explore alternatives if the proposed adjustment is not feasible.  Simply rejecting a request without considering the full context or possible alternatives may lead to findings of discrimination and a failure to meet the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

The Test for Reasonable Adjustments: Key Criteria

Under the Equality Act 2010, the duty to make reasonable adjustments arises when:

1. Substantial Disadvantage:  The employee must be at a substantial disadvantage compared to others who are not disabled.  This disadvantage could relate to accessing the workplace, performing tasks, or being subject to workplace policies or practices.  The test is whether the disadvantage is more than minor or trivial.

2. Knowledge of Disability:  The employer must know, or could reasonably be expected to know, that the employee has a disability.  An employer cannot be expected to make adjustments for a disability of which they are unaware.

3. Reasonableness of the Adjustment: The adjustment must be reasonable in the circumstances.  Factors influencing reasonableness include the practicality of the adjustment, cost, the extent to which it alleviates or minimises the disadvantage, and its impact on business operations.

The tribunal in Pryce applied these tests and found that Pryce was at a substantial disadvantage due to his severe anxiety and mysophobia. The Scottish Government knew of his condition, and allowing remote work was deemed a reasonable adjustment given the success of prior remote arrangements and minimal disruption to the organisation’s operations.

Remote Working – The future

This case is part of a broader trend towards increased workplace flexibility.  The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of remote working, which remains popular today.

The new Labour government has recognised the importance of flexible working and proposes to make flexible working the default. Under new proposals, employers will need to demonstrate a strong business reason to refuse flexible working requests, which includes remote work. These changes are expected to bolster employee rights and promote a healthier work-life balance.

Conclusion: The Importance of Reasonable Adjustments in Remote Working Contexts

The Pryce decision provides valuable guidance on handling remote working requests, particularly in the context of disability-related adjustments.

As flexible working becomes increasingly established, employers must:

• Take disability-related remote working requests seriously
• Evaluate each case on its individual merits
• Maintain comprehensive documentation
• Engage in meaningful dialogue with employees
• Stay informed about legislative developments

 

This approach will help reduce litigation risks while promoting inclusive workplace practices that benefit both employees and organisations.

For further information and professional advice tailored to your specific circumstances, feel free to contact our team at Hempsons. Our expertise in employment law can help you navigate the complexities of employment law.

Andrew Davidson
Partner and National Head of Employment
Hempsons
Email: a.davidson@hempsons.co.uk
Phone: 01423 724129
Mobile: 07740 828 724
Twitter: @andrew_davidson

For more detailed insights, visit us at www.hempsons.co.uk.