Skip to Content Accessibility
Login Register
Change text size:

Choose Style:

Some style changes refresh this page, so please choose your preferred style before filling in a form.

More Than Reasonable: Why employers need to redesign how adjustments work

  • Home
  • Blog
  • More Than Reasonable: Why employers need to redesign how adjustments work
Women with red hair works on a monitor at a desk.

More Than Reasonable: Why employers need to redesign how adjustments work

By Rachael Mole, Founder, Moleworks Solutions

In the latest article in our Patchwork Hub Employer Support series, Rachael Mole - Founder of Moleworks Solutions and Patchwork Hub Non-Executive Director - outlines her new white paper, bringing together the evidence, analysis and employer practice on reasonable adjustments to distill key lessons for employers moving forward.

Across the UK, reasonable adjustments are widely understood in principle. They have been embedded in equality law for over 25 years and are regularly referenced in employer policies, guidance, and accreditation schemes. Yet for many Disabled people, access to adjustments remains unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.

This is not a marginal issue. It is a systemic one.

More Than Reasonable, a new white paper by Moleworks Solutions, brings together evidence, policy analysis, and employer practice to examine why the current system continues to fall short, despite strong legal foundations and widespread awareness. The findings show that the problem is not whether employers care about inclusion, but how adjustments are designed, governed, and delivered inside organisations.

The gap between legal duty and workplace reality

The Equality Act 2010 establishes a clear duty on employers to make reasonable adjustments where Disabled people are placed at a substantial disadvantage. In theory, this creates a strong framework for inclusion. In practice, outcomes vary widely depending on role, manager, organisation, and sector.

My research found that far too often, adjustments are treated as discretionary responses to individual needs rather than as a predictable part of how work operates. Decisions are made informally, timelines are unclear, and learning is rarely captured or shared to improve things for those who come later. The result is a system where access depends on confidence, persistence, and individual advocacy.

This inconsistency is not benign. It actively shapes who feels able to stay in work, progress, or disclose support needs at all.

Good intentions are not enough

Many employers point to commitment, values, or intent when discussing disability inclusion. And this is positive - it suggests a foundation of good intentions to build from. However, while intent matters, More Than Reasonable shows that intent without structure produces uneven and inconsistent outcomes.

Where processes are unclear, responsibility shifts from organisations to the disabled people within them. They are left to navigate fragmented systems, repeatedly explain their needs, and absorb the consequences of delay. At the same time, managers are expected to make judgement calls without adequate guidance, while HR teams inherit risk without reliable data or standards. Everyone is impacted.

In this context, inconsistency is not an accident. It is a predictable outcome of systems that rely on discretion rather than design.

Policy schemes cannot replace employer responsibility

Government schemes and employer-led initiatives are often positioned as solutions to these challenges. Access to Work, Disability Confident, and workplace adjustment passports all have a role to play. At their best, they can enable good practice and remove barriers that would otherwise prevent adjustments being implemented.

However, the white paper is explicit that these mechanisms cannot compensate for weak internal systems.

Access to Work is vital, but is overstretched and slow. Disability Confident signals intent, but lacks robust accountability around converting that intent into tangible actions and improvements. Adjustment passports can be effective, but only when embedded within organisations that already understand and own their responsibilities.

When employers treat these schemes as substitutes for internal capability, rather than as complements to it, the burden is displaced rather than reduced - simply transferred back onto the disabled individuals who require adjustments and those trying to support them. 

Adjustments as workplace infrastructure

A central argument of More Than Reasonable is that reasonable adjustments must be treated as workplace infrastructure. That means designing them into policies, processes, data, and decision-making, rather than responding to them case by case.

This requires a shift in how employers frame the issue. Instead of asking whether a particular adjustment is reasonable for a particular individual, organisations need to ask how their systems are creating disadvantage in the first place.

Infrastructure thinking moves the focus away from exception and towards predictability. It creates clarity about routes, timelines, and accountability. It reduces reliance on individual advocacy and enables learning to be embedded across roles and teams. When this process becomes business as usual, it isn’t just the most efficient way to operate from a business side, but also creates predictability and flexibility so people feel heard, supported and able to received individualised support. 

Crucially, it also recognises that adjustments may need to change over time. Support is not a one-off intervention, but part of an ongoing relationship between people, roles, and working environments.

Why this matters now

The timing of this conversation is not incidental. The UK is facing rising economic inactivity linked to ill health, an ageing workforce, and the long-term effects of Covid. At the same time, work is being reshaped by digital systems and AI-driven tools that increasingly influence recruitment, performance management, and job design.

These developments create both opportunity and risk. Where we end up will depend on us actively mitigating the risks and engaging fully with the opportunities. Technology can reduce friction and enable anticipatory support. And it can embed exclusion at scale if accessibility and governance are not considered from the outset.

Employers therefore face a strategic choice. Continue to manage adjustments as reactive fixes, or redesign systems so access is predictable, timely, and fair. Now is the perfect time to make that shift and ensure we’re embracing the opportunities that the wider policy and tech environment is giving us.

What the evidence shows

More Than Reasonable is accompanied by four in-depth packs that explore different parts of this system:

Together, they demonstrate that most adjustments are low cost, that delays and refusals are common, and that fear of stigma continues to suppress disclosure. They also show that much of the data needed to improve practice already exists, but is rarely connected or acted upon.

Accountability, not aspiration

One of the clearest messages from the white paper is that progress will not come from new slogans or voluntary commitments alone. It requires clearer standards, better data, and shared accountability.

This does not mean a one-size-fits-all model. It does mean moving beyond reliance on individual champions and informal goodwill. Employers need systems that work regardless of who is managing a team, which role someone is in, or whether a person feels safe to disclose.

Without this shift, reasonable adjustments will continue to function as a lottery rather than a right.

A moment for leadership

Employers are operating within a complex policy environment, under genuine pressure. But complexity does not remove obligation. The Equality Act already sets the floor. 

So what should organisations and their leaders be doing next? Engage with the evidence. Read the white paper. Explore the packs. And work with expert support to examine how adjustments are currently designed and delivered in your organisation - not just in policy, but in practice.

Reasonable adjustments are not an edge case. They are a test of how seriously organisations take equity, sustainability, and the future of work. And they’re an area where doing the right thing makes clear commercial sense.

 

 

Tags

All Tags
4-day week Academy for Disabled Journalists Academy for Disabled SEO Specialists Access2Funding Adaptive fashion All-Party Parliamentary Group for Inclusive Entrepreneurship Aspiring Entrepreneurs with Disability Development Programme Baroness Jane Campbell Beth Kume-Holland Brooke Millhouse Business Disability Forum Careering into Motherhood Company Corner Disability Policy Centre Disability Pride Disabled and Proud podcast Diversity Project Employer Support Series Equality Act 2010 Flex Plus GAIN Gareth Walkom Gem Turner Grant Logan Harvard University Healthy working lives House of Lords Houses of Parliament Incomplete Tetraplegia India Intensive care Isaac Harvey MBE Kennedy Scholarship Lee Ridley Let’s Talk About It LGBT Great LGBTQ+ Limb-pelvic hypoplasia Liz Carr Loeys-Dietz Syndrome London Fashion Week Matt Pierri Metro National Council for the Training of Journalists NCTJ Patchworker Spotlight Primark Puneet Singh Singhal Rachael Mole Small Business Britain Spotlight stories Ssstart St. James’s Place Charitable Foundation Stammer Stuttering TechRound UCL UK Government Unhidden United States Congress University of Leicester Unlearning Ableism Vanessa Castañeda Gill Wheels and Wheelchairs Working Families Group Ability Today Ableism Access to Work ADHD Alternative formats Anxiety Artificial Intelligence (AI) Autism BASE UK BBC Blue Badge British Sign Language (BSL) Celia Chartres-Aris Cerebral palsy Chloe Tear Company Corner series Curb cut effect Cystic Fibrosis Deaf and Hearing Loss Disability Confident Scheme Disability employment gap Disability History Month Disability in film and tv Disability Pay Gap Disability Policy Centre Disability Pride Month Disabled People’s Direct Action Network (DAN) Disabled Students Allowance Dr Mark Esho Early Careers Easy read Employer Spotlight Energy-limiting condition Epilepsy Fashion industry Fibromyalgia Financial services Impact Partner Inclusive Entrepreneur Network Internships Jacqueline Winstanley Lived experience ME/CFS Neurodivergence Neurodiversity Niya Not Your Grandmas Oxford University Parallel Windsor Patchwork Hub Podcasts Power 100 Purple Sock Day Reasonable Adjustments Shaw Trust SJP Sociability Social Cipher Social model of disability Spotlight Series St. James’s Place Then Barbara Met Alan Universal Inclusion Victoria Jenkins Visual impairment