Feedback on reasonable adjustments wanted

We want to hear your feedback on BT’s ‘Reasonable Adjustments’ process.

Real-life examples are being sought of good, bad and indifferent experiences of BT’s ‘Reasonable Adjustments Process’ to inform the union’s position in discussions on a joint review of the procedure that is just getting underway.

Intended to ensure that those with special needs under the Equalities Act are provided with the practical help they need to remain fulfillingly and productively employed, for many years the CWU has been highlighting individual instances where the process has fallen short, with examples sparking heated debate on a perennial basis at CWU Annual Conference.

With the CWU’s Personnel Team now poised to enter highly welcome talks with management that provide a golden opportunity to improve how the Reasonable Adjustments Process works in practice, the union is appealing for feedback from those with direct experience of the procedure at the sharp end – however satisfactory or unsatisfactory the outcome was for them.

CWU national officer for BT personnel issues, Dave Jukes explains: “Given we want this review to be the most thorough possible re-assessment of not just the areas of the Reasonable Adjustment Process that need improving, but also those that are working well, real-life case studies involving positive and negative experience of members will be hugely helpful.

“As such, we’d welcome any feedback whatsoever from members who’ve either been subject to the Adjusted Job Searchinvolving reasonable adjustments – or their experience of reasonable adjustments that have been sought to help them stay within their current role.

“We’re not entering this review with any hard-and-fast preconceptions – simply with a view to making the Reasonable Adjustment Process as rigorous, fair and consistent as it can possibly be.”

In particular the Personnel team is looking for:

  • Good news stories from colleagues who’ve been in receipt of any form of ‘Reasonable Adjustment: “It would be very useful to understand what their adjustment was, what made the experience a positive one, where they worked at that time, and whether we would be able to make contact with them if we require any further information,” stresses Dave.
  • The not so good experience from colleagues where the Reasonable Adjustment Process did not live up to expectation: “Again it would be helpful to understand what their adjustment was, what made the experience a poor one and where they worked at that time,” Dave continues. “Above everything, we’d like to hear such individuals’ views on what could have made the experience better for them at that time, and whether anything was done to mitigate the poor experience.”

Dave concludes: “The wider the feedback of good and bad experiences we amass from both current and past colleagues across the whole range of pay scales, the stronger position we will be in to press for a Reasonable Adjustment Processthat consistently works for those who need it.”

Any individuals wishing to present their experiences should first view the union’s Health & Safety Branch Bulletin number No. 169.2021 and send their answers to the questions posed to