Reasonable Adjustments Just Got Personal: Could Your Managers Be Named in a Tribunal Claim?

For many managers, a reasonable adjustment request is an HR matter that lands on a desk, sits in an inbox and eventually gets answered. A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision and new government research suggest that approach is riskier than ever, for the business and for the individuals making the decisions.

Merriman v 1st Staff: The Individual in the Frame

In Merriman v 1st Staff Ltd and others, the claimant was a tutor placed through an agency to work with a student with special needs. Her disabilities made attending the student's premises difficult, and she asked for adjustments, including moving the tuition online. She brought failure to make reasonable adjustments claims against the agency and four individuals who worked for it.

The employment tribunal let the claim against the agency go ahead but removed the individuals, reasoning that the duty to make reasonable adjustments sits with the employer alone.

The EAT disagreed. It accepted that the duty rests on the employer, but said an organisation can only act through its employees and agents. Where an individual's conduct contributes to a breach for which the employer may be liable, that individual may also be personally liable. The individuals were reinstated as respondents, and the case returns to the tribunal to decide the merits.

That is not a finding that anyone acted unlawfully. It is a decision about who can be named. But the practical message is plain: managers and HR staff who handle reasonable adjustment requests can find themselves personally on the hook and in the Tribunal, which brings added stress, complexity and reputational pressure to any claim.

What the Government Research Says Is Going Wrong

Government research published on 11 September 2026 on the reasonable adjustments process offers useful context. Drawing on expert interviews, survey data and an analysis of 66 tribunal judgments, it found that most disabled employees who ask for adjustments receive some or all of them. But a significant minority struggle, and it identified recurring barriers:

• Knowledge gaps: the most significant barrier. Employers and employees are often unclear about what is "reasonable", and misaligned expectations featured in 68% of the tribunal cases reviewed.

• Unclear processes: many employers have no clear procedure, employees often have to drive the process themselves, and line managers are frequently untrained.

• Delay: mostly at the implementation stage rather than in acknowledging or deciding requests, although the researchers noted the evidence is mixed.

• Fear of consequences: employees fear stigma, while employers fear getting it wrong, legal costs and reputational harm.

• Cost: a commonly cited reason for refusal, yet the research found most adjustments are cost-neutral, and only three of the 66 tribunal cases involved cost disputes.

Putting the Two Together

The research tells us where processes break down: unclear expectations, untrained managers and slow implementation. Merriman tells us who may carry the consequences. The common thread is the line manager who receives a request, does not know what to do with it and lets it drift.

What Employers Should Do Now

Create a clear adjustments process. Set out who receives requests, who decides, expected timescales and how outcomes are recorded and reviewed.

Train the people who decide. Managers and HR need to understand the duty, what "reasonable" means in practice and when to escalate.

Escalate early. Make sure requests reach HR or an adviser quickly, rather than being handled informally.

Document the reasoning. Record what was requested, what alternatives were considered and why decisions were reached. Good records protect the business and the individual.

Challenge the cost assumption. Test whether an adjustment is genuinely costly before refusing it, and look at funding options.

Deal with delay. Agreed adjustments should be implemented promptly, with progress tracked.

Impact

Impact Employment Law helps employers get reasonable adjustments right before a claim arises. We can review your adjustments and absence processes, deliver practical training for managers and HR on the duty and on recording decisions, and advise on live requests, including complex mental health and neurodiversity cases. If a claim has been brought against your business or against individual managers, we can advise and represent you throughout. Get in touch if you would like your process reviewed.

Contact Oliver Tasker: 📞 Call: 01522 776270 ✉️ Email: oliver@impactemploymentlaw.co.uk

Advice. Protection. Impact.