natalyad: (Default)
In 2013 I successfully sued HMRC for 'disability discrimination' with the help of Unity Law (which is now Fry Law) for their repeated requirement that I use telephones to contact them.

The only thing I regret is that I did not take legal action several years earlier.

When government departments are being discriminatory and poorly accessible I DO tell them I successfully sued HMRC for disability discrimination and ask them if they wish me to sue them too!

For a summary (but still quite long) overview of my HMRC case including deafness issues.

I also summarised and timelined all my dealings with Unity Law so people can see that it isn't scary, just quite a lot of work.

HMRC ended up paying me significant financial compensation, writing me an apology and paying my legal costs (covering legal costs is less likely to be possible now due to something called Qualified One Way Costs Shifting).
natalyad: (Default)
I've been trying to think of things to write about for the #DeafMust campaign. I keep thinking . o O ( I'm lucky, I haven't had much discrimination for my deafness... ) before thinking of yet another example...

After I graduated from university I started applying for jobs, some at the local library service as my degree is in information management and these looked like viable entry level jobs. One of the librarian jobs I applied for had a "tour of the library" with info being provided about parts of the job.

A small group of us going for this job were shown the main library area for shelving books, front desks for loans and returns of books and other materials, public computers where patrons needed technical support, the back office for moving books around and logging them in and out of the computer system and finally the other office where staff handled incoming calls or phoned people about overdue loans.

The idea of the role was that everyone did all of these 5 activities in approximately equal amounts. As I'm deaf and I can't hear the phone I asked the guide if there was likely to be a chance that I could swap phone-shifts with colleagues and cover more of the other roles, especially technical support of public PCs which we were told most staff hated. I explained that it would be dishonest of me to try and do phonecalls which I couldn't hear.

The reply was "No, that would not be possible, everyone has to be treated the same".

I was quite shocked at this, as I knew that employers were supposed to make adjustments for disabled staff, and I thought I was making a reasonable proposal. I wasn't being lazy, I was being honest... I can't 100% remember now, but I think I ended up withdrawing my application.

I now know that response was probably unlawful.

Sadly "We have to treat everyone the same" is very common. BUT (while I am not a lawyer), it is almost certainly not a legitimate justification for not making an adjustment for deaf or disabled employees.

And finally, while I emphatically do not believe "you asked the wrong person" or "you asked in the wrong way" as excuses for not making adjustments - in this case, that guide was probably not the best person for me to have asked. It wasn't her decision to make. If I had asked HR or a senior manager I may well have been able to get phones changed for me as I has been done in other jobs I have had. I am confident none of my colleagues have resented me not using the phone, I make up for it in other ways.
natalyad: (Default)
Deaf awareness from staff makes the difference between hospital appointments being mostly-accessible and completely inaccessible (and majorly stressful).

I had a hospital appointment with an eye clinic because I was having some problems with my vision.

The consultation got off to a bad start when the Clinician insisted on the door being left open and I explained I was deaf and needed it to be closed so I could hear the consultation. Clinician's excuse was that people came in and out of consultation rooms to work. I said that was fine as long as they were quiet and closed the door behind them.

I told the Clinician that I am deafer than most people realise from my speech, hearing aids do not give me perfect hearing and that I need to lipread people to understand speech.

Despite being told I needed to lipread which requires me to look at people's faces, Clinician started doing eye tests which involved covering one of my eyes then the other while talking to me. As I could not understand her, I tried to look at her which wrecked the test. She would not explain the test in advance or give me any warning of instructions. We had to do some tests in the noisy area we'd closed the door from including going into another room (which partner closed door to) where it was made dark. Again no advance explanation while I could lipread so I did more things incorrectly because I could not understand the instructions.

Throughout the consultation I repeatedly asked Clinician to speak louder and more slowly which she did not do. She got very grumpy with me whenever I asked her to repeat herself. I couldn't hear her well, but I could see the annoyed facial expression and body language. At the end she told me my reported issues were not a part of my known-condition with clear implications that she did not think my issues were genuine. She reluctantly agreed to refer me to see one of the doctors -- but that referral never arrived.

It was another 4 years before I got an explanation for the vision problems - my GP referred me to one of the doctors Clinician should have referred me to!

Profile

natalyad: (Default)
natalyad

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   1234
567 891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 29th, 2025 04:37 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios