The High Court has dismissed Nano Nagle School’s appeal against a Labour Court determination that it failed to properly consider reasonable accommodation for former special needs assistant Marie Daly. The Labour Court awarded Ms Daly €40,000 in compensation. The High Court appeal was on a point of law under section 90(1) of the Employment Equality Acts.
Ms Daly had worked at the school since about December 1998. After a serious accident in 2010 left her paralysed from the waist down and using a wheelchair, she sought to return to work. Occupational health advice initially said she could perform many SNA duties, subject to a risk assessment and adjustments. An occupational therapist later reported that she could perform some duties, but not others, and proposed reorganising work so she could serve as a “floating” SNA.
In November 2011, the school’s occupational health physician concluded that Ms Daly was not medically fit for the SNA position, citing the level of accommodation required and the school’s view that it could not provide it. The school’s board then decided she was unsuitable for the role, and she was dismissed in December 2011.
The Labour Court found that the school had not adequately considered redistributing duties among its SNAs, consulting Ms Daly about possible adjustments, or trying modified duties for a period. It held that the school had wrongly treated its obligation as limited to enabling her to perform the full range of SNA duties. It awarded her €40,000.
The school argued on appeal that the Labour Court had misunderstood evidence, misinterpreted the law and failed to assess whether reorganising the work would impose a disproportionate burden. The High Court rejected the appeal. It held that reasonable accommodation can, where appropriate, include adapting the distribution of tasks, including eliminating some tasks, subject to the disproportionate-burden limit.
The High Court stressed the limits of the Labour Court’s decision: it had not found that Ms Daly must be accommodated in any particular way. Rather, it found that the school had failed to properly consider the available options. The appeal was dismissed, leaving the Labour Court determination and award in place.