How should managers talk with disabled workers about the accommodations they need for their work? How can a workplace offer the right accommodations, and what should be done when the accommodation requested by the worker conflicts with the core responsibilities of the role?
Civil servants at the Ministry of Labor’s Disability Workforce Integration Division are developing a new framework aimed at regulating the conversation on this topic between employers and their workers.
Lishay Mishaly Keen, director of the division, told Davar that the goal is to create a structured process for providing accommodations to workers with disabilities. She explained that the framework seeks to establish a shared language among the relevant parties in the process, which includes understanding the disability and its impact on functioning as well as the job and its requirements.
Chapter 8 of the Israel’s Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law stipulates that an employer is obligated to provide accommodations for an employee with a disability in order to enable their employment. The definition of disability is very broad and includes physical and mental disabilities, whether permanent or temporary, visible or invisible.
The law qualifies this obligation by clarifying that the employer is only required to make accommodations as long as they do not impose an “undue burden.” This is determined by factors such as the cost and nature of the accommodation, the size and structure of the business, the scope of its activity, the number of employees and the composition of the workforce, as well as the availability of external funding sources for the accommodation.
“The definition of ‘undue burden’ still leaves a certain degree of uncertainty—especially around what we call ‘economic accommodations,’ for example, the obligation to allow an employee to reduce their workload,” Mishaly Keen said. In the absence of clear guidelines, it’s not clear how employers are expected to implement these accommodations. Conflicts often arise, and they may ultimately be brought before the courts.
According to Mishaly Keen, the new framework’s emphasis is on a structured and well-documented decision process around support that includes a legitimate and essential discussion of possible alternatives.
In the first stage, the employer is required to define the core responsibilities of the worker’s role and what the job requires—for example, writing documents and reports, participating in court hearings, distributing equipment between departments, traveling between towns multiple times a week, supervising construction work, working shifts—as well as describing the work environment in which the employee must operate.
From the workers’ side, they must specify the type of accommodations they need. For example, arriving late to work because they take medication in the morning and are not yet ready to work, working from home twice a week because of scheduled treatments, an office close to an elevator or restroom, or more frequent rest breaks.
In the dialogue between the two sides, the employer is entitled to request medical documentation, to suggest alternative solutions, and to consult with an expert. The employer can, of course, argue that a certain accommodation is unreasonable or that it undermines the core responsibilities of the job. The worker, in turn, can also request their own support person, present letters and expert opinions, and ask the employer to consult with a third-party adviser.
“Unlike accessibility, which is universal, accommodations are individual, dynamic, and should—and can—change depending on shifts in the employee’s health condition or role,” Mishaly Keen said.
The framework aims to establish a structured process of assessing the effectiveness of accommodations every three months. This assessment is oriented around the tasks and the role overall. If necessary, a permanent or temporary transfer to another role within the organization can be considered.
“It’s especially important to us that everything is written and documented—both the core and defined responsibilities of the employee’s role, and the requested accommodations,” Mishaly Keen said. “That the process be transparent, open, and professional. Today, we often get approached for advice only after the process has already become ‘messy,’ when there’s already a lack of trust between the parties—claims about decreased productivity from the employee, or about the employer harassing the employee—and suddenly there are lawyers and courts involved. Our goal is to offer a process that prevents things from getting to that point.”
As of now, the framework is the subject of ongoing discussions between the Headquarters for the Ministry of Labor’s Disability Workforce Integration Division and the Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities at the Ministry of Justice. The aim is to formulate it in a way that will allow it to be given legal force. The Civil Service Commission has already adopted the proposed process as part of its internal procedure for providing accommodations in the public sector.
A central part of advancing the framework, Mishaly Keen said, lies in promoting training for doctors and therapists involved in employment-related care, so they can serve as relevant advisors to both employees and employers.
“Recently, we completed the first course on workplace accommodations for people with disabilities, aimed at rehabilitation doctors, occupational physicians, and occupational therapists. There was tremendous need and thirst among this target audience for guidance on how to implement accommodations,” Mishaly Keen said. “It’s important to us that health care professionals ask people about their workplace, about the tasks they are expected to perform, and that they know how to advise in this area as well. We want them to also be able to approach the employer, ask questions, and help shape the conversation with the employee accordingly.
In June, a new course will open, which will also be available to family doctors, physiotherapists, and speech therapists.
Staff members from the division are also conducting in-person and Zoom training days, meeting with employers, HR professionals, and disability employment coordinators to introduce the framework.
“Our goal is to foster a conversation about accommodations and the different types of accommodations, which is why it’s important for us to tailor it by sector—because accommodations in local government, a cellular company, the education system, or a manufacturing plant are not the same,” Mishaly Keen said.
David Shaulov, head of the Population Administration at the Ministry of Labor told Davar that Israel has a duty to provide equal opportunities to disabled individuals. “Employing people with disabilities is not only a social responsibility—it is also a driver of economic growth and a means of strengthening the social fabric,” he said. “Our role at the Ministry of Labor is to ensure that the labor market is accessible and inclusive, so that every individual can work under conditions that allow them to succeed. We expect all sectors to join this effort, with the understanding that a diverse, inclusive, and accessible labor market is a vital national interest.”
This article was translated from Hebrew by Nancye Kochen.
