Calling for Statutory Disability Leave
- kevinndaws
- Jun 27
- 7 min read
Conference, Ash Wise, moving this motion on behalf of the PCS (Public And Commercial Services) Union.
I speak to you from the heart with lived experience as someone living with ME and also neurodiversity – which causes me physical, sensory and cognitive impairments.
Right now, across our workplaces, disabled workers are being failed by a system that does not recognise reality.
We are told to stay in work.
We are told to manage our conditions.
We are told to be resilient.
But when our disability means we need time off, even temporarily, we are treated as if we are simply sick.
And that distinction matters.
Because disability management, is not the same as treating sickness.
And treating it like it is? - that is where the painful injustice begins.
Conference, nearly one in four working-age people in the UK are disabled.
One in four.
And yet there is no statutory right to paid disability-related absence.
Think about that.
We have Statutory Sick Pay.
We have statutory maternity rights.
We have supposed workplace protections under the Equality Act and newly laid Employers Rights Act.
However, in the employment tribunal judgement of Griffith vs the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and I quote,
“The duty to make reasonable adjustments is a cornerstone of the [Equality] Act and requires employers to take positive steps”.
Is writing off someone’s disability needs for respite under a blanket sickness absence policy, or “empathising” by awarding a period of unpaid leave, really a positive step?
If you are disabled, and you need paid time off because of your disability, support depends entirely on your employer’s corporate-minded justifications of “compassion”.
That’s as reassuring as putting Mr Bean in charge of Road Safety Standards.
Statutory sick pay is being disproportionately relied on by disabled workers.
We use it when we are not “sick” but managing our disability or long-term condition.
We use it when we are recovering, not deteriorating.
We use it simply to stay in work, yet cannot afford the respite we desperately need to achieve our baseline levels of comfort and safety to be in work.
And then, when we are unwell for a different reason.
There is nothing left, or we are fobbed off and told to claim ESA or Universal Credit – which in itself is not sustainable or in some cases eligible.
That is not equality.
That is a system that builds disadvantage in from the start.
Conference, let’s be honest about what disability-related absence actually looks like.
It is not neat, like the medical model of disability prescribes.
It is not predictable.
And it is not limited to appointments.
It is medication titration as we heard within a previous Motion, where treatment is adjusted and side effects can include exhaustion, brain fog, dizziness, and an inability to function safely at work.
It is recovery after treatment. It is flare-ups. Relapses. Periods where someone needs time to stabilise their condition simply to remain in employment. Time travelling to and from care settings.
None of this is optional.
None of it is avoidable.
None of it fits neatly into policy.
And yet the system says: ‘We will support the appointment, but not the impact’.
Conference, that is not support. That is systemic denial, and as adopters of the social model of disability, we shall not stand for this.
Conference, the Equality Act 2010 requires employers to make reasonable adjustments.
That includes looking at how absence is managed, so disabled workers are not placed at a disadvantage.
The EHRC guidance also recognises that time off for treatment, rehabilitation, and recovery can be part of those adjustments.
But without a statutory right, without a baseline that applies to everyone, support remains inconsistent.
And too often, it is not there when people need it most. The consequences of that are real.
Disabled workers burn through sick pay faster.
We are more likely to face absence management.
More likely to face disciplinary processes.
More likely to be pushed out of work altogether.
Not because we cannot work, but because the system is not designed to support us to stay.
Conference, we know the scale of this.
Disabled people are far less likely to be in employment, with a gap of around 30 percentage points compared to non-disabled people.
And millions of disabled people who want to work are not currently employed, often because workplaces and systems fail to meet their needs.
Conference, that is why this motion matters. Because what we are calling for is simple – a standalone, Statutory Disability Pay.
A system, like Statutory Sick Pay, that recognises disability-related absence as distinct.
A statutory floor of rights.
A guarantee that disabled workers are not left financially exposed simply because they need time to manage their condition.
Conference, this is not just about fairness. It is about keeping people in work. Because when disabled workers are supported, we stay.
When we are not, we leave.
We leave jobs.
We leave careers.
We leave workplaces that were never designed to include us.
We abandon our potential to showcase our ability.
And that is not inevitable.
It is the result of policy choices and exclusionary design.
Our movement of unions has never accepted “that’s just the way it is.”
We didn’t accept it on sick pay.
We didn’t accept it on workplace safety.
We didn’t accept it on maternity rights.
And we should not accept it now.
Because this gap, this absence of statutory support, is one of the clearest inequalities left in our system.
Conference, this motion calls on us to act.
To lobby the UK Government to introduce Statutory Disability Pay.
To push devolved governments to act within their powers.
To organise and negotiate with employers.
And to stand behind every disabled worker facing discrimination because this system falls short.
Conference, if we accept a system where disabled workers are forced to use an inequitable system such as sick pay just to manage their disability, then we are accepting inequality as normal. And it is not normal.
It is fixable.
It is preventable.
And starting today, we can demand better.
Conference, Statutory Disability Pay is not a luxury. It is not an add-on.
It is the missing piece of equality at work.
It’s something we should all be speaking about openly and championing on our national stages.
I also sincerely thank my seconders from NAHT, whose personal story you will hear - one that resonated with my heart, as it reflects my own experience of workplace treatment, which inspired this motion.
Conference, I move. Thank you
Chair, conference, Jon Barr: apparently now I look a bit like Bob Mortimer
I speak to second this motion on behalf of NAHT: the school leaders union.
Across my decades as a school leader, as a headteacher, a wide range of necessary, reasonable adjustments have been required by the staff I have led. The most complex I found, have been the adjustments needed by those colleagues whose needs fluctuated; fluctuated because of the nature of their condition or the conditions they were managing.
I remind myself of one of the finest teachers I have ever seen in a classroom.
Let’s call her Jane. Jane had very high standards for her work with the children in her class. When this was combined with her ME this could lead her to burn out and then she would experience significant months of absence from work.
Over the years we worked together we recognised that there were months of the year where Jane was more at risk. She learnt to manage her work and request temporary reduced hours during those months if she was under strain.
However I recall the year where she she had to request a significant temporary adjustment to her contract for a number of months to manage an acute bout of her ME. While my governors and I agreed to this I was acutely aware of the strain this put on on her household where she was the main earner.
I admit I was never sure if she returned to full time work prematurely with a resulting negative impact. In other words money drove Jane to risk her own management of her ME.
If the social model of disability is to be lived then disability leave pay needs to be in place where it is required. My colleague Jane was managing her ME to ensure she did not get unwell.
Statutory Disability Payments would have protected her income and ensured she did not return to full time work too soon.
There are many Janes in many work places. Disability Payments should be a statutory right to ensure paid disability absence.
Conference I urge you to support the motion.
Tell us about your experiences with Disability Leave - have you received paid Disability leave? Have you been refused Disability Leave? Share your experiences with us in the comment box below this article.
Motion 8 Calling for Statutory Disability Payments (“SDP”)
Conference notes the absence of remunerated disability incapacity policies from employers, creating hardship for disabled employees and carers of disabled dependents.
Nearly 1 in 4 working-age people are disabled, yet there is no statutory right for remunerated disability absence. Most employers deduct disability-incapacity from sick pay, providing no separate support.
The EHRC recognises disability leave for assessment, treatment etc. and the Equality Act 2010 requires reasonable adjustments; however, fully-paid long-term leave for disability-incapacity is rare.
Instead, disability absences are treated as ordinary sickness, causing financial strain and dehumanising disabled workers.
Conference calls upon UK Government to create 'Statutory Disability Pay' (SDP) like Statutory Sick Pay (SSP). This prevents disabled workers from exhausting sick pay on disability-respite.
Conference further calls upon the Devolved Governments to augment or implement SDP related benefits, UK-wide adoption of SDP notwithstanding, within their competence.
Conference instructs TUC DWC to:
i) Lobby UK government to make paid disability leave a statutory right.
ii) Direct UK government to instigate 'Statutory Disability Pay' (SDP) or similar payments.
iii) Lobby employers to align disability leave pay with sick pay.
iv) Lobby Devolved Governments, working with relevant PCS and TU bodies, to implement similar benefits
v) Legally support members facing discrimination.
Comments