A worker who is declared unfit to perform the essential functions of his or her job while completing a probationary period as part of his or her recruitment may be assigned to another job for which he or she has the necessary skills, abilities, and availability, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on Thursday 10 February (case C-485/20).
A trainee worker employed by Belgian Railways to perform railway maintenance was diagnosed with a heart condition that prevented him from performing his duties and was recognised as disabled by Belgian social security. He was reassigned to a warehouse position within the company and then informed of his dismissal with a 5-year ban on recruitment at the grade in which he had been hired. According to the rules applicable to Belgian Railways staff, unlike statutory staff, trainees who are recognised as disabled and unfit to perform their duties do not benefit from a reassignment within the company.
The Belgian Council of State, brought before the Court by the disabled worker, asked the Court to interpret the Directive (2000/78) on equal treatment in employment and occupation and, more specifically, the concept of reasonable accommodation for disabled persons.
In its judgment, the Court considers that the Directive applies to the conditions of access to employment, self-employment, or occupation, as well as to access to vocational training and guidance. The terms used are broad enough to cover the situation of a worker who is on a training course following recruitment by their employer, it considers.
EU law, the European judge said, requires that reasonable accommodation be made to ensure equal treatment of people with disabilities. Thus, the employer must take any type of appropriate measure to adapt the workstation to the disability (e.g. adaptation of premises, equipment, work rhythm, distribution of tasks). The Court points out that the list of appropriate measures is non-exhaustive, as they may be physical, organisational and/or educational.
The Court therefore considers that, where a worker becomes permanently unfit for their job due to the onset of a disability, reassignment to another job may constitute an appropriate measure of ‘reasonable accommodation’ within the meaning of the Directive.
However, the measures to be taken to accommodate a disabled person’s work should not place a disproportionate burden on the employer. In order to determine the existence of a disproportionate burden, the financial costs involved in a measure, the size and financial resources of the company, and the possibility of obtaining (public) aid should be taken into account. And, the Court points out, the assignment of a disabled person to another job is only possible if there is at least one vacancy that the worker concerned is likely to fill.
See the Court’s judgment: https://bit.ly/3sqZTAO (Original version in French Mathieu Bion)