Considering the Disability Discrimination Act

Published on 27 Apr 2006

Ann Clarke of Claremont Group considers the widely misunderstood question of how workplace designers and managers can meet their obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act.

Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act appears to have turned into one of those pieces of legislation that generates understanding of what it actually is in inverse proportion to the amount of press coverage it generates.

In part, this is down to bandwagon-jumping commercial interests who inadvertently or otherwise tend to obscure the real implications of the legislation. In part, it is down to a series of (often well-meaning) misperceptions and stereotypes, particularly around what we mean by disability. One of the most pernicious aspects of this is a misunderstanding based on two mental images. One is of a young person, fit and agile, with good hearing, manual dexterity and eyesight able to navigate the world without difficulty. The other is of exactly the same person, except that they’re sitting in a wheelchair.

Hence the most common misperception that the DDA is primarily about wheelchair access, when it is really about access to services and not just access to buildings. Disabled people don’t necessarily need to get through the same doors, but they do need access to the same workplaces and services. In fact, the DDA is appropriate for around 10 million people, (by the current definition) over ten per cent of the UK population, and applies to everybody from wheelchair users to people with visual and aural disabilities and to people with facial disfigurements. And while only around four per cent of these people are permanent wheelchair users, many workplace design standards have focussed on issues of access and egress from buildings. In fact, the DDA has profound implications for all aspects of workplace design including lighting, the choice of colours, signage, access to filing and the provision of furniture and seating.

So the battle is for hearts and minds as well as bricks and mortar. While the sad truth is that some organisations don’t give access to their buildings and services because they don’t want to or can’t be bothered, rather than because they can’t, the majority are well intentioned but may be ill-informed which may lead them to take unnecessary or counter-productive steps to meet what they believe are their obligations. The implications of this are profound. A recent survey by Workplace Law found that around 75 per cent of all UK organisations were unprepared when the deadline for compliance with the DDA passed on 1 October 2004 and around 70 per cent judged their levels of compliance to be satisfactory or good whereas when questioned on their understanding and what steps they had taken the survey showed that in fact 68 per cent had a weak or poor level of compliance.

So what can managers do to make sure that their workplaces do not exclude or make life difficult for a large proportion of the workforce? The first step is the most important and perhaps the most difficult which is to ensure that the company has a culture of inclusivity which may incorporate written policies and training programmes. The second is to get advice to ensure that they understand what their legal obligations are – especially the need to make reasonable adjustments - and also what issues they should address. A workplace audit may be advisable.

When it comes to designing the workplace itself, there are a number of important steps that can be taken. What these steps are – and whether they are even necessary – will vary from site to site and depend on factors such as whether the building is new or a refurbishment. Added complications may include that the building is listed, which raises issues of exemption and what adaptations are permissible. Ideally, designers and facilities managers should be consulted early enough in the building procurement and development process to allow informed input on issues of access.

While a total overview would be impossible in this feature, it is possible to gain some understanding of needs by imagining a simple walk through of a building. (For more guidance and a full checklist, you may want to purchase a copy of Workplace Law’s comprehensive report Making Buildings Accessible).

The entrance to the building clearly poses some standard questions about access. Question the position of parking paces. You should consider how doors are opened, whether ramps are needed (ramps are not the best access for many disabled people) and also where call buttons are placed – preferably at the foot of the ramp, not the top. Be careful to check regulations on ramp gradient and hand rail height. Is the signage and use of colour, texture and other wayfinding appropriate. Many of the same considerations are relevant to internal circulation routes.

Once inside the building, the reception area should feature lots of contrast especially for potential obstacles such as seating and tables. Access to lifts should be clear and simple. The reception desk should contrast well with its surroundings and may also feature a set down section for wheelchair users (details of how to specify this are laid out in BS8300). Depending on its use, the reception desk may also provide knee space for the wheelchair user. It’s fair to say that the DDA has catalysed a widespread reassessment of the concept of welcoming people to a building, how comfortable they feel and the service they receive.

In general areas of the office, a number of issues commonly arise. For example, around 90 per cent of visually impaired people have some perception of light and dark, so their use of a space can be greatly enhanced from a well designed lighting scheme. Lighting should take account of issues such as the glare of surfaces including walls and floors. The intelligent use of spotlights can highlight architectural features and furniture. Similarly there are issues with the currently popular provision of glass partitions. Using visual clues such as stickers and etched symbols helps but so does the application of common sense to where and how partitions should be sited.

The provision of signage should be equally holistic. While the application of large, clear fonts, symbols and contrast is important, so too is the intelligent use of other interior features such as floor and wall colours, the shape of walls, tactile elements and Braille.

The provision of specific workspaces should ideally not exclude anybody. Common sense is important. Booths, breakfast bars and metre high touchdown workstations may look great and be effective for the majority, but alternative provision should be made for disabled people. The same goes for standard workstations which may be inappropriate at their standard height of 72 cm. This does not mean that you cannot use such features, merely that they should also be accessible to everybody, perhaps by offering two heights of workstation and making similar adjustments to meeting and public spaces.

Access to information is very important in the contemporary workplace so it is worth putting some thought into how this will work. The solution may be physical, perhaps by specifying different types of filing, but may also be solved by putting appropriate management systems in place.

Ann Clarke is Design Director at Claremont Group. www.claremontgi.com

More guidance

Claremont Group is one of the UK’s largest workplace design specialists offering advice on aspects of workplace design including legislation, space planning, technology, and fit-out. www.claremontgi.com or T 01925 284000

Covering all aspects of the obligations of organisations and managers, the Workplace Law report Disability: making buildings accessible priced at £195 is available via www.workplacelaw.net or on 08707778881

Detailed information on making buildings accessible is contained in BS 8300:2001 Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people www.bsi-global.com

The Employers Forum on Disability
www.employers-forum.co.uk
The Disability Rights Commission
www.drc-gb.org