Written evidence from Dr Daniel Wheatley*, Dr Harriet Clarke*, Dr Christian Darko*, Dr Benjamin Hopkins*, Dr Aikaterini Tavoulari** and Dr John Gibney* [FWD0031]

*University of Birmingham **University of Bath

1               Executive summary

1.1              The AI-empowered research project, led by researchers from the Work Inclusivity Research Centre (WIRC), University of Birmingham, assesses the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) and automation technologies for the employment opportunities and working experiences of disabled people in the UK.

1.2              Within the AI-empowered project, we have investigated reasonable adjustments, flexible working and experiences of work among disabled people. The importance of flexibility has featured prominently in our findings, but our evidence highlights that it is often unevenly implemented and too narrowly focused on remote and hybrid working.

1.3              Drawing on this evidence, we identify key actions for UK Government to improve access to flexible working for disabled people, addressing both structural barriers in the labour market and gaps in policy implementation, as follows:

Recognising the diversity of flexibility and disability

• Policy and guidance should give explicit recognition to the distinctive characteristics of different forms of flexibility, and associated benefits, challenges and risks.
• Policy and guidance must better reflect the diversity of disability, regularity of co-occurrence of conditions, and how impacts upon flexibility needs of disabled people.
• Government should fund and deliver targeted employer-focused awareness and training programmes to improve organisational capability in implementing flexible working and reasonable adjustments.

Translating policy to practice

• Guidance on flexible working reasonableness tests and employee consultation stages of flexible working requests should include explicit consideration of disability and be developed with input from disabled people.
• Structured requirements and accompanying guidance should be developed around reasonable adjustments including those pertaining to flexibility, consistent with the changes incoming related to requests for flexible working.
• Government should develop and disseminate practical guidance on ‘flexible job design principles’ enabling employers to embed flexibility at the recruitment stage and improve transparency around available arrangements.

Employment access, recruitment and onboarding

• Strengthening of Disability Confident scheme to integrate a ‘flexibility guarantee’, requiring accredited organisations to guarantee granting of flexible working requests (or alternative arrangement agreed between employer and employee) to disabled people as part of recruitment/onboarding processes.
• Awareness campaigns and guidance should promote more widespread adoption of reasonable adjustments passports.  
• Expand funding for built environment and transportation improvements, in partnership with research institutes such as the national centre for transportation research (ncat), targeting enhanced workplace accessibility for disabled people.

2               AI-empowered project outline

2.1              AI-empowered was funded by the Edward Gostling Foundation (Charitable Registration No. 1068617) in April 2025.

2.2              The project has developed a rich evidence base collected October 2025-May 2026 comprising a systematic literature review, survey of 1,029 employers, survey of 1,402 disabled people, 115 unique in-depth interviews with disabled people, employer representatives and stakeholder groups, and five organisational case studies capturing over 90 voices from distinct groups of disabled people in diverse organisational settings.

2.3              The project adopts ‘disabled people’ in alignment with the UK disabled people’s movement and prevailing usage in UK policy, while also recognising administrative criteria for eligibility/receipt of statutory financial support. Our definition of disabled people includes physical or sensory impairment, chronic health conditions, learning disabilities, long-term mental health conditions (or mental distress) and neurodiversity, with this approach recognising the diversity of disability and regularity of co-occurrence of conditions. Our method has supported data capture from all groups of disabled people within this definition.

3               Our evidence

3.1              Why has the cultural shift since the Covid-19 pandemic towards greater acceptance of flexible working not yet had a substantial impact on the employment rate of disabled people and the disability employment gap?

3.1.1              Disabled people face a series of well documented interconnected challenges in both accessing and maintaining employment that continue to impact on their experiences of work. They face entrenched perceptions, many of which have been evidenced as unsubstantiated, including bias and stigma around disability and its implications in relation to costs of accommodation for employers, productivity levels, and risk including around absence and retention. This translates to considerable cultural and practical barriers to employment for disabled people.[1]

3.1.2              There remain gaps in clarity over the availability of flexible working in recruitment advertisements, while many disabled people perceive that recruitment processes discriminate against them. Across our evidence we heard examples of unconscious bias and in some cases overt discrimination in recruitment processes which impacted on disabled people’s access to employment and perceived risks around sharing details of disability with prospective employers at recruitment stage and in onboarding experiences. In response, some employers outlined in interviews their efforts to redress these issues in their organisation including highlighting the importance of training and socialising disability to increase awareness and confidence among leaders and hiring managers to support more disability-inclusive recruitment processes.

3.1.3              Our survey evidence highlights persistent structural barriers: 37% of disabled people reported a lack of employment opportunities, while lack of flexibility in job design (51%) was the most commonly cited barrier. Other reported barriers included skills mismatches (18%) and the perceived limitations associated with specific conditions (16%), though these often reflect inflexible job design rather than inherent incapacity.

3.1.4              From the employer perspective, awareness and implementation gaps remain. While 48% reported employing disabled people, 23% did not know whether they did so. The most commonly cited organisational barrier was inflexibility in work design (15%), alongside lack of resources (14%), limited expertise (13%) and concerns around capital investment required to accommodate disabled employees (10 percent).             

3.1.5               Inflexibility and entrenched assumptions about the risks of employing disabled people create difficulties in accessing and re-entering employment. Participants recounted their difficulties in trying to get back into employment. For example, a professional worker with a chronic health condition, after first becoming disabled, outlined how they felt they had no choice but to offer to work without pay as they attempted to gain employment: When I was initially trying to get back into the workplace and I had to work entirely from home it was difficult even just to start conversations with [employers]. I ended up offering to work for organisations voluntarily because I really wanted to get back into the workplace. No opportunities were provided, even though I was like, ‘this is what I'm bringing, I have got experience, I'm really keen, I’m not even bothered about getting paid. I just want to work.’ [Professional worker with chronic health condition]

3.1.6              For disabled people already in employment the expansion of flexible working since the pandemic, especially remote work at home, has provided several benefits supporting some to remain in employment or continue to work full-time rather than reduced hours (see section 3.3). But these benefits do not translate to all disabled people and there remain considerable gaps in the flexibility offered across organisations. We further emphasise that disabled people do not want it to be assumed that hybrid or home working is the sole solution to inclusive employment practice.

3.1.7              Across our survey of disabled people fully remote (20 percent) and hybrid (37 percent) work were the most common forms of flexibility reported. Reduced hours arrangements were reported by 22 percent, predominantly part-time (16 percent), and 16 percent reported working time re-arrangement including flexi-time or compressed hours.

3.1.8              The limited scope of current applications of flexible working, often centred too heavily on remote and especially hybrid work, continue to limit opportunities for disabled people through lacking recognition of the diversity of disability and differing needs of individuals. Speaking of the need to think beyond remote and hybrid work, a non-government organisation representative argued: I think we need to go beyond remote and hybrid work. Part-time work is something that disabled people really would value. And there's just an absence or there's not enough of these kinds of roles available in the economy to meet this demand. [Non-government organisation representative]

3.2               Are there differences in disabled people's experiences of flexible working across different types of disability or impairment and among disabled people with a range of other protected characteristics, for example their age, sex, and race and ethnicity?

3.2.1              Our evidence provided insights into the ways that flexibility impacts on experiences of work across different types of disability. For example, speaking on the value of flexibility over working time and daily hours of work, a participant reflected: Particularly if you've got an energy limiting condition, it's really important because it just means that you don't have to push yourself beyond your limits. I'll work a bit more this day and then I could have some time back this day, that kind of thing. [Professional worker with physical disability and chronic health condition]

3.2.2              We noted how working at home offered benefits for many disabled people, albeit the nature of the benefits felt from working at home were distinct relative to the disabilities and other characteristics of the individual including socio-economic position and associated availability of physical spaces and resources to support remote work. An underlying factor, though, was the ability to control the environment at home, emphasising the importance of autonomy to personalise experiences of work.[2]

3.2.3              Working from home provided substantial benefits for many disabled people, particularly in managing fatigue, pain, and accessibility challenges associated with transport and physical work environments. Overall, 85% of respondents reported that homeworking supported (or would support) management of their condition. In some cases, we heard how working at home had supported disabled people to remain in paid work or avoid moving to part-time or reduced hours work due to the flexibility it offered in managing disability alongside other aspects of life and work.

3.2.4              However, these benefits are not universal. Preferences and needs vary significantly across individuals and types of disability, reinforcing the importance of offering a range of flexible working options rather than treating remote work as a one-size-fits-all solution. We heard in our interview and case study evidence from people with learning disabilities, certain neurodiverse and mental health conditions, about the value of in-person working and, in some cases, how the home may not offer a suitable environment for work: A lot of people feel like home is their safe space. For me, it's a reminder of the adaptations needed. For me being out and in a normal environment where you see diversity stops me looking in the mirror so much and that I think is really good for me, meeting people's legs [laughs] was also really good, you know, because you get to know the whole people. [Professional worker with physical disability and mental health condition]

3.3               What are the experiences of flexible working of disabled people across different sectors of the labour market?

3.3.1              In our employer survey, 60 percent of large organisations reported offering remote or hybrid work and/or alternative working arrangements including working time rearrangements or reduction. In medium sized organisations, 45 percent reported offering remote or hybrid work, and 46 percent reported alternative working time arrangements.

3.3.2              Although offered on a lesser basis, overall, than in medium and large organisations, remote work was over-represented in adjustments offered by micro-organisations (43 percent) compared to other adjustments including alternative working arrangements that were only reported by around one quarter of these organisations (27 percent). The greater rigidity and lesser availability of flexible working arrangements in smaller organisations highlight a need for expanded guidance and support.

3.3.3              The offer of remote work was more commonly reported in the public sector (59 percent) and voluntary and community sector (60 percent), although it was also reported by half of private sector organisations (50 percent). Alternative working time arrangements were most common in the public sector, reported by two-thirds of employers surveyed (67 percent), compared with 61 percent of voluntary and community sector organisations and only 45 percent of private sector organisations.

3.3.4              Occupational differences in the use of fully remote and hybrid working are important to recognise. In our survey of disabled people, knowledge occupations including managerial and senior officials, professional, associated professional and technical and extending to administrative and secretarial all reported higher use of fully remote (22 percent) or hybrid (43 percent) flexible working arrangements, compared to other occupations (5 percent and 4 percent respectively on average).

3.3.5              We note the lesser flexibility present consistently across skilled trades, caring, leisure and other service, sales and customer services, process, plant and machine operatives, and elementary occupations. The most common forms of flexibility reported across these occupations, on average, were flexi-time (19 percent compared to 44 percent among knowledge occupations) and part-time (21 percent compared to 22 percent in knowledge occupations).

3.3.6              These patterns are driven by the nature of the occupation and relative necessity for physical presence, reflecting especially the limits of workplace location-based flexible working arrangements, and importance of policy and guidance supporting organisations to avoid over-dependence on remote and hybrid work as the default form of flexibility.

3.3.7              We also note the risks and benefits of informal flexibility that remains more common in SMEs. Longstanding evidence points toward people liking informal flexibility as it offers more short-term flexibility and autonomy over how and where to work.[3] But informal flexibility presents greater risks around potential withdrawal of flexibility where there are changes in line management or organisation conditions (e.g., a more difficult business environment), emphasising the need for better coverage, range, and use of formal flexible working arrangements.

3.3.8              Employers should focus on designing jobs and working practices that align with the nature of the tasks being fulfilled. A worker picking and packing in a warehouse cannot work at home, but other forms of flexibility such as flexi-time or compressed hours could significantly improve their working life. As such, employers need good quality, evidence-based, guidance that supports them in recognising the benefits of flexibility as well as its limits. In this way, mutual gains can be generated as employers across sectors and organisation types can support talent to thrive while meeting business need.  

3.4               What evidence is there about the impacts of flexible working on disabled people's progression in work?

3.4.1              Impacts on disabled people’s progression at work are highly dependent on the way that flexibility is applied within the organisation including the way policy is translated into practice and the culture present that influences workplace behaviours including those of line managers and senior decision-makers. In more inclusive organisations availability and integration of flexibility into business-as-usual practices offers disabled people the advantages outlined in section 3. 2 in managing their disability and personalising their experiences of work.

3.4.2              These benefits support enhanced performance among disabled people, and assistive technologies (including AI and automation) can further support these gains. An employer highlighted the benefits they perceived from the provision of communication and assistive technologies in supporting remote and hybrid work: From a mobility perspective, we’ve been able to get technologies to people that need to work from home far more of the time than most other colleagues. They've got greater parity in the experience they can have at home now. The amount of assistive tools we can deploy on remote devices is massively improved. [Senior leader, private sector]

3.4.3              Where policy, practice and cultural barriers to flexibility exist, there are considerable risks for disabled people including marginalisation of those working flexibly. For example, in cases where employees work remotely and others do not or work part-time and are excluded from activities that take place when they are not working. These risks could more negatively impact disabled people who already encounter discrimination in work environments that impact on perceptions around their performance and in turn influence opportunities for development and progression (should they wish to pursue this, acknowledging that some people may not actively wish to seek progression).

3.4.4              There is a risk that use of remote work could be considered and undertaken by employers as primarily a method of avoiding addressing accommodation challenges and accessibility problems including inaccessible buildings or lack of physical (e.g., desks, chairs) and/or technical (ICTs including assistive technologies) infrastructure. Again, in these cases, location-based flexibility could perpetuate or exacerbate marginalisation and limit career advancement rather than supporting disabled workers to thrive in their organisation. Central to outcomes is the degree to which employers recognise the needs of the individual, and their capability and willingness to offer flexibility and support structures which allow workers to personalise their experiences of work (recognising the limits of specific occupational settings).

3.5              What are the impacts on disabled workers of employers' "back to the office" mandates? 

3.5.1              Our study provided evidence consistent with working at home having the potential to offer several benefits for disabled people (see section 3.2), while also providing benefits more widely recorded including to work-life balance, employee satisfaction, and productivity.[4] Balancing this, it is essential to recognise the differing needs of individuals and that working at home is not suitable or preferred by all. Our existing evidence also shows that location-based flexibility can have unintended effects including creating co-ordination challenges within organisations, termed ‘ripple effects’, especially where workers have more fluid or changeable routines of onsite and at home working. These issues must be addressed for the potential benefits from remote and hybrid work to be realised, including for disabled people, requiring an active role for line management.[5]

3.5.2              Owing to the nature of their disability some disabled people cannot work in communal spaces and ‘back to the office’ mandates risk loss of this talent or marginalisation of these workers where teams are required by default to work on site. Within our study, a professional worker with a chronic health condition explained the nature of their disability in influencing their place of work: I can't work on site. I'm on treatment that affects my immune system, and I have to be really careful coming into contact with people. I also have problems with my spine which makes travelling very difficult. I do work entirely from home for those reasons. [Professional worker with chronic health condition]

3.5.3              Beyond those who need to work fully remotely, changed perceptions and pressure for physical attendance also risk isolating those who cannot work onsite all of the time. Speaking to the importance of continued recognition of the contribution of employees working at home, and the role of managers in providing support, a HR manager outlined: One of the risks is that they become very isolated and they've got to make a real effort to ensure that they use technology to make sure that they're integrated in the team and equally for the manager as well, that they don't forget about the person sitting at home. [HR manager, private sector]

3.5.4              Practical realities further disadvantage disabled people in engaging in movements for work. Limitations were outlined in navigating inaccessible built environments and public transport networks that act as a considerable barrier to travelling on a regular basis to a workplace, requiring targeted action to address these accessibility problems: I would love to be out in an office. I thrive on people, I learn better, I interact better, I don't get distracted. Due to my ADHD, being in an office is just better because you're absorbing the energy. But with my limitations, I work from home, I can't do a regular schedule. I couldn't say that I can leave the house on this day because I'm not driving at the moment and the bus, there's one space for a wheelchair. So, you can't guarantee you'll get it. And if it's raining, I'm in a power chair, it's shower proof, but I'll have to be sitting on a wet seat all day! [Employee representative with chronic health condition and neurodiversity]

3.5.5              Beyond debates around the impacts for disabled people specifically, mandates for physical attendance remain difficult to justify based on current evidence in many organisational and occupational settings. Back to the office mandates raise wider inclusivity and intersectional concerns including for parents and carers and other groups who may require flexibility over workplace location.[6] Back to the office mandates also present an underlying distrust of employees when working at distance, indicative of cultural problems in organisations that require awareness campaigns and guidance and training to improve organisational capabilities.

3.6               To what extent will the flexible working provisions in the Employment Rights Act 2025 benefit disabled workers and jobseekers? Are there further legislative or policy steps the Government could take to increase disabled people's access to flexible working?

3.6.1              The flexible working provisions of the Employment Rights Act have the potential to increase transparency of decision-making and availability of flexible working arrangements. However, our evidence shows that current flexible working provision suffers from considerable gaps between policy and practice. As such there is a need for careful monitoring of changes arising from the Act and provision of guidance and training to support organisations to effectively translate policy into practice including around job design, and consideration of specific employee groups including disabled people.

3.6.2              There is uncertainty around how employers will respond to the Act and at least shorter-term impacts on the overall number of employment opportunities in the UK labour market. Potential risk of discrimination against candidates, at least perceived, as requiring reasonable adjustments or flexible working arrangements, could be increased. The changes may disadvantage disabled people and exacerbate gaps in disabled people sharing details of their disability with prospective employers, even into onboarding processes following successful recruitment, due to perceived risk of this negatively impacting on their employment prospects.

3.6.3              To mitigate these risks, we propose awareness campaigns and incentivising organisations to support more widespread adoption of Disability Confident. Further, strengthening the scheme could include integration of a ‘flexibility guarantee’, requiring accredited organisations to guarantee granting of flexible working requests (or an alternative arrangement agreed between employer and employee) to disabled people as part of recruitment/onboarding processes.

3.7              How clear and well understood is the law around employers' Equality Act duties to provide flexible working options and associated aids and equipment as "reasonable adjustments"?

3.7.1              Experiences of reasonable adjustment policies and practices within organisations varied across our evidence. Reasonable adjustment policies were reported by 65 percent of large employers, 60 percent of medium employers, 39 percent of small employers, but only 22 percent of micro-organisations. Partly led by these differences in organisation size, we find that public (68 percent) and voluntary and community sector (59 percent) organisations were more likely than those in the private sector (43 percent) to have a reasonable adjustments policy.

3.7.2              As a result, some employers may not be aware of whether an employee is disabled and their need for reasonable adjustments due to gaps where disabled people do not feel they can share details of their disability with their employer. In these cases, disabled employees may put in requests for a flexible working arrangement, rather than directing this request specifically as a reasonable adjustment related to a disability, but this could risk higher likelihood of refusal.

3.7.3              Across our evidence base we heard examples of good practice within organisations who provided employees with reasonable adjustments including provision of required equipment. These included employers supporting disabled employees to apply for grants through the Government's Access to Work scheme (see section 3.9). One employee summed up the equipment provided by their employer as part of a reasonable adjustment allowing them to work at home:  They have provided a chair, a laptop, a dock. I've got an adapted keyboard as well. They've provided webcams and stuff, basically anything that I need. [Associate professional worker with physical disability and neurodiversity]

3.7.4              Our evidence, though, pointed to a variety of potential failure points in decision-making processes over requests for reasonable adjustments. In SMEs, problems often stem from lack of awareness, lack of formality, or in some cases an unwillingness to digress from rigid policies and processes. In larger and more complex organisational settings where there are multiple layers of hierarchy and/or functions, difficulties often centre on delays in decision-making or accountability that result in reasonable adjustments not being enacted. A professional worker with chronic health condition outlined the need for a shift in culture within organisations:

3.7.5              One of the biggest challenges for a lot of [disabled people] is the reasonable adjustments actually being enacted. There's got to be a culture shift, a shift in mindset to think about delivering roles differently. It shouldn't be a challenge for people to have reasonable adjustments made that will enhance them being able to do the job that they're doing. [Professional worker with chronic health condition]

3.7.6              Rigidity over reasonable adjustments that are provided and this not matching the fluidity of certain disabilities, for example, variations in fatigue levels or pain among people with physical impairments and/or chronic health conditions requiring more fluid working time and location-based flexibility, also acts to limit effectiveness of policies and processes, requiring organisations to adopt more agile solutions.

3.7.7              Improving organisational capabilities is essential to provide employer representatives, including line managers, HR and occupational health, with the confidence and clarity to work through reasonable adjustments processes with disabled employees. This will address current barriers including rigid policies and processes, and a lack of understanding and awareness among organisational stakeholders. A professional worker with a full-time hybrid routine combining three days in office with Monday and Friday at home, outlined their experiences with rigid organisational practices and limited acknowledgement of the impacts of their disability:

3.7.8              I have spoken to [my employer] about potentially working more from home, but they weren't willing to budge. I guess that's quite rigid. I have to work 9.30 to 6.30, whether it's at home or not. I can't really do that much longer because it just sends me to pieces. My body can't really cope with it, which is a shame. Some people think I'm just being a bit dramatic and when I mention it, my boss certainly does. I did have a meeting once about working from home on a Wednesday and they said, ‘we're not willing to do that’. [Professional worker with chronic health condition]

3.8              Are there best practice examples of access to flexible working for disabled workers? How can these be spread across sectors to benefit a much greater proportion of disabled people?

3.8.1              Beyond the already outlined need for flexible job design principles and improved organisational capabilities, one of our case organisations presented a good practice example of the application of policy and practices around reasonable adjustments including transparent recruitment processes, line manager training, and the introduction of a reasonable adjustments passport scheme.[7] These measures supported greater inclusivity and smoother recruitment, onboarding and in-job experiences for disabled employees in the organisation.[8]

3.8.2              A manager at another organisation, similarly, spoke of their own past experiences encountering difficulties in getting a reasonable adjustment to work at home approved, and explained how this had prompted them to work with colleagues to implement a reasonable adjustments passport scheme: My manager was leaving, so referred me to occupational health. Perhaps it was just me and my naivety having never dealt with them. It was more like, ‘you should consider allowing [me] to work from home because…’ rather than saying, ‘my condition means this, this, this’. Now my role leads on equalities, and driven by myself and a manager in HR, we're introducing a reasonable adjustment passport. [Manager with physical disability and chronic health condition]

3.9               To what extent can disabled people access the aids and equipment they need to work flexibly via the Government's Access to Work scheme? What changes could be made to make the scheme more effective in this regard? 

3.9.1              We would like to direct the Committee to evidence the AI-empowered project submitted to the Public Accounts Select Committee on Access to Work that included a series of recommendations to UK government to support reform of the scheme.[9]

4              References