When an employee’s sight changes, the first reaction in many workplaces is to look for a piece of equipment. In Ireland the legal duty is wider than that, and the cost of getting it wrong has become more visible. In April 2026 the Workplace Relations Commission awarded €30,000 to a civil servant with a visual impairment after finding a failure to provide reasonable accommodation over a period of years. This article sets out what the law asks of an Irish employer, what the decision shows, and how HR and occupational health teams can approach sight loss in a way that holds up.
What the law asks of an employer
Section 16 of the Employment Equality Act 1998, as amended, requires an employer to take appropriate measures, where needed in a particular case, to enable a person with a disability to access employment, take part in it, advance in it and undergo training. The duty does not apply where the measures would impose a disproportionate burden on the employer.
Appropriate measures are effective and practical changes to the workplace. They can include adapting premises or equipment, changing working patterns, redistributing tasks, and providing training. They do not include anything the person could ordinarily or reasonably provide for themselves. In deciding whether a measure would be a disproportionate burden, the Act directs the employer to consider the financial and other costs, the size and resources of the business, and the possibility of public funding or other assistance.
The Supreme Court considered the test in Nano Nagle School v Daly in 2019. As summarised by employment law commentators, it described the test as one of reasonableness and proportionality. The employer should consider all the measures that might reasonably accommodate the employee, assess whether they would be a disproportionate burden, which must include looking at public funding, and engage with the employee. The court described engagement as advisable, although it did not make it mandatory.
What the 2026 decision shows
In Paul Hill v Department of Social Protection, the Workplace Relations Commission found that the employee, who has a visual impairment that affects his central vision, had been discriminated against on the disability ground through a failure to provide reasonable accommodation between 2012 and 2024. The award was €30,000. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, which supported the complaint, said employers have a fundamental obligation to provide appropriate and timely reasonable accommodation, and that compliance cannot be delayed or treated as optional.
Reports of the decision describe the missing supports as assistive technology, suitable lighting and accessible materials. The Department disputed parts of the complaint and said it had provided a range of equipment and support, so the decision should be read as a finding on its own facts. The lesson for other employers is about timing and follow-through. The issues were recognised early, and the concern was how long it took to resolve them.
What adjustments commonly involve
Sight loss is not one condition, and two employees with the same diagnosis can need quite different things. The adjustments that come up most often fall into a few groups. Screens and software can include magnification, high contrast display settings, text to speech or a screen reader, and a monitor of a size and position that suits the individual. Lighting can mean reducing glare, adding task lighting, or changing the position of a desk relative to windows. Documents and materials can be provided in an accessible format and in advance of meetings. Layout and safety can involve clear walkways, contrasting edges on steps, and arrangements for emergency evacuation. Working patterns and travel can matter too, especially for people who find travel at certain times of day harder.
The detail matters because the obvious answer is not always the right one. A larger screen can help a person with reduced central vision. For a person with a narrowed field of vision, it can mean most of the screen sits outside what they can see, and a smaller screen may suit better. Equipment bought before anyone has asked what the person actually finds difficult is the most common way for money to be spent twice.
Funding that may help
Work and Access, run by the Department of Social Protection, can contribute up to €2,500 towards a Workplace Needs Assessment, with further supports such as Workplace Adaptation of up to €25,000 available only where an assessment has recommended them. Approval must be in place before anything is bought, and the assessor has to meet the scheme’s requirements on qualifications and professional registration. The availability of this funding is also one of the factors the law asks an employer to weigh when considering whether a measure is a disproportionate burden.
What this means for HR and occupational health
The safest practice is to start the conversation early and keep a record of it. Ask the employee which tasks are hardest, what already helps, and how it varies with light, fatigue or the time of day. Treat sight as something that can change, so build in a review date instead of a one-off decision. Agree who owns the process, tell the employee who that is, and set a date for the next update even when there is nothing new to report. Put sensible interim measures in place while larger items are being arranged. Document what was considered, what was decided and why, particularly where a measure is declined.
Occupational health can help by describing functional needs in plain terms, but a report that stops at the diagnosis rarely gives a manager something to act on. What a manager needs is a clear account of the person, the job and the workplace, with practical recommendations that can be priced and reviewed.
This article is general information and not legal advice. Whether an adjustment is reasonable depends on the circumstances of the individual case.
Summary
The Irish duty of reasonable accommodation is an individual, practical duty, and delay is a risk in itself. Start with a conversation, assess the person and the job before buying anything, consider public funding, and review what you put in place. The April 2026 decision is a reminder that years of partial progress can still amount to a failure to accommodate.
Watch the short film
This short film follows an employee with sight loss who does their job well but works twice as hard to do it, enlarging every document and checking everything twice. Their manager asks what makes it hardest, and bigger text, less glare and documents sent the day before make a real difference. The film lasts under a minute.
Frequently Asked Questions
Section 16 of the Employment Equality Act 1998 requires an employer to take appropriate measures for an employee with a disability unless they would impose a disproportionate burden. Whether a particular measure is required depends on the circumstances.
It found that a civil servant with a visual impairment was discriminated against through a failure to provide reasonable accommodation between 2012 and 2024, and awarded €30,000. The Department disputed parts of the complaint, so the decision turns on its own facts.
No. It can help some people with reduced central vision, but for a person with a narrowed field of vision a smaller screen may suit better. The right answer depends on what the individual can see and how they work.
Work and Access can contribute up to €2,500 towards a Workplace Needs Assessment where the assessor meets the scheme's requirements. Confirm eligibility with the Department of Social Protection before booking.
The law does not make the employer's duty conditional on a grant. Where funding is likely to take time, the sensible approach is to agree interim measures and review them.
If you or someone in your team is visually impaired and would like expert, tailored support to stay productive and comfortable at work, visit https://visualisetrainingandconsultancy.com/workplace-assessments/visual-impairment-workplace-assessments/ to arrange a visual impairment workplace assessment.
Sources
Workplace Relations Commission, Paul Hill v Department of Social Protection, ADJ-00043779 (April 2026): https://workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2026/april/adj-00043779.html
IHREC, press release on the decision (22 April 2026): https://www.ihrec.ie/news-press/ihrec-welcomes-landmark-wrc-decision-on-reasonable-accommodation-and-disability-discrimination
L&E Global, Ireland: developments in disability law (28 May 2026): https://leglobal.law/2026/05/28/ireland-developments-in-disability-law-expanding-remedies-and-reinforcing-employer-obligations/
Employment Equality Act 1998, section 16 (revised act): https://revisedacts.lawreform.ie/eli/1998/act/21/section/16/revised/en/html
Disability and reasonable accommodation, employer factsheet: https://www.ihrec.ie/guides-and-tools/human-rights-and-equality-for-employers/what-does-the-law-say/disability-and-reasonable-accommodation
HR Headquarters, Supreme Court clarifies the test for reasonable accommodation (Nano Nagle School v Daly, 2019): https://hrheadquarters.ie/legal/disability-discrimination-supreme-court-clarifies-the-test-for-reasonable-accommodation
Citizens Information, Work and Access employment programme (edited 27 August 2026): https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment-and-disability/work-and-access-programme/