accommodation-request git:20260810.d0ca707A

Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/0d69496ad0670da7.

---
name: accommodation-request
description: "Request a reasonable accommodation at work or in education — frame it around the barrier and the adjustment (not your diagnosis), cite the right process, and navigate the back-and-forth constructively. Use when someone says 'I need a workplace accommodation', 'request reasonable adjustments', 'ADA/Equality Act accommodation', or 'how do I ask for accommodations for my disability/condition'. Produces the request letter, a barriers-and-adjustments map, disclosure guidance, and a plan for the interactive process. Not legal advice — routes to the formal process and to advocacy where needed."
homepage: https://mohitagw15856.github.io/pm-claude-skills/skill/accommodation-request.html
metadata:
  {
    "openclaw": { "emoji": "🧠" }
  }
---

# Accommodation Request Skill

Reasonable accommodations (US: ADA; UK: reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act;
similar elsewhere) are a right, but getting them often stalls on how the request is
framed: people over-share medical detail, ask for a vague "help," or frame it as a
favor rather than an adjustment to a barrier. Employers and institutions respond best
to a specific request that names the *barrier* and the *adjustment that removes it* —
they generally don't need your diagnosis, only the functional limitation and what
helps. This skill writes that request, guides how much to disclose, and prepares you
for the interactive back-and-forth that follows. It is not legal advice; it routes to
the formal process and to advocacy if you hit resistance.

## What This Skill Produces

- A **barriers-and-adjustments map**: for each thing that's hard, the specific
  workplace/course barrier and the concrete adjustment that removes it (framed as an
  adjustment to a barrier, not a personal favor)
- The **request letter/email**: to the right person (HR, disability services, manager
  per the process), citing the process, naming the adjustments, and inviting the
  interactive dialogue
- **Disclosure guidance**: how much to share (usually the functional limitation and
  what helps, not the diagnosis), what you're not obliged to reveal, and where medical
  documentation is genuinely needed
- A **process plan**: the interactive/good-faith dialogue that's expected, how to
  handle "that's not possible," alternatives, and escalation to advocacy or the formal
  complaint route if needed

## Required Inputs

Ask for (if not already provided):
- The setting (workplace or education) and country/system, since the legal framework
  and process differ
- The specific difficulties and the tasks/situations where they bite (the barrier),
  and what adjustments would help
- What the user is comfortable disclosing and to whom, and whether there's an existing
  process (HR policy, disability services office)
- Any history (a prior refusal, a difficult manager) that shapes strategy

## Framework

1. **Frame around barrier → adjustment, not diagnosis.** The request names the barrier
   ("open-plan noise makes focused work impossible," "fixed exam timing conflicts with
   medication effects") and the specific adjustment that removes it (noise-cancelling/
   a quiet space, extra time/a separate room). The employer's duty attaches to the
   barrier and the reasonable fix, not to your medical history.
2. **Disclose the minimum that works.** Generally you must share enough functional
   information to justify the adjustment and may need medical documentation of the
   limitation — but not your full diagnosis or records. The skill helps calibrate:
   enough to establish the need, no more, and names what you're not obliged to reveal.
3. **Send it to the right process.** Route to whoever owns adjustments (HR, disability/
   access services, occupational health) rather than only a manager who can't approve,
   cite the relevant policy/law framing, and put it in writing so there's a record.
4. **Expect the interactive dialogue — and engage it.** These processes are meant to be
   a good-faith back-and-forth: they may propose alternatives, ask for documentation, or
   push back on cost/feasibility. The skill preps constructive responses, the
   "undue-hardship/reasonableness" conversation, and holding firm on the barrier while
   being flexible on the exact fix.
5. **Know the escalation and get support.** If met with refusal, delay, or retaliation:
   the formal grievance/complaint route, disability advocacy organizations, and (where
   warranted) legal advice. Retaliation for requesting accommodations is itself usually
   unlawful — flag it, and route to real help rather than adjudicating it here.

## Output Format

```
## Barriers → adjustments
| The barrier (situation/task) | The adjustment that removes it |

## Your request (send this)
[To the right owner · cites the process · names the adjustments · invites the
interactive dialogue · in writing]

## What to disclose (and what you needn't)
[The functional info to share · documentation if genuinely needed · what you're not
obliged to reveal]

## The back-and-forth
[Expect a good-faith dialogue · handling "not possible"/alternatives · firm on barrier,
flexible on fix]

## If you hit a wall
[Grievance/complaint route · disability advocacy orgs · legal advice · retaliation is
usually unlawful — get help]

⚠ Not legal advice. Frameworks differ by country and situation; route to the formal
process and to an advocate/lawyer if you meet resistance.
```

## Quality Checks

- [ ] Every request is framed as barrier → adjustment, not as a diagnosis disclosure or
      a favor
- [ ] Disclosure is calibrated to the minimum needed, and what's not required is stated
- [ ] It's routed to the actual owner of the process, in writing
- [ ] The interactive/good-faith dialogue is anticipated with constructive responses
- [ ] An escalation/advocacy path and the not-legal-advice line are present

## Anti-Patterns

- [ ] Do not over-disclose medical detail — the barrier and the fix are what matter
- [ ] Do not assert specific legal entitlements or "undue hardship" thresholds as fact —
      they vary; route to the process and to advocacy
- [ ] Do not frame it as asking a favor — it's a request to remove a barrier, often a legal duty
- [ ] Do not counsel giving up at first refusal — the interactive process and escalation
      exist for exactly that
- [ ] Do not treat retaliation as normal — flag it and route to real help

## Related

[[disability-disclosure-decision]] for the whether/how of telling work at all;
[[disability-benefit-appeal]] for the benefits side; [[venue-access-check]] and
[[accessible-travel-planner]] for physical access; [[nt-translator]] for the workplace-
communication layer.