Public servants living with disabilities say they fear accommodation requests could hurt their careers, Public Service Commission survey finds

Seven in 10 federal public servants living with disabilities who needed an assessment accommodation during a staffing process or second-language evaluation, but did not request one, feared doing so would hurt their chances of succeeding, according to a new Public Service Commission survey.

Interviews with federal public servants and disability-policy experts suggest those concerns can extend beyond the moment a request is made or denied. Uncertainty about the accommodation process, and fear of how disclosure will be received, can shape a public servant's career decisions before any formal outcome is known, according to the survey.

The commission defines an assessment accommodation as a change to an assessment's procedure, format, or content during a staffing process or second-language evaluation, meant to remove barriers so a candidate can fairly demonstrate their qualifications.

The Public Service Commission's (PSC) survey received 82,987 responses from employees across 80 federal organizations, a 30.9 per cent response rate. The commission weighted results to represent the 268,584 federal public servants covered.

The survey covered federal employees' experiences with staffing and second-language testing between April 2024 and March 2025. It found employees living with disabilities were nine times as likely as those without to request an assessment accommodation, at nine per cent compared to one per cent.

Among employees living with disabilities who requested an accommodation, 72 per cent received it, and 87 per cent of those said they were satisfied with the accommodation they received.

Ten per cent of employees living with disabilities reported needing an assessment accommodation they did not request, compared with one per cent of employees without disabilities.

The 10 per cent finding was based on 792 survey respondents and weighted to represent 2,548 employees. Among them, 70 per cent said they feared requesting an accommodation would reduce their chances of success. Other reasons included doubting they would receive the accommodation needed, at 36 per cent; finding the process too difficult or complicated, also at 36 per cent; and concern it would take too much time, at 29 per cent.

The results reveal a tension between high satisfaction among employees who received accommodations and the concerns reported by those who did not request them.

Choosing not to ask

One federal public servant, who spoke to The Hill Times on condition of anonymity, described an experience that closely matched the survey’s findings: he said he believed he needed an assessment accommodation during a staffing process, but never requested one.

Job postings mentioned that accommodations were available, he said, but did not explain what could be requested or what documentation was required. He said that uncertainty, and fear of how a request might be perceived, made it feel safer to manage without support.

“There’s an incentive basically to just not even deal with the accommodation process or disclose during these hiring processes and sort of try and tough it out,” he said.

During an oral second-language evaluation, he said he had difficulty processing questions asked quickly and completed the test without accommodation. He later retook the test and received a better result, but said the earlier result had limited his eligibility for some positions requiring a higher language level.

“What drives employees to fear requesting an accommodation will reduce their chances is really experience,” said University of Guelph political science professor Deborah Stienstra, who studies disability policy and accessibility.

She pointed to patterns of denial, disbelief, and medicalized processes requiring private health disclosure. Those experiences can reinforce the idea that an employee living with a disability is the problem, she said.

Arif Jetha, a scientist at the Institute for Work & Health, said workplace culture and a manager's openness shape whether an employee feels safe raising an accommodation need.

IWH research involving 600 workers found that perceptions of workplace culture could be as important as the supports formally available when employees decided whether to disclose a health condition. Jetha said employees who find reliable support can become reluctant to pursue a promotion or transfer for fear of losing it.

“Workers with disabilities sometimes feel locked in their jobs,” he said.

In an email to The Hill Times, the Canadian Association of Professional Employees said members of its Disability Justice Caucus reported that they and other CAPE members had avoided promotions and job changes because they feared having to restart lengthy accommodation processes or face greater stigma under a new manager. Some members also reported that verbal promotion offers never materialized after they raised accommodation needs, the association said.

When a move fell through

For another federal public servant, that concern arose after he had already arranged a move to another organization. The manager and former human-resources adviser spoke to The Hill Times on condition of anonymity because of unrelated ongoing litigation.

He said he had arranged a six-to-nine-month lateral secondment to another federal organization and signed the paperwork before raising the need for accommodation measures.

The prospective manager told him the measures were not operationally feasible for such a short assignment, he said. He said he withdrew rather than proceed without support and filed a grievance, which was settled before a first-level hearing. There was no adjudicated finding or admission of fault.

“Never again will I ask for accommodation measures before I have a signed legal document in my hand,” he said.

In an email, a Public Service Commission spokesperson said some candidates have asked it to investigate claims that requesting an accommodation hurt them in a hiring process. Allegations have included not being invited to an assessment, being screened out, facing delays, or having the request affect how their candidacy was considered.

Most of those files involved administrative or communication problems, such as delays, missed follow-ups or accommodations being put in place incorrectly, the commission said. In some cases, departments returned candidates to the hiring process, provided the accommodation or reassessed them.

“This finding underscores the importance of fostering inclusive workplaces where employees can request accommodations without fear of negative consequences,” the Public Service Commission said.

The PSC spokesperson said it has urged departments to offer accommodations proactively, to reduce stigma and to build accessibility into assessments from the outset. It is also updating its guidance for assessing people with disabilities, developing tools for hiring managers and improving the accessibility of its language-testing platform.

A manager's view

K.S., a federal manager living with a disability described a similar gap between formal policy and practical support, this time involving a workplace accommodation rather than an assessment. The Hill Times is identifying her by her initials to protect her identity while she discusses her workplace and career experiences.

Her employee had a Government of Canada Workplace Accessibility Passport, a tool used to document workplace barriers and agreed solutions so employees do not have to renegotiate supports each time they change jobs or managers. It specified a need for quieter seating and dimmer lighting, she said, and she arranged the quieter workstation immediately.

Getting the overhead lights above the workstation turned off, however, took five months because responsibility was divided between two federal organizations and a service ticket was mistakenly closed.

“I am, as a manager, the best-resourced manager for knowing how to handle this stuff,” she said. “It still took me five months.”

In a 2019 Treasury Board follow-up survey, 743 federal employees whose accommodation requests related to a health condition or disability identified long waits, paperwork, and repeatedly explaining their condition among the challenges they considered when deciding whether to request accommodation.

The auditor general’s May report found that all seven organizations it examined had ineffective accommodation processes, with requests taking an average of 24 to 310 days to close. The report did not examine the manager’s case. It also found that only 51 per cent of supervisors surveyed were aware the passport existed.

The same manager said she has repeatedly been encouraged to pursue more senior leadership roles, but has held back because of the workload, its health consequences, and doubts she would be adequately supported at that level. Her experience shows how uncertainty about support can narrow a career before an accommodation request is ever made.

“I haven’t seen the commitment from my department or other departments to actually supporting employees once they get to that rank,” she said.

Stienstra said employers could reduce the fear attached to disclosing a disability, or requesting an accommodation by asking every employee what support they need, rather than waiting for workers living with disabilities to identify themselves and initiate the process.

“What do you need to work well at this? What can we do to make you succeed in this job?” should be standard questions for every employee, she said.

Making those conversations routine would normalize accommodation and reduce the sense that employees living with disabilities are asking for exceptional treatment.

Jetha said employers could reduce the risks employees associate with disclosure by focusing conversations on job demands and possible solutions rather than diagnoses. He also recommended designing workplace practices to support a wide range of employee needs, noting that measures benefiting people living with disabilities can also help other workers.

“There’s no person who doesn’t need support from time to time,” he said. Some of the accommodations employees most need cost little or nothing, he added.

Editor's note: An edit was made to this article at 9:27 a.m. on Aug. 4, 2026, to strengthen source anonymity.

mponcana@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times