How do we know?
ernesty's research comes from two separate sources: a survey of employees who have requested accommodations, and the founder's case records. This page explains how each figure was produced, what it measures, and where its limits are.
The 72%
Survey findings
Workplace Accommodations: Share Your Experience, September-October 2025
What the survey measured
In September 2025, ernesty distributed a survey titled Workplace Accommodations: Share Your Experience via LinkedIn and employee resource groups. The survey was shared publicly and circulated peer-to-peer among networks with interest in workplace disability issues. 214 complete responses were collected over approximately one week. Of the 214 respondents, 208 reported having made at least one reasonable accommodation request at work. This group forms the basis of the 72% figure.
How retaliation was defined
Respondents were asked: "How did behavior toward you change after your request?" Standard response options included increased scrutiny, placement on a performance improvement plan (PIP), termination, no change, and increased support. Respondents could also provide a written open-ended response.
Retaliation was defined as any negative change in employment status or treatment following an accommodation request, including:
- Increased scrutiny or monitoring
- Placement on a performance improvement plan
- Termination or forced resignation
- Demotion or removal of responsibilities
- Exclusion, isolation, or hostile treatment
Open-ended responses were reviewed individually. Responses describing any of the above outcomes were counted as retaliation. Responses describing neutral or positive changes were not counted. Under this definition, 150 of 208 respondents reported experiencing retaliation, a rate of 72.1%.
Limitations
This survey was self-selected. Respondents chose to participate after seeing a post about workplace accommodation experiences, which means the sample likely overrepresents people who had difficult or notable experiences. The true rate of retaliation among all employees who make accommodation requests may be lower.
All figures are based on self-report. Employment outcomes were not independently verified.
Respondents were predominantly located in the United States (69%), Canada (14%), and the United Kingdom (7%). Findings may not apply equally across different legal jurisdictions.
No demographic information beyond geography was collected. Factors including disability type, industry, employer size, employment status, race, gender, and other identity variables were not captured and are not accounted for in this analysis. A follow-up study incorporating these variables would be warranted.
The 92%
Case data
ernesty founder case outcomes, 2020-2025 · 2,000+ employees
What this figure measures
Over five years of practice, ernesty's founder has provided accommodation guidance to more than 2,000 employees. Of those who engaged support before making their initial accommodation request, 92% received an approved accommodation.
Approval was defined as full approval, partial approval, or an equally effective alternative, as judged by the employee. Outcomes where the employee received something materially different from what was needed were not counted as approvals. Critically, any case in which retaliation occurred was not counted as a successful outcome, regardless of whether the accommodation itself was approved on paper. An approval accompanied by retaliation (a demotion, a PIP, a hostile shift in treatment) is counted as an effective denial.
What "before making the request" means
The 92% figure applies specifically to employees who sought guidance prior to submitting their accommodation request. Employees who engaged support before requesting were able to frame their needs clearly, anticipate employer responses, and document appropriately from the start.
Employees who came to ernesty after an initial denial or after retaliation had begun faced a more complex process. Outcomes for this group were still meaningfully better than average, but are reported separately. Exact figures for this group are in preparation and will be published here when available.
About the founder
Julie
founder of ernesty
Julie is a disabled employee and former accommodations consultant who has worked on both sides of the accommodation process. From 2021 to 2023, she worked exclusively advising employers on accommodation compliance and response. From 2023 through late 2024, she worked with both employers and employees. Since late 2024, her focus has been exclusively on the employee side.
This experience on both sides of the table informs ernesty's understanding of how employers approach accommodation requests and what employees need to know to navigate that process effectively.
Limitations
Case data was not collected under controlled conditions. Outcomes were tracked through direct involvement in the process and client self-report for cases that resolved without ongoing support. This data has not been independently audited.
The 92% figure reflects outcomes for a self-selected group of employees who actively sought professional support. It does not represent the general population of accommodation requesters.
A Note on Transparency
ernesty publishes this methodology because the employees who use this tool are making vulnerable decisions with real professional consequences. They deserve to know exactly what the numbers behind ernesty mean and what they don't.
If you have questions about this data or methodology, contact us →
Survey data collected September-October 2025. Case data covers 2020-2025.
This page will be updated as additional data becomes available.