In most common law jurisdictions there is both caselaw and legislation which confirms that both the government (all levels) and private business MUST accommodate persons with disabilities.
For Example in Ontario (Canada eh!):
The Ontario Human Rights Code clearly states that employers MUST accommodate persons with disbaitlies. Furthermore the code also states that persons with disbaitlies are defined in the code as person with mental and physical dsiabitlies. It goes on to state that if a person applies for workers compensation (WSIB) benefits then this too is considered a disability. This si also the case even if they are denied the claim for benefits. more importantly in the Code under section 10(3) it also states and I quote
"The right to equal treatment without discrimination because of disability includes the right to equal treatment without discrimination because a person has or has had a disability or is believed to have or to have had a disability."
This is a law that governs the actions of government agencies such as workers compensation board (WSIB) in the law it defines barriers as:
"“barrier” means anything that prevents a person with a disability from fully participating in all aspects of society because of his or her disability, including a physical barrier, an architectural barrier, an information or communications barrier, an attitudinal barrier, a technological barrier, a policy or a practice; (“obstacle”)"
So it is clear to see that person, specifically injured workers with disbaitlies do in fact have rights when dealing with government agencies such as the Workers Compensation Board(WSIB) and private business such as employers.
The following are some examples of where the workers compensation board and/or the employer failed to provide accommodations for injured workers.
Mr. D. Lawson brought complaints against the Ontario workers compensation board (WSIB). The foundation of his complaints was that the WSIB had knowingly and intentional violated his Human Rights under the Ontario Human rights Code.
In May 2009 Mr. Lawson had field a complaint arguing that he should have received his benefits as direct deposit as opposed to a cheque. The matter was resolved between the parties.
September 29, 2009 -
Mr. Lawson filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal - OHRT, which claimed that the Ontario workers compensation board (WSIB) discriminated against him on the grounds of disability, age, record of offences and reprisal, in the areas of employment, contracts and goods, services and facilities.
June 24, 2015 - This case is cited by 2 other cases
Mr. David Lawson had filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal - OHRT against the Ontario workers compensation board (WSIB). Mr. Lawson complaint was that the WSIB reprised against him because of an earlier application to the OHRT and has discriminated against him in the way that it interacts with him as an injured worker with a psychological disability. In May 2009 Mr. Lawson had field a complaint arguing that he should have received his benefits as direct deposit as opposed to a cheque. The decision maker agreed that the WSIB needed to communicate with Mr. Lawson in an appropriate manner and adjourned the hearing in attempt to utilize the medications services of the Tribunal.
September 21, 2015 -
This decision dealt with a request for the OHRT chair to recuse himself due an apprehension of bias. the foundation of the complaint was the OHRT chair was a former WSIB decision maker and thus has an inherent conflict of internet or bias. The OHRT chair stated in his decision, that he never worked for the WSIB aside from the assist with the establishment of the "Fair Practice Commission" he never worked for the WSIB. However the OHRT chair admits he did in fact work for the Workplace Safety & Insurance Appeals Tribunal - WSIAT. The WSIAT is an administrative tribunal that handles appeals form the WSIB and is directly finically connected to the WSIB.
Ultimately, the OHRT chair basing his decision on Landau v. Ontario decided that he would not recuse himself in the matter.
July 12, 2017 -
I am sorry I am still working on this page click on the link for information about the decision.
November 22, 2011 - This case cited by 8 other cases
Frankson v. Workplace Safety & Insurance Board,  HRTO No. 2107
Deals with pre-existing non work related disabilities - WSIB failed to accommodate
Deals with violation of Human Rights
This case was one of the first where the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal stepped in and made a ruling against the WSIB.
The WSIB was found at fault order to pay $5,000 in punitive damages and was ordered to amend its LMR policy documents so
that any references to the requirement to have regard to non-work related disabilities in conducting a LMR assessment, and to the WSIB’s accommodation of disabilities in a LMR plan, include non-physical disabilities such as a learning disability.
If you know of other cases where employers and/or the WCBs refused to provide accommodations and was later found to be WRONG, please let me know using my contact page and I will add them here.