Abstract
This article examines the evolving notion of reasonable accommodation at work under European Union law, with the aim of contributing to a clearer definition of its scope and limits. While reasonable accommodation has become a central instrument of disability equality in employment, its boundaries remain fluid and contested, particularly where accommodation intersects with job retention, sickness absence, and the continuity of the employment relationship. The article addresses a specific legal dilemma that has not yet been fully explored in a systematic manner: whether the suspension of work performance and prolonged absence from work may qualify as reasonable accommodation for workers with disabilities. From a methodological perspective, the analysis is grounded in Directive 2000/78/EC and in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and is complemented by a case study of the Italian legal system, where extensive and sometimes divergent judicial approaches have developed in relation to sickness leave and dismissal for incapacity. Against this background, the article focuses on the recent Pauni judgment (Case C-5/24), examining its reasoning and implications for the construction of reasonable accommodation under EU law. It argues that the Court’s approach supports an interpretation of reasonable accommodation as an instrument aimed at enabling participation in professional life, rather than legitimising the indefinite or quasi-indefinite suspension of work performance. The originality of the article lies in highlighting the normative and systemic significance of the Pauni judgment in clarifying what reasonable accommodation at work is—and, crucially, what it is not—within contemporary European labour law.