A/69/261 religious or belief minorities who may be confronted with the dilemma of either living in accordance with their convictions or risking dismissal or other sanctions. 47. Indirect discrimination at the workplace can occur both in public institutions and in the private sector. When establishing rules or practices with indirectly discriminatory implications, public or private employers in some cases are cognizant of what they do and use such mechanisms on purpose. However, it seems plausible to assume that in many cases they are not fully aware of the possibly discriminatory effects that prima facie neutral rules can have on the situation of religious or belief minorities within their staff. 48. Apart from difficulties in detecting indirect discrimination or other concea led forms of religious intolerance, finding an appropriate response is usually more complicated than in cases of straightforward intolerance and direct discrimination. Obviously, it requires a culture of open and trustful communication between employers, managers and staff, always including religious or belief minorities, who should feel encouraged to voice their specific concerns and needs. In some situations, indirect discrimination can only be rectified by modifying general rules or by accommodating specific “exceptions” for certain individuals. Many employers are reluctant to embark on such a course out of a fear that this could open the floodgates to all sorts of presumably “unreasonable” demands. Some employers may also fear that by accommodating specific needs of religious minorities, they could in the end undermine important policy considerations, such as corporate identity, neutrality, customer-friendliness and the rights of other employees. Demands to accommodate specific needs of religious or belief minorities seem to have triggered resistance in the wider society, because they are sometimes misperceived as “privileging” minorities at the expense of the principle of equality. For this reason, even people generally sympathetic with broader human rights and non-discrimination agendas may react in a somewhat ambivalent manner towards proposals of special accommodation for religious or belief minorities in the workplace. In order to counter such fears, those proposing specific measures of accommodation u sually make clear that these measures should remain within a “reasonable” framework. This leads to the issue of “reasonable accommodation”. D. The role of reasonable accommodation 1. The meaning of reasonable accommodation 49. “Reasonable accommodation” has become a recognized term in the international human rights debate, and its relevance in a comprehensive non-discrimination strategy has been formally enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 (General Assembly resolution 61/106). 19 Article 2 of the Convention defines: “Reasonable accommodation means necessary and appropriate modification and adjustments not imposing a disproportionate or undue burden, where needed in a particular case, to ensure to persons with disabilities the enjoyment and exercise on an equal basis with others of all human rights and fundamental freedoms”. Article 5, paragraph 3, of the Convention __________________ 19 14/23 The term “reasonable accommodation” has been used by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its general comment No. 5 (E/1995/22, annex IV, para. 15 ). See also the Committee’s general comment No. 20 (E/C.12/GC/20, para. 28). 14-58756