An employee does not require formal diagnosis in order to be protected under the legislation – for example, they may have symptoms of autism that are severe enough to impact on day-to-day life – but have never received a piece of paper from a doctor confirming their condition. Of course, due to stigma and fear of discrimination, an employee may choose not to disclose their neurodiversity to their employer. They may not even realise whether their condition impacts their performance at work. This can make things even more complicated for employers. There is a need, therefore, to educate HR, managers and colleagues around neurodiversity and the associated legal obligations.

While complying with the law is of course a compelling reason for employers to support neurodiversity at work, it’s also the right thing to do. Speaking to the relative of a woman with autism and dyspraxia, one particular comment hit home. She said, “employers don’t understand that my sister’s condition won’t disappear once she’s trained up. She’s not just going to be ‘better’ at social skills. But there’s so many things she is really good at.” Employers may simply be unaware of the benefits neurodivergent employees can bring. Someone on the autism spectrum might be uncomfortable in social situations, but could be excellent at analytical work. An employee with ADHD might need support to stay on track with projects, but their creative thinking might lead to a solution nobody else has thought of. Someone with dyslexia might need their writing proof read, but could be a fantastic verbal communicator who excels at presenting.

I am often asked, what is a ‘reasonable adjustment’? Unfortunately, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. But just because something is inconvenient to the employer, does not make it unreasonable. T he definition of reasonable may differ depending on the size and resources of your organisation and a tribunal would generally expect a larger employer to do more to accommodate a disabled employee than would be required of a smaller organisation. Common employee requests might be flexible working hours or a change in working location. Someone with ADHD may find a noisy office difficult and may prefer working from home, or in a quieter area. Others may struggle with day-to-day functions. Adjusting targets, or absence trigger points may be required. Every individual is different, so it is important to observe, listen to the employee and seek medical advice concerning what support is required. Such requests have to be balanced against the needs of the role and the organisation to determine their reasonableness. Employers also need to ensure they are not putting unlawful barriers in place that prevent neurodiverse people from gaining employment. Organisations are expected in law to anticipate the needs of disabled applicants and make reasonable adjustments to their processes. Job ads should be easy to read. Application forms should be accessible, with clear, precise questions and available in a range of formats. Help should be offered to anyone who needs support to apply. Those selecting candidates and interviewing should be educated about unconscious bias and the importance of not simply rejecting a candidate without further consideration because, for example, their body language is different from ‘normal’. After all, a fixation with normal is hardly a credo for striving for diversity.

FOR FURTHER INFO WWW.ANDERSONSTRATHERN.CO.UK