The Brutal Truth About Neurodiversity & UK Employment Tribunals

This isn't a nice-to-have conversation. This is your arse on the line.

Let me be clear from the start: neuroinclusion isn't some fluffy HR initiative you roll out to look good on LinkedIn. It's not about being kind or progressive. It's about not getting dragged through an employment tribunal that costs you tens of thousands of pounds, destroys your reputation, and leaves your business limping.

The landscape has shifted. What used to be a niche issue is now mainstream, and tribunals are absolutely hammering employers who don't get this right.

The Numbers Don't Lie

In 2023, UK employment tribunal cases related to neurodiversity increased significantly. We're not talking about a handful of edge cases anymore. There's been a surge in ADHD-related tribunal claims specifically, and the trend shows no signs of slowing down.

Tribunals receipts have shown an 11% increase in 2024/25 compared to the previous year. More people know their rights. More people are willing to fight. And tribunals are taking these claims seriously.

This isn't going away. This is your new reality.

The Law You Cannot Afford to Ignore

Equality Act 2010

Here's what matters: neurodivergent conditions like autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and dyspraxia often meet the definition of "disability" under the Equality Act 2010. The test is whether the condition has a "substantial and long-term adverse effect" on someone's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

If it does, you're legally required to make reasonable adjustments. Not nice adjustments. Not when-you-get-around-to-it adjustments. Reasonable adjustments.

Fail to do this, and you're open to claims of:

• Disability discrimination

• Harassment

• Victimisation

• Failure to make reasonable adjustments

An employee doesn't even need a diagnosis to be considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010. Think about that. Your "we need official paperwork" policy might already be discriminatory.

The ACAS Code and the 25% Kick in the face

Here's where it gets expensive.

The ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures sets out how you should handle workplace disputes. If you fail to follow it, tribunals can increase your compensation award by up to 25%. This uplift applies after they've calculated what you owe.

Let's say a tribunal decides you owe £40,000 for unfair dismissal and discrimination. You didn't follow the ACAS Code properly. The tribunal can add up to 25% on top. That's another £10,000. You're now at £50,000.

The uplift is applied if a tribunal considers it just and equitable to do so when an employer unreasonably fails to comply with the ACAS Code. The key word is "unreasonably". Tribunals are not sympathetic to employers who can't be bothered to follow basic procedures.

The case of Rentplus UK Ltd v Coulson is a perfect example: the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld a 25% uplift when the employer failed to comply with the ACAS Code.

Bad process equals big money. Simple as that.

Real Cases That Should Make You Uncomfortable

These aren't theoretical. These happened.

The sighing manager: A tribunal found that a manager repeatedly sighing and making exaggerated exhalations at a neurodivergent employee was discriminatory behaviour. Read that again. Sighing. That's how low the bar is for what counts as harassment.

Wright v Cardinal Newman School: The tribunal decided that the employee's repeated grievances and conduct were manifestations of autism, and the school had failed to make adjustments. The behaviour they were disciplining him for was literally part of his disability.

The Darth Vader comparison: An employer compared an employee to Darth Vader during a personality exercise. The tribunal found that caused a "detriment" and awarded around £30,000. Seems absurd? Maybe. But it happened, and someone paid for it.

£17,154 award: One case involved a combination of failure to make adjustments, discrimination, harassment, and victimisation. The sum might not sound massive, but add in legal costs, management time, reputational damage, and the ACAS uplift, and you're looking at a six-figure problem.

Tribunals are treating micro-behaviours, eye-rolling, sarcasm, and subtle biases as part of the fabric of discrimination. You might think "that's just how we manage performance here," but tribunals disagree.

Why Employers Keep Getting Hammered

Let me tell you exactly why this keeps happening:

1. Neurodivergent employees often mask. They hide their struggles. They don't disclose. By the time you realise something's wrong, the damage is done and the pattern of disadvantage is established.

2. Your one-size-fits-all HR system is broken. It was designed for the "average worker" without considering variance. That's discrimination baked into your processes.

3. You're ignoring the warning signs. Poor focus, errors, social challenges, communication difficulties. You're treating these as performance issues when they might be manifestations of a disability.

4. Your managers are untrained. They don't know how to spot difference, handle conflict, or respond to adjustment requests. They default to "treat everyone the same," which is exactly what the law says you shouldn't do.

5. Tribunals expect proactive responsibility. "I didn't know" isn't a defence. You should have known. You should have asked. You should have created an environment where people felt safe to disclose.

The Top 5 Reasons Employers Get Dragged to Tribunal

1. Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments

This is the big one. Reasonable adjustments are changes an employer makes to remove or reduce a disadvantage related to someone's disability.

What does this look like in practice?

• Not adjusting deadlines when someone's ADHD makes time management genuinely difficult

• Ignoring sensory issues (noise, lighting, open-plan chaos)

• Refusing flexible working or different communication channels

• Not providing written instructions when someone struggles with verbal processing

• Forcing someone into meetings or social situations that cause genuine distress

  
  

The law requires employers to make a reasonable adjustment where a disabled worker would be at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled colleagues.

The word "reasonable" matters. You don't have to bankrupt yourself. But "it's inconvenient" or "we've always done it this way" won't cut it.

2. Harassment and Hostile Conduct

Comments, sighs, eye-rolling, exclusion, sarcasm. Even if your manager thinks "it's just pressure" or "I'm motivating them," tribunals can treat these acts as disability harassment.

You don't need to intend discrimination for it to be discrimination. If your conduct creates a hostile environment related to someone's disability, you're liable.

3. Unfair Dismissal or Constructive Dismissal

Firing someone without considering their condition and what adjustments you could have made is a fast track to a tribunal.

Constructive dismissal is when the employee resigns because your treatment made their position intolerable. If you're disciplining someone for behaviour that's a manifestation of their neurodivergence, or if you're making their life hell because they disclosed or requested adjustments, they can resign and still claim you dismissed them.

4. Discrimination in Performance and Progression Decisions

Penalising someone for missing quotas or making errors when those difficulties are part of their condition, without understanding the context or adjusting expectations, is discrimination.

If you're blocking promotions, bonuses, or opportunities because someone "doesn't fit the mould," you need to ask whether that mould is discriminatory.

5. Victimisation After Disclosure

This is the killer. Someone tells you they're neurodivergent, or they request adjustments, or they raise a grievance. Then you demote them, isolate them, discipline them, or make their life difficult.

That's victimisation. It's illegal. And tribunals come down on it like a tonne of bricks.

How Training and Proactive Inclusion Actually Mitigate Risk

Let's be practical. Here's what you do:

A. Get Leadership on Board

This isn't an HR problem. This is a business risk. Your directors need to understand that neuroinclusion is risk control, not a nice-to-have. It needs to be on the board agenda.

B. Train Your Managers Hard

More than four in ten senior leaders have received specific training in relation to neurodiversity in the past 12 months. If you haven't, you're behind the curve.

Your managers need to know:

• What neurodivergent traits might look like (not a checklist, just awareness)

• How to have safe conversations: "What helps you work best?" instead of assumptions

• Micro-adjustments: changes to communication style, workflow, environment, feedback delivery

• When and how to escalate to HR or occupational health

C. Overhaul Your Policies and Processes

Make "reasonable adjustments" a standard part of every policy, not a footnote you add when someone threatens legal action.

Build formal, confidential workflows for adjustment requests. Make them responsive. Review them regularly.

Audit your performance management, disciplinary, and grievance procedures with a neurodiversity lens. Where are the assumptions? Where are the barriers?

D. Stress-Test Your Systems

Run mock grievance and dismissal scenarios involving neurodivergent employees. Would your processes hold up under legal scrutiny? Would you survive an ACAS Code challenge?

Fix the gaps now, before someone escalates.

E. Document Everything

If a dispute lands in a tribunal, your survival depends on records. Requests, deliberations, adjustments offered or refused, reasons, communications.

A weak paper trail means you're relying on tribunal mercy. Good luck with that.

The Bottom Line

Neuroinclusion isn't about being kind. It's about survival.

You can't say "we treat everyone the same" anymore, because "the same" means giving advantage to the neurotypical and disadvantaging everyone else. You must actively engineer inclusion, flexibility, and empathy into your systems.

Training, policy, awareness, record-keeping - these aren't optional. They're your shield.

Get it wrong? You pay. In money, reputation, and time.

Get it right? You're protected. And you might even build a better business in the process.

The tribunals are coming. The question is whether you'll be ready.