Autism, ADHD and the Rise in Employment Tribunals: What Organisations Must Do Now

A recent Telegraph article reported a sharp rise in employment tribunal cases linked to autism and ADHD. As awareness and diagnosis increase, more employees are asserting their legal rights at work.

This should not surprise anyone working closely with organisational culture, governance and equity.

We are seeing it too.

Across sectors, particularly in complex systems such as the NHS, local government and higher education, we are supporting leaders who are navigating an increase in neurodiversity-related grievances, formal complaints and disputes.

The pattern is not primarily about bad intent. It is about systems that have not kept pace with understanding.

What Is Driving the Increase?

Three factors are converging:

1. Greater awareness and diagnosis - More adults are being diagnosed with autism and ADHD. Many are mid-career professionals who have been masking for years.

2. Increased confidence in asserting rights - Employees are more informed about the protections under the Equality Act 2010, including the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

3. Workplace pressures - Hybrid working, performance intensity, restructures and financial constraints are exposing weaknesses in management capability and inclusion practice.

When systems are rigid, communication is unclear, or performance processes lack flexibility, neurodivergent colleagues can quickly find themselves labelled as “difficult”, “underperforming” or “not a team fit”.

What could have been a supportive conversation becomes a formal process. What could have been an adjustment becomes a dispute.

The Risk of a Compliance-Only Mindset

Some organisations respond defensively:

• Tightening documentation

• Referring quickly to occupational health

• Escalating to HR early

• Seeking legal reassurance

While compliance is important, this approach often misses the cultural root cause.

Tribunals are rarely just about policy. They are about how people experience leadership.

A technically sound policy implemented without empathy, flexibility or understanding can still create harm.

What Organisations Should Be Thinking About Now

1. Move From Awareness to Capability

Most organisations now run neurodiversity awareness sessions. Awareness is not enough.

Managers need practical capability in:

• Holding psychologically safe conversations

• Exploring adjustments collaboratively

• Distinguishing between conduct, capability and difference

• Managing performance with flexibility and clarity

Line managers are the fulcrum point. Without equipping them, risk escalates.

2. Normalise Reasonable Adjustments

Adjustments should not feel like a special favour granted reluctantly.

They should be:

• Embedded into onboarding conversations

• Reviewed during performance discussions

• Framed as productivity enhancers

• Documented consistently

  
  

Simple changes, such as clear written instructions, structured agendas, predictable routines or flexibility in communication channels, often prevent escalation.

3. Review Performance and Conduct Processes

Many tribunal cases arise when behavioural differences are misinterpreted.

Ask:

• Are your performance frameworks overly reliant on subjective behavioural language?

• Do your conduct policies distinguish between misconduct and neurodivergent traits?

• Are managers trained to interpret behaviour contextually?

  
  

Without this clarity, formal processes can disproportionately affect neurodivergent staff.

4. Strengthen Psychological Safety

Employees who feel safe raise concerns early.

Where cultures are hierarchical, fast-paced or punitive, concerns surface late and formally.

Psychological safety is not a “soft” concept. It is a risk mitigation strategy.

5. Collect and Use Data Thoughtfully

Organisations should:

• Monitor disability-related grievance and tribunal trends

• Analyse patterns by team or function

• Use qualitative insight alongside quantitative data

  
  

Data should prompt learning, not defensiveness.

This Is About More Than Legal Risk

Yes, there is legal exposure. Tribunal claims are costly financially and reputationally.

But the bigger issue is this:

Neurodivergent colleagues often bring exceptional strengths, pattern recognition, creativity, hyperfocus, innovation, systems thinking.

If organisational culture pushes them to the margins, the loss is strategic.

A Leadership Moment

We are at an inflection point.

The rise in tribunal cases is not a crisis of entitlement. It is a signal.

A signal that organisations must evolve from:

Reactive compliance → Proactive inclusion Policy possession → Cultural capability Accommodation → Belonging

The question for leaders is not “How do we protect ourselves from claims?”

It is:

“How do we design workplaces where neurodivergent colleagues can thrive before conflict ever arises?”

Those who get this right will not just reduce tribunal risk. They will build more adaptive, humane and high-performing organisations.