A recent employment tribunal decision has highlighted the complexities surrounding what constitutes a ‘reasonable adjustment’ for neurodivergent employees.

Ms Khorram, a Cloud Technologist with over 25 years’ experience, worked for technology services company Capgemini. During her probation period, she disclosed that she was taking ADHD medication, which was affecting her ability to carry out day-to-day tasks.

In response, Capgemini arranged an occupational health assessment, which recommended that the team attend a training seminar on working with individuals with ADHD. However, the seminar was never delivered after Ms Khorram expressed discomfort at being required to attend herself. The company also failed to implement coaching sessions aimed at enhancing communication between HR at Capgemini and Ms Khorram. These oversights were deemed by the tribunal to constitute a failure to make reasonable adjustments, and Ms Khorram was partially successful in her claim.

This case raises important questions about what employers must do to support neurodivergent employees and how to ensure that adjustments are both reasonable and effective.

Understanding reasonable adjustments

Under the Equality Act 2010, individuals with a ‘significant impairment’ that substantially affects their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities may be considered disabled. Employers are legally required to consider and implement reasonable adjustments for such employees.

The aim of these adjustments is to remove or reduce barriers, support coping strategies, and provide tools that enable neurodivergent employees to thrive. This recognises that while an individual may face challenges in some areas, they may excel in others—and with the right support, can perform effectively.

Examples of reasonable adjustments

Examples of reasonable adjustments for employees with ADHD or similar conditions might include:

• Additional reminders for deadlines, especially when multiple deadlines are due in a short timeframe.
• Extended time to complete tasks.
• Consideration of workload to avoid excessive multitasking.
• Frequent breaks from the workspace.
• Advance notice of social events.
• Regular one-to-one sessions with managers to encourage open communication.
• Standing desks to improve focus and reduce restlessness.

In Ms Khorram’s case, the tribunal found that Capgemini failed to provide achievable tasks, did not deliver ADHD awareness training, and neglected to implement coaching sessions – despite these being recommended by occupational health.

Being a supportive employer

Supporting neurodivergent employees begins with understanding, open communication, and tailored support. Many individuals may be undiagnosed or choose not to disclose their condition. Employers should avoid pressuring employees into disclosure and instead foster a culture of trust where individuals feel safe to share their needs.

Confidential conversations can be particularly helpful when performance concerns arise. Employers may also benefit from engaging with neurodiversity-focused charities to better understand how to approach these conversations with empathy and discretion.

When a condition is disclosed, an occupational health assessment can provide valuable guidance. However, as this case shows, it’s not enough to commission a report – employers must act on its recommendations.

In Ms Khorram’s situation, the failure to follow through on suggested coaching and the imposition of additional objectives despite known difficulties with multitasking were key factors in the tribunal’s decision.

Embedding neurodiversity into workplace culture

To create a psychologically safe and inclusive environment, employers should consider team-wide training on neurodiversity as part of broader diversity and inclusion efforts. This avoids singling out individuals and helps build a culture of understanding.

In this case, both Ms Khorram and Capgemini’s HR team agreed that training could have been beneficial. However, because the session was framed as a response to her diagnosis, she declined to attend – and therefore the training was never delivered. The tribunal found this to be a failure to make reasonable adjustments.

This highlights the importance of designing training that is inclusive by default, rather than reactive or individualised in a way that may cause discomfort.

Becoming truly inclusive

Creating an inclusive workplace requires more than compliance – it demands proactive engagement. Employers must tailor adjustments to individual needs, maintain open lines of communication, and act on expert recommendations. As this case demonstrates, failure to do so can have legal consequences and damage trust.

Embedding neurodiversity awareness into broader inclusion strategies helps create a culture where all employees feel supported and valued.

If you’re an HR professional looking to better support your neurodivergent employees, we can help you navigate your legal obligations and implement best practices. Get in touch today to discuss how we can support your organisation in building a more inclusive workplace.