FMJ Facilities Management magazine providing industry-specific intelligence to FM and property professionals
More than a third (35 per cent) of HR and compliance professionals say managers in their organisation lack confidence when discussing reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent employees, with 30 per cent describing managers as “not very confident” and five per cent citing they were “not confident at all”.
The findings are from a survey of 495 workplace professionals carried out by compliance eLearning provider, VinciWorks, who says the picture at the other end of the scale tells its own story, with only 6.5 per cent saying managers in their organisation were “very confident” in these conversations. With at least one in seven people in the UK estimated to be neurodivergent, the confidence gap among those responsible for managing them carries significant workforce implications.
The findings arrive as analysis of His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service data by employment law firm Irwin Mitchell reveals that tribunal claims involving neurodiversity discrimination have risen 95 per cent over five years. In the last year alone, 517 cases were recorded, up from 265 in 2020, with a sharp 19 per cent increase between 2024 and 2025. Autism and ADHD were the most commonly cited conditions. The average cost of defending a single tribunal now stands at £8,500 in legal costs alone, before any settlement or award is taken into account.
More than half (57 per cent) of respondents said their organisation was neurodiversity friendly. Yet more than a quarter (28 per cent) said they were unsure, and over one in seven (16 per cent) disagreed or strongly disagreed.
Those figures sit uncomfortably alongside the barriers data. Almost a third (31 per cent) of the same group identified staff lacking awareness as the single biggest obstacle to improving support for neurodivergent employees, and over a fifth (22 per cent) cited manager confidence. The data suggests organisations may be measuring intent rather than outcome, rating themselves on the existence of policies rather than on whether those policies are reaching the one in seven employees who are neurodivergent.
Nick Henderson-Mayo, Head of Compliance at VinciWorks, said: “There is a pattern here that should concern HR and compliance leaders. Organisations who say they are neurodiversity-friendly should have the evidence to back this up. With the Employment Rights Act putting more power in the hands of workers, firms should be prepared to show a tribunal how supporting neurodiversity in principle aligns with practice.”
Fewer than four in 10 (39 per cent) organisations have delivered any neurodiversity training at all. Of those that have, only around one in five (21 per cent) have embedded it within ongoing programmes rather than treating it as a one-off exercise. Almost two in five (38 per cent) said their organisation had not yet trained on neurodiversity but wanted to. Almost one in seven (14 per cent) said there were no plans to do so.
Henderson-Mayo continued: “A single standalone session is unlikely to change how a manager behaves when a neurodivergent employee comes to them with a problem. What changes behaviour is repeated exposure, practice and the confidence that comes from knowing what effective support for neurodivergent staff looks like. Effective training covers how to open the conversation, how to approach a needs assessment, and how to review adjustments over time. That is how employers can evidence support.”
When asked to identify the single biggest barrier to improving support for neurodivergent employees, almost a third (31 per cent) of professionals cited a lack of staff awareness. Manager confidence came second, named by over a fifth (22 per cent). Together, barriers directly linked to training and awareness accounted for more than half (53 per cent) of all responses.
Time and budget constraints were cited by around one in six (16 per cent) respondents. Unsupportive workplace culture was identified by nearly one in seven (14 per cent), and unclear or inconsistently applied policies by over one in 10 (11 per cent). Only 6.5 per cent said their organisation faced no major barriers.
Henderson-Mayo said: “Like any workplace issue, a policy is useless on its own. It has to be backed up by strong and regular communication, training for managers and employees alike, and effective routes for accessing support. This is what an employment tribunal will look for, and we can expect to see a lot more neurodiversity at work issues being adjudicated in the future.”
The Employment Rights Act will soon reduce the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims, alongside more rights from day one of employment, and a doubling of the timeline to bring a tribunal claim from three to six months. The removal of the compensation cap also means high earners will be more likely to bring a claim, potentially adding even more cost to claims of neurodiversity discrimination.
