Why 2025 Is A Turning Point for Employers
New data shows a sharp rise in neurodiversity employment tribunal cases in the UK. According to analysis from Fox and Partners, references to neurodiversity in tribunal decisions increased from 102 to 183 in the latest reporting year. This represents a 79 percent jump and signals a wider pattern of rapid growth in neurodiversity related disputes.
This rise is not an anomaly. It reflects a clear trend in the working population. More people are seeking assessment and receiving diagnoses such as autism, ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. More employees are requesting reasonable adjustments. Expectations around inclusive practice are increasing. Organisations are struggling to implement effective support. Tribunals are responding accordingly.
This is a warning that support for neurodivergent staff can no longer be reactive or informal. The risks of failing to provide appropriate adjustments are becoming more visible and more costly.
High Profile Tribunal Cases Highlight the Risks for Employers
Two recent neurodiversity tribunal cases from 2025 illustrate the growing legal and reputational consequences of getting neuroinclusion wrong.
Greene King: Dyslexic Chef Unfairly Dismissed
A kitchen chef with dyslexia won his case against Greene King Retail Services after being dismissed for struggling to read orders in a busy environment. The tribunal found that his employer failed to make simple and affordable adjustments that would have helped him perform his role. These could have included clearer print formats, visual supports or accessible ordering systems.
He was awarded around £24,000 in compensation.
The case demonstrates how common conditions like dyslexia can be mishandled when managers lack awareness or do not understand their legal duties.
Capgemini: ADHD Related Discrimination
In another headline case, a senior technologist at Capgemini UK, diagnosed with ADHD, partially succeeded in her claim after the company failed to implement recommended adjustments. These included clearer task setting, support with prioritisation and neurodiversity awareness training for managers.
The tribunal ruled that the absence of training created a disadvantage and contributed to discriminatory treatment. This ruling is significant because it shows that training itself can be considered a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act.
Together, these cases send a clear message. A lack of understanding about neurodivergent conditions is no longer viewed as unfortunate or accidental. It is viewed as a failure to meet legal obligations.
Why Tribunals Are Seeing More Neurodiversity Related Claims
The rise in neurodiversity tribunal cases is connected to several workplace trends.
Disclosure Rates
More employees now understand their rights around workplace support, and expectations are rising. Under the Equality Act 2010, employers have a legal obligation to make reasonable adjustments – even if an employee has not formally disclosed a condition. If an employer has reason to believe that someone is struggling due to a potential disability, they must take proactive steps to explore and offer appropriate adjustments. Younger professionals, in particular, are more confident in identifying as neurodivergent and requesting support early, meaning organisations need clear, informed processes to respond effectively.
Limited Internal Capability
Many organisations still do not have structured policies or trained managers. Without clear processes, even small misunderstandings can escalate into conflict, grievances or performance disputes.
Increased Expectations and Stronger Legal Interpretation
Tribunals are taking a firmer view of what the Equality Act 2010 requires. Reasonable adjustments now extend beyond physical tools and working arrangements. They include communication style, workload management, clarity of tasks, psychological safety, and access to specialist training or guidance.
Employers who are unsure what adjustments to offer, or who rely on informal conversations rather than structured processes, are increasingly found to be in breach of their duties.
What Employers Need to Take from This Trend
Neurodiversity tribunal cases is not simply a legal issue. It represents a growing disconnect between what neurodivergent employees need and what many workplaces are currently able to offer.
Employers should consider:
- How to create a neuroinclusion policy at work
- Manager guidance for workplace adjustments
- Neurodiversity workplace resources by condition
- How to improve neurodiversity disclosure at work
- Neurodiversity awareness training for employees
- How to audit current processes to identify risk points
Waiting for a problem to occur is no longer a workable approach. The organisations that are reducing tribunal risk are the ones taking proactive steps to embed inclusion into everyday practice.
Moving From Risk to Readiness
The increase in neurodiversity tribunal cases shows that neuroinclusion is now central to organisational strategy. It affects legal compliance, employee wellbeing, retention, leadership credibility and brand reputation.
For employers who want to act, structured support exists. The Bridge platform provides practical, scalable tools for managers, HR teams and neurodivergent employees. It helps organisations move from fragmented, reactive support to sustainable, evidence led practice.
“These tribunal decisions make something very clear. Neuroinclusion is not about ticking a box or doing the minimum. It is about creating an environment where people can work without unnecessary barriers. Cases like Greene King and Capgemini show how a lack of awareness and simple missed adjustments can lead to serious financial and reputational damage. The organisations that will thrive in the next decade will be the ones that invest early in structured support and equip their managers with the right knowledge.”
– Josh Goodison, CEO and Founder of NeuroBridge
