Reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent employees: what is reasonable at work?

By James Robertson, Head of Training & Consultancy, Neurodiversity UK

“Of course we want to support them. But what is reasonable in this job?”

That question comes up regularly in my conversations with HR, L&D and inclusion teams.

It might involve reducing caseloads, changing shift patterns or supporting someone with sensory overload in a workplace where hearing safety alarms is essential.

Employers want to support their people. They also need to understand how adjustments can work alongside service delivery, safety and the responsibilities of the role.

A list of suggestions can help start the conversation. Making a fair, individual decision takes a little more thought.

What are reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent employees?

Reasonable adjustments are changes that remove or reduce a disadvantage related to someone’s disability. For neurodivergent employees, these might involve communication, working arrangements, equipment, responsibilities or the working environment.

The right support depends on the individual. Two people with ADHD, autism or dyslexia may experience very different barriers at work and need different adjustments. ACAS emphasises that adjustments should reflect the person’s circumstances.

In practice, that means understanding where someone is struggling and what would help them do their job.

Across our recent NDUK client conversations, this is where many organisations feel stuck. They have a policy, but managers are unsure how to apply it to the situation in front of them.

How do you decide whether a workplace adjustment is reasonable?

An adjustment needs to be considered in context: whether it will reduce the disadvantage, how practical it is, its affordability and any implications for health and safety. These are factors identified in ACAS guidance.

A useful starting point is to understand the barrier behind the request.

If someone asks for fewer cases, is the difficulty the overall workload, the complexity of particular cases, constant switching between tasks or a lack of uninterrupted time for records?

Each could lead to a different discussion about support.

I would encourage managers to ask:

• “Which parts of the working day are hardest to manage?”
• “When does this work better, and what is different then?”
• “What would the change you have suggested help you to do?”

These questions help everyone understand whether the proposed adjustment addresses the problem, and what other options might help.

What if an adjustment changes the employee’s job responsibilities?

A request to change responsibilities needs individual consideration. ACAS says employers do not have to change the basic nature of a job, while also recognising that reallocating responsibilities or offering another suitable role can be possible adjustments.

That distinction can be difficult for managers to navigate.

For example, a care worker requesting changes to weekend or outreach duties may be experiencing difficulties with unpredictable rotas, travel, recovery time or particular tasks. Understanding those details gives the employer something specific to assess.

Where the proposed change cannot reasonably be implemented, explain the reasons and explore alternatives. Simply saying “it’s part of the job” leaves important questions unanswered.

Complex decisions benefit from HR and, where appropriate, occupational health or legal advice.

How can reasonable adjustments work in shift-based or safety-critical roles?

Adjustments in manufacturing, care, education and other operational environments need to address the employee’s barriers alongside the actual requirements of the workplace.

Consider sensory overload on a manufacturing site. If a proposed headset could prevent someone hearing an alarm, the next step is to involve competent health and safety advice and explore safe ways to reduce the sensory barrier.

In a classroom, it may be difficult to change the whole environment. There may still be options to explore around preparation time, clearer information about changes, task organisation or access to a quieter space during breaks.

These are possibilities to investigate with the employee and relevant specialists. Their suitability depends on the role and setting.

The useful question is: what can we change here that would make a meaningful difference?

Can you offer reasonable adjustments without a diagnosis?

Yes. ACAS confirms that a worker does not need a diagnosis to be considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010. Its guidance says employers should offer support whether or not a diagnosis is in place.

Managers can begin by discussing the difficulties someone describes and exploring appropriate support. They do not need to identify or diagnose a condition themselves.

This matters because waiting for diagnostic paperwork can leave everyday problems unresolved when useful changes could already be explored.

What if an employee does not know which adjustments they need?

An employee may understand that work feels difficult without knowing what would help. Employers and employees can explore the barriers together, consider options and review the results.

“What adjustments do you need?” can be a surprisingly hard question, particularly for someone who has recently received a diagnosis or has never been offered support before.

Business Disability Forum’s 2023 research found that 78% of disabled employees surveyed had to initiate the adjustments process themselves. Although this research covers disability more broadly, it highlights how much responsibility can fall on the person seeking help.

A more helpful conversation might begin with:

“Talk me through a typical day. Where do things become harder, and what already helps?”

A workplace needs assessment can support this process by exploring the person’s tasks, working environment and experiences, then making recommendations for discussion and implementation.

How should managers review reasonable adjustments?

Agree what the adjustment is intended to help with, who will put it in place and when it will be reviewed. ACAS recommends regular reviews and keeping a record, particularly when circumstances change.

A useful agreement should capture:

• The barrier being addressed.
• The support being introduced.
• Who is responsible for implementing it.
• How its effectiveness will be assessed.
• When the employee and manager will review it together.

Implementation matters. If someone is given protected time for case notes but meetings keep being booked into it, the adjustment has not been properly put into practice.

At review, ask whether the support is available consistently, whether it is helping and whether anything needs to change. Include the employee’s experience alongside relevant work outcomes.

The aim is to improve support, without making someone repeatedly prove they deserve it.

How can HR teams make reasonable adjustment decisions more consistent?

Consistency comes from a clear process: listening, exploring options, considering evidence, explaining decisions and following through.

It does not mean giving everyone the same adjustment.

Managers need to know what they can agree, where to find advice and who is responsible for making things happen. Training should give them opportunities to work through the situations they actually face, including requests that feel difficult to accommodate.

At NDUK, these are the conversations we help organisations navigate. Practical training, workplace needs assessments and consultancy can help turn uncertainty into clearer decisions and support that works in day-to-day practice.

If your managers or HR team are finding reasonable adjustments difficult to navigate, get in touch with me at Neurodiversity UK. We can talk through your challenges and identify the support that would be most useful for your organisation.

Book a call in with me to discuss how we can support you and your team: Speak with James – NDUK

Or visit www.neurodiversityuk.co.uk to read more and speak with the team.