What is a Section 278 Agreement?

A Section 278 Agreement is a legal agreement between a developer and a highway authority to carry out highway works.

Neurodiversity Awareness: What HR Needs To Know About Neurodivergence At Work

Neurodiversity Awareness Week took place last month. Its aim is to shift how organisations understand and support neurodivergent individuals. For HR professionals, that aim is not just cultural – it has clear legal implications.

Public debate around rising diagnoses of conditions such as ADHD and autism continues, with some questioning whether these conditions are being over-diagnosed. Late last year, UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting warned that the rising number of diagnoses risked medicalising ‘normal behaviour’, signalling a growing scepticism in some quarters about the expansion of neurodevelopmental labels.

However, from an employment law perspective, this debate is largely irrelevant. The legal question is not whether a condition is fashionable or contested, but whether an employee is experiencing a disadvantage at work – and what reasonable steps can be taken to address it.

“Neurodivergence” is an umbrella term covering conditions such as autism, ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. Many individuals with these conditions will meet the definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010: a physical or mental impairment with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, such as communication, concentration or social interaction.

Importantly, a formal diagnosis is not required to trigger legal obligations. Tribunals focus on the impact of the impairment, not the label. This is particularly relevant given long NHS waiting times for assessments. If an employee reports ongoing difficulties, the duty to consider reasonable adjustments may already arise.

Case law reinforces this practical approach. In Sherbourne v N Power, a failure to adjust an open-plan working environment for an employee with Asperger’s syndrome amounted to a breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments. In Jandu v Marks & Spencer, redundancy selection criteria that disadvantaged a dyslexic employee were found to be unlawful. And in Borg-Neal v Lloyds Bank Plc, a dismissal linked to conduct arising from dyslexia led to a significant discrimination award.

For HR, the key is to focus on impact rather than diagnosis. That means:

Considering reasonable adjustments early, even where a condition is not formally confirmed
Using occupational health where appropriate to understand workplace impact
Training managers to recognise and respond to neurodivergence

The duty to make adjustments is not unlimited – employers are only required to take steps that are reasonable in the circumstances. However, failing to engage with the issue at all is likely to create legal risk.

In short, Neurodiversity Awareness Week is a timely reminder that HR’s role is not to arbitrate medical debates, but to ensure workplaces are fair, inclusive and legally compliant.

About Jon Dunkley

Jon Dunkley is a Partner at Wollens and heads up the firm’s Regulatory Department. Based at our North Devon office, Jon is a highly experienced solicitor with a broad commercial and regulatory practice, supporting businesses, professionals and senior employees across a wide range of legal issues.