An HR worker with ADHD has been awarded more than £200,000. An Employment Tribunal found that her employer discriminated against her and failed to make reasonable adjustments for ADHD in the Workplace.

Roberta Ghiotto worked as a Talent and Culture Coordinator at Hawkwell House Hotel in Oxford. She experienced particular difficulties with payroll and administrative tasks because of symptoms associated with her ADHD. These included problems with concentration, focus and time management.

Despite this, her employer required her to concentrate almost exclusively on payroll. This placed her under significant pressure. She was then moved into a former cupboard when she explained that she found the main office distracting.

The Employment Tribunal found that the hotel’s approach effectively “set her up to fail”.

Ms Ghiotto succeeded in claims for direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments. She was subsequently awarded £200,252, including compensation for financial losses, injury to feelings and psychiatric injury.

The case provides an important example of what can happen when an employer fails to consider reasonable adjustments for ADHD in the workplace properly.

What Happened to Roberta Ghiotto?

Ms Ghiotto began working for Hawkwell House Hotel on 19 October 2023 as temporary maternity cover. Her role covered a range of HR responsibilities.

She particularly enjoyed the employee wellness aspects of her work but experienced greater difficulty with administrative tasks, including payroll. Payroll represented around a quarter of her duties, and she had only received basic training on how to complete it.

Ms Ghiotto had ADHD. Although she did not have a formal diagnosis at the relevant time, the tribunal accepted that her condition amounted to a disability for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010.

Read More: Employee with Anxiety Wins Disability Discrimination at Work Claim

Her ADHD affected areas including focus and time management, making detailed payroll work particularly challenging. Nevertheless, the tribunal found that Ms Ghiotto was committed to her role. She had made considerable efforts to manage the difficulties caused by her condition. Moreover, she used strategies like creating to-do lists, keeping her workspace organised, finding quieter areas to work and working additional hours.

Her original line manager had been supportive, and Ms Ghiotto understood that he intended to approve her probation. However, the situation changed after a new manager, Mr Sagar, took over.

Concerns Were Raised About Her Performance

At a probation review on 2 February 2024, Mr Sagar raised concerns about mistakes in the administrative parts of Ms Ghiotto’s job. The tribunal subsequently described his approach to this meeting as “unduly hostile and aggressive”. This led to Ms Ghiotto becoming upset and taking two days of sickness absence.

At a health and wellbeing meeting on 9 February, Mr Sagar said that the hotel would make any required adjustments. They discussed support with prioritising her workload and the creation of an action plan. However, the tribunal found that the support subsequently provided was inadequate.

When Ms Ghiotto returned to work on 12 February, her probation was extended until 12 April. She was also instructed to focus exclusively on payroll for the following three days. This meant that the employer removed the aspects of her job that she enjoyed and performed successfully and instead concentrated her duties on the area in which she experienced the greatest difficulty.

The tribunal later concluded that this approach was “setting her up to fail”.

Worker With ADHD Made to Work in a Former Cupboard

Ms Ghiotto had explained that she found the busy office environment distracting. In response, she was permitted to work separately in a former cupboard. However, the room had no window or telephone, and the tribunal was not satisfied that it represented a suitable workspace.

It was also not provided with evidence confirming that the room complied with relevant health and safety requirements concerning matters such as ventilation and size. Rather than solving the problem, the tribunal found that working in isolation while under considerable pressure increased Ms Ghiotto’s anxiety. She had also made clear that she had limited experience and training in payroll.

While attempting to complete the task, she became distressed and was found crying by a colleague, who then helped her. Ms Ghiotto ultimately worked approximately 39 hours over four days to complete the first phase of the work after receiving a one-day extension.

Ms Ghiotto Explained That Her Medical Condition Was Affecting Her Work

During a meeting on 27 February, Ms Ghiotto expressly explained that her medical condition was affecting her workflow and that she was struggling with the pressure being placed on her.

On 14 March, she requested permission to work from home for two days each week. However, she was told the business would struggle to put this arrangement in place.

At a further meeting on 20 March, the discussion again focused on how long Ms Ghiotto had taken to complete payroll and alleged errors in her work. She referred specifically to her ADHD and explained that noise in the office disrupted her concentration.

The tribunal heard that Mr Sagar obtained advice from an external HR consultancy during this period. It inferred from the evidence that the advice was effectively to establish whether Ms Ghiotto had a formal ADHD diagnosis and, if she did not, to dismiss her.

The tribunal considered this approach to be based on a mistaken understanding of disability discrimination law. As per the Equality Act 2010, a formal medical diagnosis is not necessarily required before an individual can satisfy the legal definition of disability.

Ms Ghiotto Was Dismissed

On 22 March 2024, Ms Ghiotto received a letter informing her that she was being dismissed because she had failed to perform to the required standard during her probation. Her employment ended the following day.

The tribunal was highly critical of the employer’s approach.

Rather than identifying what training and support Ms Ghiotto needed to succeed, it found that Mr Sagar had focused on building evidence suggesting that she was incapable of performing the role. The tribunal found that Ms Ghiotto’s ADHD was foremost in her manager’s mind when he decided to dismiss her and represented a very significant part of the reason for that decision.

It ultimately concluded that a person without ADHD would not have been dismissed in the same circumstances at that point.

What Did the Employment Tribunal Decide?

Ms Ghiotto succeeded in three significant claims.

The tribunal upheld her claims for direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments. When considering the reasonable adjustments claim, the tribunal found that requiring Ms Ghiotto to undertake payroll duties without appropriate adjustments placed her at a substantial disadvantage compared with people who were not disabled.

Her difficulties with concentration, focus and time management were connected to her ADHD. The employer knew, or should reasonably have known, about her disability and the disadvantage she experienced. Despite this, the support provided was inadequate.

The tribunal identified several steps that could reasonably have been taken. These included more focused training, additional support, more time to complete payroll, working from home and providing an appropriate quiet workspace. The action plan discussed with Ms Ghiotto also appeared never to have materialised.

Why Was the Dismissal Disability Discrimination?

The tribunal considered both direct disability discrimination and discrimination arising from disability.

Read More: The AA to Pay Compensation for Disability Discrimination to Autistic Employee | Redmans Solicitors

For the latter claim, Ms Ghiotto’s difficulties with administrative performance arose from her ADHD.

Although ensuring that payroll was completed accurately was clearly a legitimate objective for the hotel, the tribunal did not accept that dismissing her in the circumstances was a proportionate way of achieving that objective. The employer had not adequately trained her, had failed to implement reasonable adjustments and dismissed her before the extended probationary period had even run its course.

The tribunal was particularly critical of the connection between her ADHD and the dismissal decision. It concluded that the employer had failed to establish a convincing non-discriminatory explanation for why she had been dismissed when she was.

Ms Ghiotto Awarded More Than £200,000

Following the successful claims, Ms Ghiotto was awarded a total of £200,252 in compensation. This included approximately £59,831 for pecuniary loss and £83,138 for non-pecuniary loss. The non-pecuniary award included compensation for injury to feelings as well as £30,000 for psychiatric injury, together with interest. The hotel was also ordered to pay litigation costs, including £425.69 for Ms Ghiotto’s travel and accommodation expenses, with the remaining costs subject to detailed assessment.

The substantial award demonstrates how serious the consequences of disability discrimination can become. Particularly where discriminatory treatment results in dismissal, financial loss and significant harm to an employee’s mental health.

What is the Duty to Make Reasonable Adjustments?

The Equality Act 2010 places employers under a duty to make reasonable adjustments where a disabled person is placed at a substantial disadvantage. It can also apply where a physical feature causes a substantial disadvantage or where a disabled person would be disadvantaged without an auxiliary aid.

What counts as reasonable will depend on the individual circumstances. Relevant considerations can include how effective an adjustment would be, whether it is practical, its cost, the employer’s resources and the nature and size of the organisation.

Employers are not necessarily required to provide every adjustment an employee requests. However, they should properly investigate what disadvantage the employee is experiencing and consider reasonable ways of removing or reducing it.

Simply rejecting a request without adequate consideration can create significant legal risks.

Is ADHD a Disability?

ADHD can amount to a disability under the Equality Act 2010, but the legal position depends on how the condition affects the particular individual.

ADHD can affect people in very different ways. Some individuals may experience difficulties with concentration, organisation, memory, time management, sensory distractions or emotional regulation. For others, the impact may be different.

Importantly, an employee does not necessarily need a formal ADHD diagnosis before receiving protection under the Equality Act. The legal question is whether the employee meets the statutory definition of disability, or whether they possess a particular diagnostic document.

Ms Ghiotto’s case provides an important illustration of this distinction. Her employer accepted in the proceedings that her ADHD amounted to a disability despite her not having a formal diagnosis at the relevant time.

What Are Examples of Reasonable Adjustments for ADHD in the Workplace?

There is no standard list of reasonable adjustments for ADHD in the workplace that every employer must implement. Adjustments should respond to the particular disadvantages experienced by the individual employee.

Providing a Quieter Workspace

An employee with ADHD may find it difficult to concentrate in a noisy, busy or frequently interrupted workplace. Providing access to a quieter working area could potentially be a reasonable adjustment. However, Ms Ghiotto’s case demonstrates that simply moving an employee somewhere isolated is not necessarily sufficient. The alternative workspace should itself be appropriate.

A former cupboard without a window may remove noise, but that does not mean it is a suitable solution.

Allowing Home Working

Where the employee can concentrate more effectively at home, allowing some home working could potentially be considered. Whether home working is reasonable will depend on the employee’s role and the needs of the business.

Providing Additional Training

An employee struggling with a particular task may benefit from additional or more structured training. This was particularly relevant in Ms Ghiotto’s case because payroll was not an area in which she had significant previous experience, yet it became the main focus of her duties.

Allowing Additional Time

ADHD can affect concentration, organisation and time management.

Where appropriate, allowing additional time to complete particular tasks or breaking larger pieces of work into manageable stages could reduce the disadvantage experienced by an employee. Deadlines still matter, particularly for functions such as payroll, but an employer should consider whether reasonable flexibility could allow the employee to perform successfully.

Providing Help With Prioritisation and Organisation

Regular check-ins, written instructions, task lists and support with prioritising workloads may help some employees with ADHD.

Clear objectives can be particularly useful where an employee struggles to determine which of several competing tasks should receive immediate attention. Ms Ghiotto had discussed receiving support with prioritisation and an action plan, but the tribunal found that the promised support was not adequately delivered.

Considering Assistive Technology

Depending on the employee’s needs, assistive technology or software could also be considered. Tools designed to support organisation, reminders, time management, concentration or written work may help reduce particular disadvantages.

The appropriate adjustment will depend on the employee’s symptoms, their responsibilities and the technology available.

A Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments Can Have Serious Consequences

Employers should not treat reasonable adjustments as simply an optional workplace benefit. Where the legal duty applies, a failure to make reasonable adjustments can amount to unlawful disability discrimination.

Employers should also avoid focusing solely on an employee’s performance difficulties without considering whether those difficulties are connected to a disability. If an employee says that ADHD is affecting their ability to perform a particular task, the employer should consider what support could reasonably help them.

That does not necessarily mean removing every challenging aspect of the employee’s role. Instead, the objective should be to identify the disadvantage and consider whether reasonable steps could help the employee overcome it.

Ms Ghiotto’s case demonstrates the danger of doing the opposite. The tribunal found that the hotel removed aspects of her job in which she performed well and required her to concentrate on the task she found most difficult, without providing adequate support.

What Should You Do if Your Employer Refuses Reasonable Adjustments for ADHD in the Workplace?

If you believe you need reasonable adjustments for ADHD in the workplace, consider explaining your needs to your employer as clearly as possible.

Describe how your ADHD affects you at work, the particular disadvantage you are experiencing and what adjustments you believe could help. Additionally, it can be helpful to request this in writing so that there is a clear record.

Where appropriate, medical evidence or an occupational health assessment may help your employer understand the impact of your condition and identify suitable adjustments. However, employees should remember that a formal diagnosis is not necessarily required before someone can satisfy the Equality Act definition of disability.

If your employer refuses an adjustment, ask for an explanation and whether alternative measures could be considered. Where the problem cannot be resolved informally, you may decide to raise a formal grievance.

Keep copies of relevant correspondence, meeting notes, medical evidence and adjustment requests. These documents could become important if a dispute subsequently develops.

When Should You Seek Legal Advice?

Consider obtaining specialist employment law advice if your employer repeatedly refuses to consider adjustments, subjects you to disciplinary or capability proceedings because of disability-related difficulties, or dismisses you in circumstances connected to your ADHD. Legal advice may also be appropriate where the treatment has caused significant financial loss or harm to your health, including psychiatric injury.

Employment Tribunal claims are subject to strict time limits. Employees should therefore seek advice promptly rather than waiting indefinitely for an internal grievance, appeal or other workplace procedure to conclude.

Depending on the circumstances, potential claims could include a failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination arising from disability or direct disability discrimination.

Reasonable Adjustments Should Help Employees Succeed

The Ghiotto case provides a powerful example of why employers should properly engage with requests for disability-related support.

Ms Ghiotto had explained that she struggled with concentration and payroll tasks because of ADHD. Instead of providing effective support, the tribunal found that her employer concentrated her duties on the very area in which she struggled most. Moving her into an unsuitable former cupboard did not resolve the problem.

The tribunal found that appropriate training, support, additional time, home working and a suitable quiet workspace were among the steps that could reasonably have been considered. The resulting £200,252 award, including compensation for psychiatric injury, demonstrates the potential consequences where an employer’s approach crosses the line into unlawful disability discrimination.

Employees with ADHD should not automatically be expected to overcome disability-related disadvantages without support. Where the Equality Act duty applies, employers must consider reasonable steps that can remove or reduce those disadvantages.

Employer Failed to Make Reasonable Adjustments for ADHD in the Workplace? Get Help with Redmans

If your employer has failed to provide reasonable adjustments for ADHD in the workplace, or you believe you have experienced disability discrimination because of ADHD, contact Redmans Solicitors today. Our specialist employment solicitors can assess your circumstances, explain your legal rights and advise you on your possible next steps.

If you may have grounds to bring an Employment Tribunal claim, we can also advise you on the claims available, applicable time limits and the compensation you could potentially recover.

To get started on your journey with us today, please:

• Phone us directly on 020 3397 3603
• Complete our online form to request a consultation