Neurodiversity in the Workplace

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Westminster Hall

16:00

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

I will call Sarah Hall to move the motion and then the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of both the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30-minute debates.

[Sarah Hall (Warrington South) (Lab/Co-op)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered neurodiversity in the workplace.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. Neurodiversity is still too often misunderstood, overlooked or treated as a marginal issue, when in reality it affects millions of people across our workforce, across every sector and across every part of the country. This debate is about fairness, dignity at work and whether our workplaces are genuinely designed for the people who work in them.

I also requested this debate for a more personal reason. I was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as an adult, and like many people who are diagnosed later in life, that diagnosis did not change who I am, but it clarified things. It helped me understand why some environments drained me, why others energised me, and why I had spent years adapting myself to systems that were never designed with people like me in mind.

Since I became a Member of Parliament, many constituents have written to me with experiences that echoed that same story. This included people who have spent years masking, people who have been labelled difficult or unreliable, and people who have quietly left jobs they were good at because the barriers became too much. So when we talk about neurodiversity at work, we are not talking about abstract theory; we are talking about real people, real workplaces and real lost potential.

Around one in seven people in the UK are neurodivergent, including autistic people, and people with ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia and other conditions. Many neurodivergent people will qualify as disabled under the Equality Act 2010, which means that they are legally entitled to reasonable adjustments at work.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for bringing this matter forward, and I spoke to her beforehand. By way of encouragement, in Northern Ireland, we have done a lot of work on this issue, and I am very impressed by what we have done. There has been a significant push towards neuro-inclusion through governmental toolkits and specialised training programmes. That fits in well with our legal landscape in Northern Ireland, as it should, but there is one thing that we fall short on, and the hon. Lady might wish to ask the Minister about it. Small businesses do not have human resources sections and, as such, they are unable to do the work that HR departments do. Does she feel that that is something we could improve on, not just here but back home?

[Sarah Hall]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention; I absolutely agree. I echo his comments about the fantastic work that is being done in Northern Ireland on inclusion, and I am sure that the Minister will address the points he made in her closing remarks.

It is also important to say this clearly: not all neurodivergent people have a diagnosis, and many are diagnosed far later in life. In some parts of the country, people wait years for assessment. During that time, they are still expected to work, cope and perform, often without any understanding of why things feel harder than they should. We cannot design workplace support around a system that is already overstretched and inconsistent. Support has to be based on need and not on paperwork.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg, and I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate and for her very personal testimony. Does she agree with me and PACT for Autism, which is based in my constituency, that we should not only support people in work, but support people into work? The application process for some roles is often so complicated that people who are neurodiverse are put off even applying for them, which means that they cannot realise their potential.

[Sarah Hall]

I could not agree more. My hon. Friend makes a very good point.

Research by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has found that one in five neurodivergent workers have experienced harassment or discrimination at work because of their neurodivergence.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

Does the hon. Member agree that, in the workplace, the way that neurodiverse traits are observed and received can vary between men and women? Women can suffer the consequences of unconscious bias. As my constituent Zaphira recently explained, decisiveness and spontaneity in men can be viewed as emotional or impulsive in women.

[Sarah Hall]

I agree and feel that the hon. Member is describing me a little bit in that. So yes, I absolutely agree with that characterisation.

Just as concerning is the fact that nearly a third of neurodivergent workers have not told their manager or HR department at all, not because they do not need support, but because they fear stigma, stereotypes or the impact that disclosure could have on their career. That tells us something fundamental: the problem is not difference, but the environment that people are expected to work in. Neurodiversity describes the natural differences in how people’s brains behave and process information. We all think, learn and act differently and have different strengths and challenges. That is normal and human, yet the world of work is still too often built around a very narrow idea of what is typical. When workplaces are designed around that narrow norm, barriers are created.

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

Merry Christmas to you, Mr Twigg, and all the House staff. I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate on a topic that is close to my heart, and close to the hearts of many of my constituents. My union, the GMB, has done a lot of work on this issue through the “Thinking Differently at Work” campaign. Does my hon. Friend agree that when workplaces are inclusive by design, and there are clear routes for reasonable adjustments to be made, employers benefit because they get the best out of all the talents in their workforce?

[Sarah Hall]

I could not agree more. I will come on to some of the work that GMB, Unison and USDAW—the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers— are doing in this area.

The barriers that I mentioned are what disable people. Too often, neurodiversity is still approached through the medical model of disability, focusing on what is wrong with the individual, what they cannot do or how they fall short of an assumed standard. That approach creates low expectations and leaves people feeling pitied, patronised or quietly excluded. The social model of disability offers a different and more honest lens. It recognises that people are disabled not by their impairment or condition, but by barriers created by society: inflexible systems, poor understanding and rigid attitudes.

Let me ground that in a practical example. An autistic retail worker struggled with constant changes to their working hours not because they did not want to work, but because of unpredictability, increased anxiety and sensory overload. What they needed was a stable shift pattern. Predictability gave them control and made work possible. Under the medical model, the problem would have been framed as the worker. Under the social model, the problem was the demand for unlimited flexibility. When the employer agreed to a stable shift pattern, it meant the difference between staying in work or having to give up their job altogether. There was no grand intervention, just a reasonable adjustment.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

The number of education, health and care plans for children with autism has more than tripled over the past decade. When we combine that with rigid recruitment procedures and inflexible working practices, as my hon. Friend outlined, it creates a significant challenge. Does she agree that the Minister should address how the Government are working with employers, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Department for Business and Trade to make workplaces genuinely neuro-inclusive, supporting individuals and helping more young people into work?

[Sarah Hall]

I agree, and I will come on to that point in my asks of the Minister.

Something that I hear repeatedly from constituents is the lack of consistency around reasonable adjustments. Support agreed with one manager often disappears when roles change, teams move or a restructure happens. People are forced to re-explain themselves, re-justify their needs and start again. That is not dignity at work. Adjustments should travel with the worker and not depend on who happens to be in charge that month.

A constituent who contacted me described a stark contrast between workplaces that created barriers and those that removed them. In early roles, including in a warehouse and later in a café, my constituent was keen to work and learn, but support was minimal. Tasks were not adapted, opportunities to build skills were restricted and they were left without support. In more recent roles, they now volunteer as a radio presenter and at the Lowry theatre, and are also employed as a trainer delivering the Oliver McGowan mandatory training programme. My constituent tells me that she loves the reasonable adjustments that they have put in place for her, compared with the very little that was in place in earlier roles.

Another constituent, a new mother, contacted me about her attempt to return to work following maternity leave. She is autistic and requested reasonable adjustments to support her return. Instead of support, she was met with suggestions, including from HR, that needing reasonable adjustments meant that she is not fit for work at all. That response is deeply concerning, and it speaks to a wider problem about how disabled workers are too often treated.

[Cameron Thomas]

I have spoken before about how neurodiversity is still an opportunity to be fully exploited by the workplace and that it is significantly inhibited by the education system. Does the hon. Lady agree that the Disabled Children’s Partnership “Fight for Ordinary” campaign presents an opportunity to create educational and working spaces that fully harness diversity?

[Sarah Hall]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Member. I am passionate about inclusion in the workplace and for children in schools. I would be happy to work with him on driving that forward.

The response to my constituent was not inclusion, but exclusion, and it shows how neurodivergent women can be pushed out of work at exactly the moment that they most need understanding and flexibility. Many neurodivergent people are still met with damaging assumptions that they lack empathy, cannot understand humour, struggle socially or are somehow less capable or reliable. None of that is true, but those assumptions shape recruitment processes, performance management and workplace culture in ways that quietly exclude people before their abilities are ever recognised. The National Autistic Society has been clear that the biggest barriers that autistic workers face are a lack of understanding, negative stereotypes and failures by employers to adapt.

[Mr Angus MacDonald (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire) (LD)]

I left school at 16. I did extremely badly at school and seem to have been fine ever since, largely. It is now very clear to me that people who are neurodiverse in many ways contribute far more than normal people. If they were given a chance, they would succeed. Just 30 seconds on the internet produces the names Bill Gates, Greta Thunberg, Richard Branson, Emma Watson, Steve Jobs and many other people who have clearly excelled, all of whom would describe themselves as extremely neurodiverse. Employers should understand what they can contribute to an organisation.

[Sarah Hall]

I absolutely agree. Some neurodiverse people would describe it as a superpower; some do not like that term, but there are so many wonderful assets and abilities that we in the neurodiverse community have. If only we were given a chance, we could make a real difference and be fantastic in whatever we choose to do.

Recruitment processes often reward confidence over competence, eye contact over ability and social performance over skill. Vague job descriptions, ambiguous questions and high-pressure interviews screen people out before they have had a chance to show what they can actually do. We also need to talk about masking. Many neurodivergent people hide parts of who they are at work to fit in. Sometimes, they do not even realise they are doing it, but masking is exhausting. It contributes to anxiety, isolation, burnout and poor mental health. I recognise that experience myself, and I know from constituents how common it is. People might not need to mask so much if workplaces were designed with difference in mind.

Although this debate rightly spans all sectors, I want to be clear that the public sector must lead by example. Unison has been clear that, despite legal protections, many public sector workplaces still lack awareness and fail to implement inclusive practices. Rigid recruitment processes, inflexible performance systems and delays or refusals in reasonable adjustments cause stress, sickness absence and employment disputes that could be avoided. There is also a gendered dimension to this. Neurodivergent women often face compounded discrimination. Unison has called for neurodiversity to be embedded properly within equality and diversity frameworks, backed by training for managers and reps, stronger enforcement of Equality Act duties and better access to support schemes such as Access to Work. Those calls matter, because without enforcement, rights are theoretical, and without adequate funding, inclusion becomes optional.

Trade unions have been vital in driving this agenda, and I want to highlight the role of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers—the retail trade union. Across the UK, thousands of shop workers, warehouse staff and reps are having conversations about neurodiversity. Many USDAW members are neurodivergent themselves. Many others are parents or carers of neurodivergent children and adults, juggling paid work with caring responsibilities in sectors where flexibility is often in short supply. USDAW talks about neurodiversity in the same way that we talk about physical difference. Some people are taller, some are stronger, some have more stamina. We accept those differences without question, and our brains are no different.

I also highlight the work that the GMB has done through its “Thinking Differently at Work” toolkit on neurodiversity, which I value because it is practical and designed for real workplaces, covering understanding neurodivergence, good employment practice, the law, reasonable adjustments and more.

Clear, accessible guidance is what too many workplaces are missing. It shows how much progress can be made when knowledge is shared early, rather than after problems escalate. Without neurodivergent minds, the world would be a poorer place. We would miss out on different ways of seeing problems, spotting patterns and challenging assumptions. That is true on a shopfloor, in a hospital, in a classroom and here in Parliament, which is why I have joined other MPs who are neurodivergent or disabled to support work on modernising Parliament, not just to make it more accessible for those of us already here but to encourage more people from different backgrounds to come into politics in the first place.

Neurodiversity should never be a barrier to ambition, public service or opportunity. Earlier this year, the TUC passed a motion calling for stronger national action on neurodiversity at work, calling for: clearer rights to reasonable adjustments, including for those waiting for a diagnosis; recruitment reform that assesses ability rather than social performance; investment in inclusive apprenticeships and work experience; better workforce data; and a national neurodiversity strategy co-created with disabled people. Those serious, practical proposals are grounded in lived experience. Supporting neurodiversity early is not a “nice to have”. It is a prevention that benefits everyone.

I have six asks of the Minister. First, will she commit to strengthening compliance mechanisms for how the Equality Act duty to make reasonable adjustments is understood and enforced in practice? Secondly, will she set out what the Government will do to make sure that people can access support at work, based on need not paperwork, including those who are waiting for or do not have a formal diagnosis? We cannot build workplace inclusion around a system where people may wait years for an assessment.

Thirdly, will the Minister commit to improving Access to Work, with clearer signposting for employers and employees, a simpler process and faster decisions, so that support arrives when it is needed and not months later? Fourthly, will she ensure that the public sector shows leadership by adopting consistent neuroinclusion standards, including manager training, so that reasonable adjustments are not left to chance or the good will of individual teams?

Fifthly, will the Minister commit to collecting and publishing workforce data on neurodivergent employees, so that progress can be tracked? At the moment, too much of the conversation relies on anecdote rather than evidence. Transparency matters and what gets measured gets improved. If we are serious about accountability, workforce data must be part of the picture.

Finally, will the Minister commit to ensuring that neurodivergent workers’ voices are central to this work, based on the principle of “nothing about us without us”, so that policy is shaped with people and not done to them?

Neurodivergent people should not have to work harder than everyone else just to stay afloat. They should not have to mask, explain themselves repeatedly or wait until they are in crisis before support appears. We should design work that works for people, not expect people to endlessly adapt to systems that were not designed with them in mind. If we want our workplaces and our Parliament to reflect society as a whole, neurodivergent people must be able to see a future for themselves. I hope today’s debate helps to push us towards inclusive workplaces, where difference is expected, supported and valued, and not tolerated as an exception.

16:19

[The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Dame Diana Johnson)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) on securing the debate and her powerful and eloquent speech. A number of excellent interventions made important points. I have noted them, even if I do not have the chance to respond to them all.

My hon. Friend has previously spoken about her ADHD diagnosis and her determination to use her platform to make Parliament, and politics more generally, more welcoming for neurodiverse people. I am pleased that she has given us the opportunity to talk about how we can achieve that in other workplaces across the country too. At the moment, only 34% of autistic people, for example, are in any sort of employment, compared with around 55% of disabled people overall. As a country, we can and must do better.

My hon. Friend is living proof that neurodiversity does not have to be a barrier to achievement, but as she has previously highlighted, the right support makes a huge difference, whether in education or the workplace. It is important that good practice becomes standard practice—not only does everyone deserve the chance to fulfil their potential, but a more inclusive labour market is a stronger labour market. I will endeavour to answer her questions, but if I miss anything, I am very happy to write to her with further details.

This January, we launched an independent panel of academics, chosen because of their expertise and lived experience of neurodiversity, to consider why neurodivergent people can have poor experiences in work and a low overall employment rate. I am grateful to the panel for their dedication and the evidence they gathered, which will help us—both the Government and employers—to understand how we can improve the workplace experiences of neurodivergent people. The panel was led by Professor Amanda Kirby, who I am pleased to be meeting tomorrow to discuss her recommendations.

I am also pleased to hear about the excellent work that unions have been undertaking in this area, the GMB and USDAW in particular, to expand the understanding of neurodiversity in the workplace.

[Laurence Turner]

One problem experienced by neurodivergent workers is that, when reasonable adjustments are put in place, the manager changes and they have to start again. The TUC did some very good work on a reasonable adjustments passport, as did the civil service unions. I encourage all colleagues to look at that work to see if it can be adopted more widely.

[Dame Diana Johnson]

My hon. Friend speaks with great knowledge of this area. Showing our commitment to raising awareness of neurodiversity, ACAS will be offering free masterclasses to small and medium-sized employers in early 2026, which goes to the point that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) made about small businesses being able to access information.

As we all know, ACAS specialises in providing free, impartial advice on workplace rights, rules and best practice. Earlier this year, we worked closely with its campaign to improve understanding and support for neurodivergent workers. The new free masterclasses will go further, helping small and medium-sized employers to build confidence, acknowledge the skills and expertise needed to support neurodivergent employees, and address the challenges those employees can face, such as barriers in recruitment, workplace adjustments and retention.

We are also setting in motion a broader mission to deliver change through the “Keep Britain Working” review, led by Sir Charlie Mayfield, which represents a pivotal moment in our mission to create genuine opportunity for all, fundamentally reshaping how we support people to stay healthy, stay in work and build better futures for themselves and their families.

We know that successful businesses and healthy workers go hand in hand, and the vanguard phase of “Keep Britain Working” is seeking partnership with employers to establish what good looks like. “Keep Britain Working” recommends developing a healthy working life cycle of best practice accompanied by a certified standard. Although it is not condition-specific, it will include best practice for early conversations between employers and employees about specific needs, and supporting all parties to navigate making the best adjustments where reasonable.

We know that supporting employers is central if we are to see real improvement in this area. That is why, in addition to our work with ACAS, we also have a suite of measures in place to support managers. We want to start making changes to ensure that we are maximising the opportunities to create accessible and inclusive workplaces for all.

We continue to oversee the voluntary Disability Confident scheme, which encourages employers to create disability-inclusive workplaces, including for people with hidden disabilities. My colleague the Minister for Social Security and Disability is leading work to strengthen that scheme to help it realise its full potential.

My hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South raised Access to Work. We absolutely agree that it needs to work better, and we are doing something about that. We recently concluded the Access to Work collaboration committees, in which we engaged with a range of stakeholders, including representatives of disabled people’s organisations and people with lived experience, to provide discussion, experience and challenge to the design of the future Access to Work scheme. Although the committees have now ended, we will seek opportunities to engage with stakeholders as we move forward with policy development in recognition of the value of their input and experience.

I want to say a few words about the support in place for neurodivergent people who face barriers to getting into work. We know that disabled people and people with health conditions are a very diverse group, so the right work and health support in the right place at the right time is absolutely vital. We therefore have a range of specialist initiatives to support individuals to stay in work and get back into work, including initiatives to join up employment and health systems. They include our new voluntary, locally led supported employment programme for neurodivergent people, the Connect to Work scheme, which has a specialist pathway that is dedicated to supporting those facing particularly complex barriers.

In our jobcentres across England, Scotland and Wales, since August there have been more than 1,000 full-time equivalent Pathways to Work advisers, who provide one-to-one, personalised support to disabled customers and those with health conditions to help them move towards and into work. That intensive support aims to enable disabled people, including neurodivergent people, to gain access to employment, wider skills support and Department for Work and Pensions employment programmes.

My hon. Friend asked about strengthening the Equality Act duty. That is a matter for the Cabinet Office, but I am of course very happy to relay her points to ministerial colleagues.

My hon. Friend also raised diagnosis for neurodivergent people. The Equality Act is clear that an employee does not need a diagnosis to meet the definition of disability. Our digital support with employee health and disability service helps employers to understand these legal obligations. It includes guidance on making reasonable adjustments, and links to other helpful services and sources of guidance. It also includes questions of disclosure, equipping employers to feel confident in having conversations to better understand their employees’ needs.

We are deeply concerned that many adults, young people and children with mental health conditions, ADHD and autism have been let down by services and are not receiving timely or appropriate support and treatment. I am therefore very pleased to welcome the independent review, launched by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on 4 December, into prevalence and support for mental health conditions, ADHD and autism.

My hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South also asked about neurodiversity in the public sector. I absolutely agree that the public sector should lead the way in raising awareness of neurodiversity. I am pleased to say that more than 700 public sector organisations are signed up to the Disability Confident scheme, and that all main ministerial Departments have achieved Disability Confident leader status at level 3. We are also committed to ensuring that our frontline staff have the skills and awareness to support neurodivergent people appropriately. There is a range of other commitments in place, and I am happy to write to my hon. Friend about them.

My hon. Friend raised workforce data. Our main source of data is the annual population survey, which does not contain detailed breakdowns of neurodivergent conditions beyond autism and learning difficulties, so we have limited data on employment outcomes for specific neurodivergent conditions. I will write to my hon. Friend with further details about that.

On self-advocacy, my hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the new independent disability advisory panel will provide that lived experience and make sure that policies take it into account. Zara Todd was appointed the chair of the panel in August. I am keen to show that this Government are taking action. We hear what people are saying about the need to address the particular concerns of neurodivergent people.

Finally, I wish all hon. Members and House staff a very merry Christmas.

Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).