We held our popular annual seminar at our office on 17 September 2025, and welcomed guests to our Waterfront Business Park office – it was great to meet you if you were able to attend.
We provided updates on neurodiversity in the workplace, relevant and recent case law relating to workplace banter and what lies ahead for businesses, when considering the Employment Rights Bill. We have captured the key discussion points below, to provide a useful summary.
Neurodiversity in the workplace
Facts
Katherine Cooke explored the Employment Tribunal (“ET”) decision of Khorram v Capgemini UK PLC. The claimant in this case was a senior employee who, during her six-month probationary period, experienced difficulties in managing her workload and meeting deadlines. She later disclosed her ADHD diagnosis and requested reasonable adjustments including clearer task setting and ADHD awareness training for her team.
The respondent – her employer - referred her to Occupational Health for an assessment, of which the findings supported her requests. Despite this disclosure, the respondent did not implement the recommended adjustments and set complex tasks with tight deadlines. The claimant proposed her line manager attend ADHD training with her, but she received no response. Her probation was extended, but ultimately, she was dismissed due to ‘ongoing concerns about her performance.’
Outcome
The ET found that Capgemini had failed to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 of The Equality Act 2019 and Judge, Tim Adkin found these failures constituted a continuing act of discrimination.
What does this mean for you as an employer?
Once you are aware of an employee’s disability, you must take active steps to remove or reduce any disadvantages caused by workplace practices. Reasonable adjustments are a statutory obligation, therefore recommendations from Occupational Health should be taken seriously and implemented without delay. Training and awareness for staff, particularly managers, are essential to effectively support neurodiverse employees. ADHD and neurodiverse training can be a reasonable adjustment, helping teams collaborate more effectively and fostering an inclusive work environment.
You must ensure your HR staff and line managers are trained to handle sensitive disclosures and respond appropriately to requests for support. Your HR team should proactively review policies, ensure adjustments are implemented and manage grievances with care. Otherwise, misunderstandings or delays in action can lead to serious consequences.
Employers should be aware of other neurodiverse conditions such as autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia and Tourette syndrome. You should tailor inclusive practices accordingly.
For more information, please read ‘Neurodiversity at Work’ published 16 September 2024. If you require any further information, advice or would like training sessions to help put this into practice, please contact Katherine.
Banter in the Workplace
Jayne Holliday, Legal Director, explored a range of Employment Tribunal (ET) cases regarding banter in the workplace and how it can quickly escalate from light-hearted teasing between colleagues to harassment or bullying. The cases explored below highlight why it is so important for workplaces to have clear anti-harassment policies, provide equality training and address any perceived mistreatment to ensure a safe working environment for all employees. It is also important for employers to have strong investigation processes.
Mr R Barr v Easyjet Airline Company Limited
A cabin manager, employed since 2017, was dismissed for gross misconduct following a series of complaints about inappropriate behaviour towards other colleagues and passengers. The issues included allegations of sexual harassment, breaches of the bullying and harassment policy and repeated inappropriate comments, of which some were overheard by passengers.
The claimant had received previous warnings, counselling and completed diversity and inclusion training but nonetheless, continued to make inappropriate remarks. Some colleagues described the behaviour as ‘banter’, however, the ET found the behaviour created an offensive environment and breached public policy. The claimant being dismissed was ruled as fair, noting the impact on others and not just the direct recipient, was key under the Equality Act.
Mr M Davies v White Dove Garages Limited
A sales team member at a SEAT/CUPRA dealership was dismissed after just three weeks’ employment, following escalating tensions with colleagues and management. The claimant, who considered himself more experienced than his peers, quickly raised concerns about workplace culture, including the use of profanities and inappropriate conversations.
Despite attempts to address these issues informally, relations deteriorated further. The claimant alleged he was subjected to and witnessed inappropriate language, sexual and offensive remarks, and aggressive behaviour. He made covert recordings of colleagues making derogatory comments, including sexist, racist, and homophobic language.
Ultimately, the claimant’s employment was terminated due to concerns about his conduct, a customer complaint, and ongoing conflict with the team. At his dismissal meeting, he reiterated his complaints about workplace culture, but a subsequent investigation found insufficient evidence to support his claims, though colleagues admitted to swearing and being noisy.
The ET did not find for any of the whistleblowing complaints or victimisation. The ET did, however, found for the claimant’s complaint of harassment of a sexual nature and sexual orientation. The claimant had, covertly, recorded his colleagues making in appropriate comments and despite arguments from the Respondent regarding the claimant’s motives for doing so, it did happen. The ET found the conduct was unwanted and the effect of it was that it created an offensive and inappropriate working environment.
Mr L Zawadzki v The Co-Operative Group
A warehouse operative, employed since 2015, was dismissed for gross misconduct following allegations of bullying and harassment. The complaint centred on the claimant making inappropriate noises and impersonations, which a colleague described as discriminatory and offensive.
An investigation found corroborating evidence from another colleague. The claimant admitted to making noises but denied any racist intent, stating he was ‘joking around.’ Notably, the employer could not show that the claimant had received any training on bullying and harassment or the company’s policy. Despite expressing remorse, the claimant was dismissed, and his appeal was unsuccessful.
The ET made a finding of unfair dismissal. It was accepted there had been a reasonable initial investigation, but further investigations should have taken place into the Claimant’s denial about his conduct. It was also decided the decision was outside the range of reasonable responses, no other penalty was considered nor was the claimant’s long service or clean disciplinary record taken into account.
What does this mean for you as an employer?
It's important for you to lay the groundwork. Ensure you have transparent and easily accessible policies that are well communicated to the workforce. You must ensure that all employees receive training on the company’s stance towards bullying and harassment. It is helpful to include examples of behaviour that is and is not acceptable.
You must not ignore complaints, even if they are of an informal nature. It is imperative to create a culture that is respectful and recognises what is acceptable and appropriate behaviour as well as what is not acceptable and appropriate. It is important to communicate where the line is and put boundaries in place so that employees are aware when this has been crossed.
Ensure investigation procedures are sound. When an incident arises, interview colleagues, obtain copies of relevant evidence and ensure it is all provided to the employee, who is invited to a disciplinary hearing.
Finally, do not always jump to dismissal. Take a minute and pause, think about whether a warning would suffice even if it’s a final written warning, particularly where the employee has an otherwise clean record.
For further tips and training, please contact Jayne Holliday.
Employment Rights Bill
Tim Jones explored the Employment Rights Bill and what lies ahead for businesses along with Katherine Cooke, Jayne Holliday and Debra Cottam.
The headline changes that SMEs should be paying the closest attention to include:
- Day one rights: statutory sick pay, parental leave and unfair dismissal protections become available from the first day of employment rather than the requiring qualifying periods
- Zero hour and casual worker protections: employees will have the right to request predictable working patterns
- Stronger enforcement and penalties: larger fines and a more streamlined process for claims through the ET.
Day one rights will affect SMEs in practice, particularly with probationary periods as currently they act as a safety net. This does not mean that SMEs will not be able to dismiss employees during the probationary period, but SMEs will need to ensure procedural fairness is sound with clear reasons, stronger documentation and transparent policies.
The Bill introduces rights for workers with irregular hours to request a more predictable working pattern after a certain period of time such as 12 weeks. SMEs should start to record regular working patterns now, so they are prepared for upcoming requests. Although many SMEs use zero hours staff to manage peaks in demand, they may have to offer more stable contracts or justify refusal on legitimate business grounds. This will add administrative pressures but will reduce the risk of disputes and retains talent.
The Bill strengthens new enforcement and introduces new penalty powers. This will include the enforcement of larger penalties for repeated breaches, Tribunals will be able to uplift penalties across the workforce and there will be easier access for employees to bring claims, with reduced tribunal backlogs via online procedures.
What this means for you as an employer?
Practically, there are some changes that can be put in place that will ease the transition. These include auditing contracts, checking where changes to sick pay, parental leave, or working hours must be made. Review HR policies on probation, dismissal and redundancy. You must train managers. Many disputes arise from poor handling by line managers. Ensure you have robust record keeping procedures to document fair processes, and engage staff communication. Inform employees how the company will implement the changes to reduce pushback and increase awareness.
The practical compliance challenges and costs include updating employment contracts to reflect day one rights and entitlements. Line managers will need to be trained to ensure any dismissals or probation issues are handled in line with the Employment Bill. HR systems will need to be implemented to track employee requests for predictable hours. Be mindful of potential higher costs for sick pay and parental leave, as eligibility begins immediately.
That being said, compliance will reduce the risk of ET claims, which can result in being far more costly than preventative investment.
Finally, the benefits include staff retention, as employees will be offered more fairness and stability. You will be recognised for having a reputation with good employment practices, therefore finding it easier to attract talent in comparison with competitors who struggle with compliance. Predictable working patterns can enhance workforce planning. It also reduces ambiguity and cuts down on costly litigation overall. The rules will be clearer for both employers and employees.
For more information, please read ‘Employment Rights Bill: Expectations vs Reality’
If you have any questions, please reach out to the team.
We host annual Employment Law seminars and webinars, both online and in person, covering a range of topics and ensuring you keep up to date with any Employment Law updates! We regularly post articles, ensuring you keep up to date with any statutory changes that may affect you, or case law updates that may influence you.
This information is for guidance purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We recommend you seek legal advice before acting on any information given.
