In partnership with
📋 5-3-1 — 5 Culture Plays on Fairness, Clarity and Kindness, 3 Playbooks, 1 Leader Spotlight
Tribunal claims linked to neurodivergent conditions almost doubled in five years, from 265 in 2020 to 517 in 2025, according to Irwin Mitchell's analysis of HM Courts and Tribunals Service data. Most employers would say they treat everyone fairly. Ask a neurodivergent employee and you often hear something different: being talked over, judged on tone instead of the work, held to rules nobody wrote down, and punished for raising a problem.
Much of it never gets called abuse, and a lot of it never gets reported at all. That's what we wanted to look at this week. Five cases and policies, all public, on what goes wrong when a communication difference is read as a conduct problem, and what a few organisations have put in writing to do better. Two come from employment tribunals, which are first instance decisions, so read them as findings in one case and not as rules for every case. Where a source only shows intent and not results, we say so.
Our guest this week is Scott Grunow, a Religious Studies lecturer. We recorded Episode 14 with him last Thursday and it premieres this Thursday, 15 October. He spoke about being judged on how work gets done instead of what it produces, why a vague "you should improve" isn't feedback, and what happens to the person who says something is off. This issue pulls those threads into Plays and Playbooks you can use.
Welcome to the seventeenth issue of The Work Life Reporter. This week you get:
5x Culture Plays on fairness, clarity and kindness at work, from tribunals and employers
3x Micro-Playbooks for people leaders
1x Leader Spotlight ft. Scott Grunow, Religious Studies Lecturer
1x Reader poll, one question and one click
1x Look at the Ethos One Transition Portal, plus the Episode 14 premiere on Thursday
Let’s get into it.
Blu Dot surpasses 2,000% ROAS with self-serve CTV ads
Home furniture brand Blu Dot blew up on CTV with help from Roku Ads Manager. Here’s how:
After a test campaign reached 211,000 households and achieved 1,010% ROAS, the brand went all in to promote its annual sales event. It removed age and income constraints to expand reach and shifted budget to custom audiences and retargeting, where intent was strongest.
The results speak for themselves. As Blu Dot increased their investment by 10x, ROAS jumped to 2,308% and more page-view conversions surpassed 50,000.
“For CTV campaigns, Roku has been a top performer,” said Claire Folkestad, Paid Media Strategist, Blu Dot. “Comping to our other platforms, we have seen really strong ROAS… and highly efficient CPMs, lower than any other CTV partner we've worked with.”
Using Roku Ads Manager, the campaign moved from a pilot to a permanent performance engine for the brand.
THE FIVE CULTURE PLAYS
Play 01
A Manager Read Missed Tasks as Defiance. The Tribunal Said He Was Setting Her Up to Fail
An Employment Tribunal in Reading ruled against Hawkwell House Hotel in December 2025, with the remedy decided in July 2026. The hotel's Talent and Culture Coordinator, who handled HR on her own, has ADHD but no formal diagnosis. Her probation was extended, and her manager cut her duties to payroll only for three days. He accepted he had "taken against" her, read the tasks she skipped as deliberate insubordination, and, in the tribunal's finding, was using the payroll week to build evidence that she couldn't do the job. The tribunal said he "was setting her up to fail." She was dismissed in March 2024. Direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability and a failure to make reasonable adjustments all succeeded, with compensation of £200,252.02 and her legal costs.
The detail worth sitting with is the manager's own evidence: it "never crossed his mind" that the missed tasks might be a sign of underlying difficulties or special needs. He didn't look for support needs and didn't make constructive suggestions. One assumption about what the behaviour meant decided every step after it. She had no formal diagnosis, and the tribunal found against the hotel anyway. Acas is clear that a worker doesn't need a diagnosis to be protected, and a manager doesn't need one to start asking questions.
If a manager has decided what a behaviour means before asking about it, the process is already unfair. Ask what's going on before you decide what it says about the person.
TEMPLATE: THE ASK-BEFORE-YOU-ASSUME CHECK
| The Ask-Before-You-Assume Check 1. Write the behaviour you're seeing in one plain sentence with no motive in it. "Tasks not done as agreed" is a fact. "Deliberately ignoring me" is a guess. 2. Ask the person what is making it hard and what would help. Write down what they say, in their words. 3. List the support you've offered so far. If the honest answer is "none yet", you're not ready to open a formal process. 4. If you change someone's duties during a probation or review period, put in writing what the change is for and how you'll judge it. 5. Keep notes of every meeting and keep them available. In this case the tribunal found the hotel deliberately withheld notes of a key meeting, and ordered it to pay the claimant's costs. |
Play 02
Lidl Could Demote Him for the Rule Break. The Tribunal Said It Could Not Dismiss Him for How He Came Across
A deputy store manager at Lidl, who has ADHD, used a powered pallet truck he knew he wasn't authorised to use. The tribunal accepted that was real misconduct and said demotion would have been within the range of reasonable responses. He was dismissed in August 2023 on findings that included a lack of remorse, which hadn't been put to him in the invitation to the hearing. Lidl's own appeal officer later accepted the remorse finding was incorrect and "did not sufficiently consider the claimant's ADHD and impact on his communication style."
A Cardiff tribunal found the dismissal unfair, because managers elsewhere who broke the same rule got final written warnings and the area managers who knew about it got a telling off. It also found the dismissal "arose in consequence of the claimant's disability specifically his difficulties with communication and the reliance on a lack of remorse," and that the disciplinary hearing needed adjustments, such as breaks. Lidl was ordered to pay £45,147.24, including £20,000 for injury to feelings and a 10% uplift for breaching the Acas Code. The useful split for HR leaders is that the rule break and the reading of the person's demeanour were two different questions, and only the first was safe to act on.
A rule break is something you can prove. "Lack of remorse" is a read of someone's tone and expression, and a read is the first thing to check when the person communicates differently.
TEMPLATE: THE ACT-VERSUS-DEMEANOUR SPLIT
| The Act-Versus-Demeanour Split 1. Before any disciplinary decision, write two lists. One is what the person did, with evidence. The other is what you think it says about them, such as remorse, attitude or trust. 2. Act only on the first list, unless you've put the second to the person and let them respond. 3. Put every finding you plan to rely on in the invitation to the hearing, so nothing new appears in the outcome letter. 4. Ask before the hearing what would help the person take part, such as breaks or the questions in writing. 5. Check the sanction against how similar breaches were handled before. Inconsistent treatment was the reason this dismissal was found unfair. |
Play 03
UNICEF Tells Managers to Stop Assuming Laziness, and to Say What They Expect in Writing, Out Loud and Visually
In June 2025 UNICEF published a manager's guide on neurodivergent talent. On what to do when a manager sees lateness, difficulty prioritising, frequent questions or unconventional thinking, it says to "avoid assumptions such as laziness, disorganization, or incompetence" and to take an "open, supportive, and solutions-oriented" approach instead. It asks managers to communicate expectations in "written, verbal, and visual" formats, and to hold structured performance conversations using "concise, objective language" with two way feedback.
The guide also quotes a neurodivergent employee, anonymously: "I'm often seen as confrontational when I speak up about issues that everyone recognizes, but no one wants to address." It's guidance, not a result. There's no outcome data and no section on discipline, so treat it as a clear statement of intent from a large employer. It's still worth copying, because it's specific about what a manager does, and it costs very little to adopt.
Clarity is a form of respect. If someone can only meet an expectation by guessing it, the expectation isn't written down yet.
TEMPLATE: THE SAY-IT-THREE-WAYS CHECK
| The Say-It-Three-Ways Check 1. Pick one expectation you've had to repeat or chase. Write it as a single sentence anyone could check, with a date or a measure in it. 2. Share it three ways: in writing, out loud in a one to one, and visually, such as a checklist or an example of what good looks like. 3. Replace "you should improve" with what to do differently, by when, and how you'll both know it worked. 4. End the conversation by asking the person to tell you what they heard. If there's a gap, fix how you said it. 5. Ask what's getting in the way, and write down one thing you'll change as a result. |
Play 04
Coventry City Council Published What Its Neurodivergent Social Workers Told It, and Committed to Check Its Own Disciplinary Processes
Coventry City Council signed the neurodiversity pledge for social work employers and published an action plan for its Children's and Adult Services for 2025/26. In it, the council says informal feedback from neurodivergent social workers points to a lack of awareness from some team managers, slow occupational health support, difficulty putting adjustments in place, and "action plans being used when presenting issues are relating to a lack of support provision." It also records positive reports of understanding colleagues and managers going above and beyond.
Its commitments include giving "due consideration to neurodiversity workers when managing capability and disciplinary processes," using Equality Impact Assessments to check that existing policies don't disadvantage neurodivergent staff, and zero tolerance of prejudicial behaviour, with the "I have a concern" intranet page as the route for reporting it. Be clear about what this is: commitments, overseen by its workforce boards, with no outcome data yet. It earns a place here because it does the harder thing first. It says in public that performance processes may have been used where support was missing, and then names the process it will check.
Before you open a performance process, ask whether the person had the support to meet the standard. If the honest answer is no, you've found the problem, and it isn't the person.
TEMPLATE: THE SUPPORT-FIRST CHECK BEFORE A PERFORMANCE PLAN
| The Support-First Check Before a Performance Plan 1. Before any capability or performance plan, write down every piece of support the person has actually received. Include what was agreed and what actually arrived. 2. Look for the gaps. A delayed occupational health referral or an adjustment still waiting to be set up belongs on your list, not theirs. 3. Ask the person what would help them meet the standard. Put it in the plan if it's reasonable. 4. Give each support action an owner and a date, as well as each performance target. 5. If the support hasn't arrived by the halfway review, say so in writing and adjust the timeline. |
Play 05
Cleveland Police Built a Plain Language Neurodiversity Toolkit With No Funding, and Managers Report Feeling More Confident Starting the Conversation
Cleveland Police built a neurodiversity toolkit in house, starting in October 2025, for staff, officers and their line managers. It gives guidance on reasonable adjustments and points people to support. The force describes it as "a usable, plain language resource rather than a policy document." It was published on the College of Policing's practice site in March 2026. Development "did not require any funding," the toolkit "has been accessed over 700 times," and managers "have reported to be more confident in starting and structuring conversations about neurodiversity and support needs."
The College of Policing classes the practice as "Untested," and the confidence figure is self reported. We've included it because it answers a practical question: what can you do now, without budget or a policy rewrite? Here the answer was a plain language resource, written in house, that managers opened.
You don't need a finished policy to make the next manager conversation better. You need something short, in plain words, that a manager will open.
TEMPLATE: THE ONE PAGE STARTER
| The One Page Starter 1. Pick the conversation your managers find hardest to start, such as asking someone what support they need. 2. Write one page in plain words: how to open the conversation, three questions to ask, what to write down, and who to call for help. 3. Test it with two or three managers and one neurodivergent colleague before you send it anywhere. 4. Send it with your next team update, and track how often it's opened. 5. After a month, ask the managers who used it what they'd change. Update the page before you write any policy. |
THREE MICRO-PLAYBOOKS
Playbook 01
The Check to Run Before a Communication Difference Becomes a Conduct File
Acas is direct about the order of things. Before using a formal performance, conduct or capability procedure, "an employer must make sure they've done all they reasonably can to support an employee," and employers should offer support "even if an employee only shares their neurodivergence when a formal procedure is started." A worker doesn't need a diagnosis to be protected. Formal steps can still be right where a conduct or capability issue remains after support is in place. The point is the sequence: support first, then process.
Acas gives an example that sounds small. A worker who is autistic struggles to keep eye contact, colleagues call them "weird and rude" and leave them out of social events, and Acas says that's likely to be disability discrimination. Researchers have some explanations for why it happens. Damian Milton's "double empathy problem" describes a "breakdown in reciprocity and mutual understanding" between people with very different experiences of the world, and it runs both ways. A 2017 study in Scientific Reports found that non-autistic raters formed less favourable first impressions of autistic adults within seconds and were less willing to interact with them, yet the groups didn't differ on rated intelligence or trustworthiness. A 2019 follow up found impressions were significantly more positive when the person was accurately labelled as autistic. It was a lab study with brief clips, not a workplace study, so use it as a reason to check your own first impressions and not as proof of how your managers behave.
One timing note. Acas consulted on a revised disciplinary and grievance Code this summer, closing on 23 September 2026. The draft says an informal conversation "should never by itself result in a formal disciplinary warning." It's a draft, and the 2015 Code is the one tribunals apply today. Until that changes, run the check yourself: what exactly did the person do, in observable terms? What support had they been offered by then? Could how they communicate explain why it landed the way it did? If you can't answer the second question, you're not ready to open a file.
Playbook 02
Say the Unwritten Rule Out Loud
The gap is visible in the data. In the CIPD's 2024 Neuroinclusion at Work report, 57% of neurodivergent employees said they felt supported by their line manager to perform at their best, against 69% of neurotypical employees. Only 24% of the employers surveyed said they train managers on how to support neurodivergent team members, and 18% on how to respond when someone tells them they're neurodivergent. The CIPD says its figures are unweighted and not representative of all employees, so read them as a signal and not a national rate. An Acas and YouGov poll in March 2026 asked employees about managers' training on adjustments for neurodivergent colleagues: 32% said it's done effectively, 35% said ineffectively, and 32% didn't know.
None of that is about lowering the standard. It's about writing the standard down. Acas lists "breaking down instructions into clear steps" as an adjustment, and UNICEF's guide asks for expectations in writing, out loud and visually. Scott put it plainly in our conversation: clarity, "rather than a vague, 'well, you should improve.' Like, how?"
Here's a quick test for any role. Could a new colleague with nobody to ask work out what good looks like this month? If the answer depends on reading the room, the rule is unwritten. Start with the three expectations people most often get wrong, and write them down.
Playbook 03
What Happens to the Person Who Spoke Up
Under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010, victimisation means subjecting someone to a detriment because they've made an allegation that the Act has been breached, or taken part in a case about it. Allegations made in bad faith aren't protected. Acas lists "being labelled a troublemaker" and "being left out" among the ways it can show up.
What employees report is worse than the policy suggests. The TUC and Opinium surveyed 1,000 disabled workers in 2025. Fewer than half (42%) of those who had experienced disability related bullying, harassment or discrimination reported it to their employer. Among those who did, fewer than one in four said it was taken seriously (24%) or dealt with fairly (24%), and a third (34%) said it was ignored or dismissed. That covers all disabled workers and not neurodivergent workers specifically, so it's a pointer and not a measure.
Scott ended our conversation with a lens from René Girard, whose book The Scapegoat first appeared in French in 1982. In Girard's theory, a community in conflict can unite against one person it blames. In Scott's words, "anyone who is seen as a threat to the system becomes a target, and it could be anybody." It's a theory and not tested evidence, so use it as a question: when someone raises a problem and then gets treated as the problem, is the team reacting to the person or to what they said?
One timing note. Since 1 October 2026 the time limit for bringing a claim to the employment tribunal has been six months instead of three (for breach of contract claims in Scotland the date is 9 November). A complaint that sits unanswered now has longer to become a claim.
LEADER SPOTLIGHT
THIS WEEK'S SPOTLIGHT, FIRST APPEARANCE
Scott Grunow on what happens when how you communicate gets judged ahead of what you deliver, and why "you should improve" isn't feedback.
Scott Grunow is a Religious Studies lecturer. How people communicate, and how they get judged for it, is part of his job every day, and he spoke from experience and not from a slide deck. He joined us for Episode 14 to talk about how neurodivergent people are treated at work, where the quieter forms of unfairness hide, and what employers who want to get it right could change.
We recorded the conversation on Thursday 8 October, and it premieres on Thursday 15 October. Scott was candid and generous with his time, and what stayed with us were the practical points. Here are five moments, in his words, that we think people leaders can use.
A note on what follows: these are Scott's own words from the recording, tidied only for spoken filler. We've kept to what he said about fairness, clarity and speaking up, and left out where he works.
FIVE MOMENTS FROM THE CONVERSATION
"My classes are vibrant. They're engaged. They just generally don't follow what the norm is."
Scott's point is about what gets measured. Work that lands, done in a way that doesn't match the usual template, can still get marked down. A fair question for any review: are you assessing what the work achieved, or how closely it matches the way you'd have done it?
"I've been accused of being blunt. Well, that could be a virtue. Or here's one: you don't do eye contact."
Two comments that turn a communication style into a character flaw. Acas treats colleagues calling someone "weird and rude" for avoiding eye contact as likely disability discrimination, and the Lidl case in Play 02 shows what happens when demeanour gets read as misconduct. More in Playbook 01.
"Clarity rather than a vague, 'well, you should improve.' Like, how?"
The shortest summary of Playbook 02. If feedback can't be acted on, it hasn't really been given. Scott also described an earlier corporate career where reviews meant sitting down with the person, with a rubric: "There was a rubric. And it was a good conversation."
"Anyone who is seen as a threat to the system becomes a target, and it could be anybody."
Scott closed with René Girard's idea of the scapegoat mechanism, which he has taught. In his reading, a group under strain can turn on whoever exposes the problem. It's a lens and not a finding, and it sits behind Playbook 03.
"The point is, everyone deserves a voice."
His closing thought, and a decent test for any process you run: can someone raise a concern and be heard without it costing them something?
Thank you, Scott, for your time and your honesty. Episode 14 premieres this Thursday.
READER POLL
New This Week, One Question and One Click
We're adding one question to every issue. Tap an answer below and it's counted.
Which is harder for you right now: knowing what your people really think, or doing something about what you already know?
Next Monday we'll share the result, including how many of you answered and no names, and ask the next question. You can read how we handle your answers on our privacy page. theworklifereporter.com/privacy
FROM OUR PARENT COMPANY, ETHOS ONE
The Transition Portal
Most companies handle the moments a role changes with a PDF and a hope.
Scott's point about clarity bites hardest at the moments when someone's role changes. A new starter works out the unwritten rules by getting them wrong. A newly promoted manager inherits a job whose know-how left with the person who did it. Someone goes on leave and their work lands on a colleague with no notes.
Ethos One is our parent company, and the Transition Portal is the part of it built for those moments. It's live today, and each area is made for one kind of change.
A candidate says yes to an offer and finds out what the job and the culture are really like on day one.
Offer Room. A deal room before they say yes: the offer, the culture and the answers to their questions.
A new starter spends the first week guessing where to be and who to ask.
Starter Pack. Onboarding, the day one schedule and welcome videos, so everyone is aligned before day one.
Someone steps up and the know-how stayed with the person who left the role.
Promotion Pack. The role's know-how, recorded by the actual predecessor.
A move sideways lands with no map of what the person can already do and what they still need.
Role Change Pack. Lateral moves and skill gap mapping, for people moving sideways or between teams.
People leave, and the reference, the pay and the reason for leaving get settled in a hurry.
Exit Pack. References, pay and an agreed exit reason, handled with structure and dignity, whether someone is leaving by choice or not.
Someone goes on leave and their work falls through the cracks, or lands on a colleague with no notes.
Check-Out Tray. Live cover for anyone going on leave or absence, so work doesn't fall through the cracks.
THE WORK LIFE REPORTER LIVE
A weekly LinkedIn live series where we take the most interesting conversation from the newsletter into a real room, with guests, debate, and the questions the newsletter doesn't have space to answer.
Episode 14, Premiere
Fair, Clear and Kind: What Neurodivergent People Should Be Able to Expect From Their Employer, and Where Workplace Abuse Hides When They Can't
Thursday, 15 October 2026 · YouTube, with clips on LinkedIn
Guest: Scott Grunow, Religious Studies Lecturer
Recorded rather than live this time. A real conversation with no script, no questions sent in advance and no rehearsal. Nothing is being sold, it's a conversation.
And that's a wrap for Issue 017. Something land? Hit reply and tell us which Play or Playbook you're taking back to your team.
Follow The Work Life Reporter on LinkedIn for what we share between issues, and catch Scott Grunow's episode on Thursday. New here? Subscribe free at theworklifereporter.com.
PS. Know someone who leads people and would find this useful? Forward it on. Ten seconds to share, a lot longer to write.
PPS. Haven't answered the poll yet? It's one click, up above. We'll share the result next Monday.