What a recent Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment can teach us about neurodiversity, workplace assumptions and the importance of understanding individuals.
15 October 2026 | Neurodiversity, Inclusion & Employee Experience
Someone sits through a difficult meeting without showing much emotion.
They answer questions confidently, seem calm and don't appear particularly worried.
So we assume they're fine.
But what if they're not?
It's something I've been thinking about following a recent Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment involving an autistic and dyslexic job applicant.
And while the case relates to recruitment, I think there are some wider lessons for anyone managing people.
When appearing confident doesn't tell the whole story
In Bryce v Coventry City Council [2026] EAT 153, an autistic and dyslexic candidate had requested adjustments during a recruitment process.
The employer had made adjustments, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the finding that the duty to make reasonable adjustments had not been breached.
However, a separate issue arose around how the candidate's experience of stress had been assessed.
One interviewer believed the candidate had not appeared particularly stressed or anxious during the interview. Part of that assessment relied on assumptions about how someone who was stressed might behave.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal found that the original tribunal had been wrong to accept that assessment without considering whether an autistic person might experience or demonstrate stress differently.
The discrimination arising from disability claim was therefore sent back to a new tribunal to reconsider.
That distinction is important. The judgment doesn't establish that discrimination occurred, but it does raise a question worth asking.
How often do we judge someone's experience based on how we think they should behave?
We don't all experience or show things in the same way
I've worked with managers and employees across many different workplace situations over the years.
One thing that experience has reinforced is that we cannot assume everyone responds to pressure, stress or difficult conversations in the same way.
Some people become visibly upset.
Others become quieter.
Some ask lots of questions, while others say very little.
And some may appear completely composed, even when they're finding a situation incredibly difficult.
For neurodivergent employees, there can be additional differences in how information is processed, communicated or expressed.
But this isn't exclusively about neurodiversity.
It's about recognising that people are individuals.
We can all bring our own experiences and assumptions into conversations without necessarily realising we're doing it.
The challenge for managers is recognising when those assumptions might be influencing their decisions.
Are we making assumptions instead of having conversations?
Think about some of the situations managers deal with every day.
An employee hasn't raised any concerns about their workload, so we assume they're coping.
Someone doesn't appear upset during a difficult conversation, so we assume the discussion hasn't affected them.
An employee communicates differently from their colleagues, so we question their engagement or confidence.
Or someone seems perfectly capable in one situation, so we struggle to understand why they might need support in another.
None of these assumptions necessarily comes from a bad place.
Managers are often making decisions while balancing workloads, deadlines, operational pressures and the needs of their teams.
But when assumptions become the basis for decisions, without taking time to understand the individual, that's where problems can develop.
It can affect trust, confidence, employee wellbeing and, in some circumstances, create discrimination risks.
What can managers do differently?
I don't believe managers need to have all the answers, and they certainly don't need to become experts in every disability or neurodivergent condition.
But they do need to be willing to ask questions, listen and sometimes challenge their own thinking.
There are a few simple things that can make a difference.
Start with a conversation, not a conclusion.
Rather than assuming someone is coping because they appear calm, create opportunities for them to explain how things are going and whether anything is making their work more difficult.
Avoid using your own reactions as the benchmark.
How you might respond to pressure isn't necessarily how someone else will respond.
Explore support without making assumptions about diagnosis.
If someone is struggling, focus on understanding the barriers they're experiencing and what might help. Employers should also recognise when their legal duties to consider reasonable adjustments may arise.
Make it safe for people to speak up.
Employees need to feel they can explain when something isn't working without worrying that they'll be judged or that it will automatically be seen as a performance problem.
Review what happens next.
A supportive conversation is a good starting point, but it means very little if agreed actions aren't followed through.
Sometimes small changes to communication, working arrangements or management approaches can make a significant difference.
Inclusion isn't about knowing everything
One of the things I feel strongly about is that we sometimes make inclusion more complicated than it needs to be.
Of course, understanding the law, recognising disability-related barriers and making reasonable adjustments are important.
But so is being curious about people.
Listening.
Not jumping to conclusions.
And recognising that what works for one person might not work for another.
That doesn't mean removing expectations, avoiding difficult conversations or treating every employee differently without good reason.
It means understanding the person and their circumstances before deciding what a fair and appropriate response looks like.
For me, that's what good management should be about.
A question worth asking
The Bryce judgment is a reminder that even when adjustments have been made, we still need to think about the assumptions influencing our decisions.
Whether you're interviewing someone, managing performance, discussing wellbeing or supporting a colleague through a difficult period, there's one question I think is worth keeping in mind.
Are we responding to what we actually know about this person, or what we're assuming based on how they appear?
Because sometimes the person who looks like they're coping is the person who needs us to ask a little more.
Supporting managers to make fair, confident decisions
At Culture & Employee Experience by Melisa Cunningham, I work with employers to navigate difficult people situations, strengthen manager confidence and develop more inclusive workplace practices.
Whether you're reviewing reasonable adjustments, supporting a neurodivergent employee or helping managers approach difficult conversations, getting the right support early can make a real difference.
If you're unsure where to start, explore my Disability & Neuroinclusion support or get in touch for a conversation.
Case reference: Bryce v Coventry City Council [2026] EAT 153, Employment Appeal Tribunal, 9 October 2026.