Question 1
An experienced analyst discloses they are autistic and request reduced participation in large, unstructured meetings, saying they can contribute better in writing. Which response best aligns with the Equality Act 2010 and good HR practice in a UK context?
Keep the disclosure confidential but advise the manager to treat the employee exactly the same as others to avoid potential discrimination claims.
Incorrect: Treating everyone “exactly the same” without considering adjustments ignores the Equality Act duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people. This approach risks indirect discrimination and fails to support the employee’s needs.
Agree in principle but require a full diagnostic report from the NHS before considering any adjustment, pausing action until it is received.
Incorrect: Requiring an NHS diagnostic report before acting creates an unnecessary barrier. Autism can be a disability without additional proof, and employers should act on the disclosed condition rather than waiting for more documentation.
Explain that attending team meetings is an essential function of the role, decline the adjustment, and suggest resilience training instead.
Incorrect: Declining an adjustment and offering resilience training alone does not address the employer’s duty to consider reasonable adjustments. This risks discrimination and may exacerbate the employee’s difficulties.
Explore the request in detail with the employee and line manager, trial written contributions and smaller meetings, and document agreed reasonable adjustments.
Correct: This option recognises the Equality Act duty to consider reasonable adjustments. It focuses on collaboration, trialling practical changes (written contributions, smaller meetings), and documenting them. This is proportionate, supportive, and legally sound.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s explore how we can adjust meetings so you can contribute at your best.”
“We can trial written contributions and smaller, more structured meetings.”
“We’ll document the agreed reasonable adjustments.”
Question 2
A high-performing manager with dyslexia makes more written errors when the company implements a new, complex HRIS. The manager requests assistive software and extra proofreading time. How should you as HR Business Partner best respond?
Decline the request and emphasise that senior managers must meet the same written standards without extra support.
Incorrect: Applying the same standards without considering adjustments ignores the Equality Act duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled workers. This risks discrimination and may undermine performance.
Require the manager to move into a non-managerial role that involves less written communication as a condition for any support.
Incorrect: Moving the manager to a less suitable role as a condition for support is disproportionate and may be discriminatory. The focus should be on adjustments within the current role.
Suggest that the manager informally ask colleagues to proofread documents without formalising any adjustments to avoid setting a precedent.
Incorrect: Informal arrangements can be inconsistent and unreliable. Reasonable adjustments should be formalised, documented, and agreed.
Approve reasonable assistive technology and work with the manager to redesign workflows, possibly reallocating detailed proofing where feasible.
Correct: This option reflects good practice and legal compliance. It recognises assistive technology and workflow redesign as reasonable adjustments, supports performance, and avoids unnecessary barriers.
Useful phrases:
“Assistive technology is a reasonable adjustment we can consider.”
“Let’s look at how we can redesign workflows around detailed proofing.”
“We want to maintain standards while providing appropriate support.”
Question 3
An employee with a long-term mental health condition has fluctuating capacity and occasionally misses deadlines. The manager proposes issuing a formal warning immediately. What is the most appropriate HR response in the UK legal context?
Recommend dismissing the employee on capability grounds if their performance has fallen below expectations for more than three months.
Incorrect: Dismissal without considering adjustments or occupational health input is disproportionate and may be discriminatory. Mental health conditions can be disabilities, and employers should explore support first.
Support the warning to ensure consistency with how other employees are treated, regardless of health conditions.
Incorrect: Consistency is important, but it must not override the duty to make reasonable adjustments. Automatically applying a formal warning without considering health impact risks discrimination.
Delay any action until the employee specifically requests adjustments, to avoid appearing paternalistic.
Incorrect: Waiting until the employee requests adjustments may allow problems to escalate. HR should proactively explore adjustments where there are signs of difficulty.
Advise the manager to explore reasonable adjustments and consider occupational health input before moving to formal warnings.
Correct: This option reflects the UK legal approach: consider adjustments and occupational health advice before formal action. It is proportionate, supportive, and legally sound.
Useful phrases:
“Before moving to formal action, let’s consider reasonable adjustments.”
“We should seek occupational health advice to understand any underlying health impact.”
“We need to ensure our approach is fair and non-discriminatory.”
Question 4
A candidate discloses ADHD in a UK-based recruitment process and asks for extra time and written questions in advance of interview. What is the most appropriate HR Business Partner advice to the hiring manager?
Agree to provide reasonable adjustments such as extra time and pre-circulated questions for structured parts of the interview.
Correct: This option recognises the Equality Act duty to make reasonable adjustments in recruitment. Extra time and pre-circulated questions are typical, proportionate adjustments.
Refuse the adjustments as they could give the candidate an unfair advantage over others and undermine merit-based selection.
Incorrect: Adjustments are not about giving an unfair advantage; they are about removing barriers. Refusing them may be discriminatory.
Offer to withdraw the candidate from the process and invite them to reapply when they feel better able to cope without adjustments.
Incorrect: This is exclusionary and likely discriminatory. The employer should support the candidate within the current process.
Ask the candidate for full medical records to prove their diagnosis before considering any change to the standard interview format.
Incorrect: Requiring full medical records is excessive and may breach confidentiality. Adjustments can be considered based on disclosure and impact.
Useful phrases:
“We’re happy to offer reasonable adjustments in the recruitment process.”
“For the structured parts of the interview, we can provide questions in advance.”
“Adjustments are about removing barriers, not giving unfair advantage.”
Question 5
A neurodivergent employee reports that a new open-plan office has significantly increased sensory overload, affecting their concentration and wellbeing. What is the most appropriate first step for HR in addressing this concern?
Advise the employee that everyone must adapt to the new office design as part of organisational change.
Incorrect: This dismisses the employee’s concerns and ignores the duty to consider reasonable adjustments. Sensory overload can be a disability-related issue.
Conduct a structured conversation with the employee and manager to identify specific triggers and explore potential environmental adjustments.
Correct: This option focuses on collaboration, identifying triggers, and exploring adjustments. It is supportive, proportionate, and aligned with legal obligations.
Suggest the employee raises their concerns through the formal grievance procedure as the primary route for resolution.
Incorrect: Grievance is not the first step; HR should explore adjustments proactively before moving to formal processes.
Immediately move the employee to permanent homeworking, bypassing any consultation with the manager.
Incorrect: This is an extreme solution without consultation and may limit development opportunities. It should only be considered after discussion and adjustment options.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s identify specific triggers in the new environment.”
“We can explore environmental adjustments that help you concentrate.”
“We’ll work with you and your manager to find practical solutions.”
Question 6
In a performance review, a dyspraxic employee is criticised for slow completion of written reports but praised for strategic thinking and stakeholder management. What is the most appropriate HR-guided intervention?
Advise the manager to reduce the employee’s grade because they cannot perform at the same speed as peers.
Incorrect: Penalising disability-related differences in speed without considering adjustments may be discriminatory. Performance should be assessed with reasonable adjustments in place.
Explore adjustments such as extended deadlines for complex reports, use of templates, and potential rebalancing of tasks within the team.
Correct: This option recognises the duty to make reasonable adjustments. Templates, extended deadlines, and task rebalancing are typical, practical adjustments.
Support a performance improvement plan focused solely on increasing report speed to match team averages.
Incorrect: Focusing solely on speed without adjustments may be discriminatory and demotivating. Support should include adjustments.
Recommend ignoring the issue entirely because the employee is strong in other areas and raising it could be discriminatory.
Incorrect: Ignoring the issue avoids necessary support and may lead to unmet expectations. Adjustments should be discussed and agreed.
Useful phrases:
“We can introduce templates and structured formats for reports.”
“Let’s consider rebalancing tasks within the team.”
“Adjusting deadlines for complex written work may be reasonable.”
Question 7
A neurodivergent employee has an agreed reasonable adjustment: clear written instructions for complex tasks. A new manager refuses, saying “people should just ask questions if unclear.” How should HR respond?
Advise the employee to make a fresh request for adjustments and treat the previous agreement as informal and non-binding.
Incorrect: Agreed adjustments are organisational commitments, not personal favours. They should not be unilaterally withdrawn.
Support the new manager’s approach to ensure consistent management style across the team.
Incorrect: Consistency in management style does not override the duty to make reasonable adjustments. This risks discrimination.
Remove the adjustment from the employee’s record as it was agreed under a different manager and may no longer be valid.
Incorrect: Adjustments remain in force regardless of line manager changes unless formally reviewed.
Remind the manager that reasonable adjustments are binding organisational commitments and work with them to implement and, if needed, review them.
Correct: This option recognises that agreed adjustments are binding and should be maintained. It supports implementation and formal review if necessary.
Useful phrases:
“Agreed adjustments remain in force regardless of line manager changes.”
“If you feel an adjustment needs review, let’s discuss this formally.”
“We need to ensure consistency with our legal obligations.”
Question 8
You are advising on a redundancy selection matrix. One criterion is “absence record over the last 12 months,” with no exclusions. A disabled employee has disability-related absences. What is the best HR advice?
Advise adjusting the matrix to discount or separately treat disability-related absences to avoid discrimination.
Correct: This option reflects UK case law and best practice: disability-related absences should not be penalised in redundancy scoring without adjustment.
Keep the matrix unchanged but assure the disabled employee that their absences will not actually be counted when decisions are made.
Incorrect: Unenforceable assurances do not protect against legal risk. The matrix itself should be adjusted to avoid discrimination.
Remove the absence criterion entirely, as any use of absence data is unlawful discrimination.
Incorrect: Absence data is not unlawful in all cases; the issue is disability-related absence without adjustment.
Retain the criterion as it is, because altering it for disabled employees would be discriminatory against others.
Incorrect: Adjusting for disability-related absence is required by law; failing to do so risks indirect discrimination.
Useful phrases:
“We should adjust the matrix to avoid penalising disability-related absence.”
“Let’s document how disability-related absence will be treated.”
“We need to ensure our selection criteria are non-discriminatory.”
Question 9
A neurodivergent employee experiences meltdowns under intense time pressure. The manager suggests removing them from high-pressure projects altogether. What is the most appropriate HR stance?
Recommend that the employee takes unpaid leave whenever a high-pressure project arises to avoid triggering meltdowns.
Incorrect: This is exclusionary and may limit development opportunities. Adjustments should be tried first.
Explore adjustments such as clearer planning, earlier involvement, and structured check-ins before resorting to excluding them from development opportunities.
Correct: This option promotes adjustments and supports inclusion. It avoids unnecessary exclusion and focuses on proactive planning.
Advise that the employee’s condition makes them unsuitable for the role and begin a capability process.
Incorrect: This is disproportionate without exploring adjustments and may be discriminatory.
Support excluding the employee from high-pressure work to protect their wellbeing, even if it limits progression opportunities.
Incorrect: Automatic exclusion may limit development and be discriminatory. Adjustments should be explored first.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s look at clearer planning and earlier involvement in projects.”
“Structured check-ins can help prevent crises.”
“We should avoid unnecessarily limiting development opportunities.”
Question 10
An autistic employee consistently avoids informal social events and is perceived by peers as “aloof.” The manager raises concerns about “team fit” in a promotion panel. What should you, as HR Business Partner, advise the panel?
Focus assessment on objective job-related criteria and challenge any reliance on vague notions of ‘team fit’ that may disadvantage neurodivergent staff.
Correct: This option challenges subjective “team fit” language and focuses on objective, job-related criteria. It reduces the risk of indirect discrimination.
Downgrade the employee’s score on behavioural competencies due to their limited participation in social events.
Incorrect: Penalising limited participation in social events may be discriminatory and misinterprets neurodivergent behaviour.
Treat “team fit” as a critical criterion for promotion, as it reflects the organisation’s culture, even if difficult to define precisely.
Incorrect: Vague “team fit” criteria can disadvantage neurodivergent staff and lead to indirect discrimination.
Delay the promotion decision until the employee undertakes social skills training and demonstrates higher participation in social events.
Incorrect: This is exclusionary and may be discriminatory. Social participation is not a core measure of capability.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s focus on evidence of performance and competencies, not social preferences.”
“We should be cautious with subjective ‘team fit’ language.”
“Participation in social events is not a reliable measure of capability.”
Question 11
A line manager insists that disclosing disability is purely a personal choice and refuses to proactively raise the topic, even when employees struggle. What is the best HR coaching point?
Suggest the manager only respond if an employee uses the word “disability,” to avoid overstepping boundaries.
Incorrect: This is too passive and may miss opportunities for support. Employees may not use the word “disability.”
Support the manager’s stance to avoid any risk of being accused of prying into health matters.
Incorrect: Avoiding the topic entirely may prevent necessary support. HR should encourage safe, proactive conversations.
Advise the manager to ask all team members for detailed health histories annually to ensure nothing is missed.
Incorrect: This is overly intrusive and may breach confidentiality and data protection.
Explain that while disclosure is voluntary, managers should create safe opportunities to discuss health and adjustments when there are signs of difficulty.
Correct: This option balances voluntary disclosure with proactive support. It encourages safe conversations when there are signs of difficulty.
Useful phrases:
“You don’t need to name a diagnosis, but if anything at work is difficult, we can look at adjustments.”
“I’ve noticed you seem under pressure; is there anything at work we can change to support you?”
“We want to create a safe space to talk about workload and wellbeing.”
Question 12
You are reviewing an occupational health (OH) report about a neurodivergent employee. OH recommends flexible start times and reduced back-to-back meetings. The manager says this is “impractical” but offers no evidence. What should HR do?
Insist that all OH recommendations must be implemented exactly as written, regardless of operational context.
Incorrect: OH recommendations are not automatically binding; they should be carefully considered but can be adjusted with evidence-based reasons.
Treat the OH recommendations as advisory only and allow the manager to ignore them on grounds of practicality.
Incorrect: Dismissing OH advice without evidence undermines good practice and may be legally risky.
Ask OH to withdraw their report to avoid conflict with the manager’s preferred working patterns.
Incorrect: OH should not be asked to withdraw reports to avoid conflict.
Work with the manager to assess operational impact and document clear, evidence-based reasons if any recommended adjustments are rejected or modified.
Correct: This option balances operational reality with legal obligations. It requires evidence-based reasons for any rejection or modification.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s assess the operational impact of each recommended adjustment.”
“If we cannot implement something, we must record clear reasons and consider alternatives.”
“OH advice is a key part of our decision-making.”
Question 13
A dyslexic employee consistently submits reports with spelling and formatting errors, despite spellcheck tools. The manager wants to link this directly to annual bonus reduction. What is the best HR-guided approach?
Explore whether further reasonable adjustments or support (e.g. proofing processes, training, different formats) can improve report quality before tying disability-related issues to pay.
Correct: This option focuses on adjustments before linking performance to pay. It is proportionate, supportive, and legally sound.
Recommend moving the employee into a lower-paid role with fewer reporting responsibilities to avoid bonus disputes.
Incorrect: Demoting without exploring adjustments is disproportionate and may be discriminatory.
Agree that quality issues automatically justify bonus reduction, as bonuses should reward only flawless performance.
Incorrect: Automatically linking quality issues to pay without considering adjustments may be discriminatory.
Advise the manager to ignore the errors because holding a dyslexic employee to quality standards would be discriminatory.
Incorrect: Employers should still expect quality, but must consider reasonable adjustments. Ignoring errors entirely is not appropriate.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s explore additional support for written quality before finalising bonus decisions.”
“We can look at proofing processes or different report formats.”
“We still expect quality, but we must consider reasonable adjustments.”
Question 14
A senior leader suggests that to avoid discrimination risk, job adverts should not mention disability, adjustments, or neurodiversity at all. What is the most appropriate HR response?
Agree, as any reference to disability could be perceived as discriminatory or tokenistic in recruitment.
Incorrect: Proactively welcoming disabled candidates is good inclusive practice and supports equality duties.
Propose adding a statement that disabled candidates are discouraged from applying due to the demanding nature of roles.
Incorrect: This is exclusionary and likely discriminatory.
Suggest using only generic diversity statements without mentioning disability specifically, to keep adverts neutral.
Incorrect: Generic diversity statements are less effective than explicit inclusion of disability and neurodiversity.
Explain that proactively referencing reasonable adjustments and welcoming disabled and neurodivergent applicants is positive and aligned with inclusive practice.
Correct: This option recognises that inclusive wording is positive and aligned with legal and ethical obligations.
Useful phrases:
“We actively welcome applications from disabled and neurodivergent candidates.”
“Reasonable adjustments are available throughout the recruitment process.”
“Inclusive wording in adverts helps widen our talent pool.”
Question 15
You discover that a manager has been informally sharing details of an employee’s mental health condition with peers “to explain their behaviour.” What is the most appropriate HR action?
Remind the manager of confidentiality and data protection obligations, and agree a plan to repair trust with the employee, including discussing what can be shared with consent.
Correct: This option addresses confidentiality, data protection, and trust. It is proportional and legally sound.
Instruct the manager to deny sharing anything if the employee raises concerns, to avoid complaints.
Incorrect: Denying the breach is unethical and may compound the problem.
Advise the manager to share even more details so colleagues fully understand the situation and can be supportive.
Incorrect: This worsens the breach of confidentiality and may be discriminatory.
Do nothing, as the manager’s intention was to foster understanding and reduce stigma.
Incorrect: Even well-intentioned sharing without consent breaches confidentiality and trust.
Useful phrases:
“Health information must be treated as strictly confidential.”
“We need to agree with the employee what, if anything, can be shared.”
“Let’s work on a plan to rebuild trust.”
Question 16
A neurodivergent employee has agreed adjustments in place. During a restructuring, HR is asked whether these should be considered when assessing suitability for a new, slightly different role. What is your best advice?
Recommend automatically excluding the employee from roles that may require any adjustment, to simplify the process.
Incorrect: Automatic exclusion is discriminatory and limits opportunities.
Advise that adjustments are irrelevant in restructuring decisions, which must focus solely on role requirements.
Incorrect: Adjustments are relevant and should be considered as part of selecting suitable roles.
Confirm that adjustments should be considered and, where the new role is broadly similar, carried forward or adapted as part of the selection and consultation process.
Correct: This option recognises that adjustments should be considered and adapted where roles are similar. It is inclusive and legally sound.
Suggest that the employee should compete for the new role without adjustments to test their ‘true’ capability.
Incorrect: This is discriminatory. Adjustments should be assumed to continue unless there is a clear reason to change them.
Useful phrases:
“We should assume adjustments continue, unless there is a clear reason to change them.”
“Selection decisions must reflect the role with reasonable adjustments in place.”
“We can adapt existing adjustments to the new role where appropriate.”
Question 17
An employee with a learning disability is struggling with a new, text-heavy compliance system. The manager proposes assigning a colleague to complete all compliance tasks on their behalf. What should HR advise?
Explore whether the system can be made more accessible for the employee with training, simplification, or assistive tools before offloading all tasks.
Correct: This option focuses on making the system accessible for the employee. It supports independence and avoids unnecessary exclusion.
Recommend starting disciplinary action because inability to use the system shows lack of competence.
Incorrect: Disciplinary action without exploring adjustments is disproportionate and may be discriminatory.
Support full task transfer, as it removes all risk of the employee making compliance errors.
Incorrect: Offloading all tasks may limit development and be discriminatory.
Insist that the employee must complete the system unaided to show they can meet the role’s essential requirements.
Incorrect: This ignores the duty to make reasonable adjustments and may be discriminatory.
Useful phrases:
“Can we simplify the interface or provide step-by-step guidance?”
“Let’s explore assistive tools that make the system more accessible.”
“We want you to be able to use the system as independently as possible.”
Question 18
During a grievance investigation, a neurodivergent employee says they experienced indirect discrimination because team meetings are always scheduled for late afternoons when they experience sensory overload. What is the most appropriate HR investigation step?
Dismiss the allegation because meeting times apply equally to everyone.
Incorrect: Apparent equality does not exclude indirect discrimination. The issue is whether the practice disadvantages a group.
Conclude that because the practice was not intended to disadvantage anyone, it cannot be discriminatory.
Incorrect: Indirect discrimination can occur without intent if a practice disadvantages a group.
Examine whether the meeting scheduling practice puts neurodivergent staff at a particular disadvantage and whether there are reasonable alternatives.
Correct: This option correctly investigates group disadvantage and alternatives. It is aligned with legal definitions of indirect discrimination.
Focus solely on whether the employee formally requested an adjustment in the past, ignoring the broader pattern.
Incorrect: Indirect discrimination considers the broader pattern, not just individual requests.
Useful phrases:
“We need to examine whether our scheduling practice disadvantages certain groups.”
“Are there reasonable alternatives, such as rotating meeting times?”
“Let’s look at the pattern, not just this individual case.”
Question 19
A neurodivergent employee with social anxiety prefers written communication and rarely speaks up in large virtual meetings. The manager wants to rate them poorly on “visibility” in the annual review. What is your best HR advice?
Endorse the rating, as visibility should reflect how vocal someone is in meetings.
Incorrect: Penalising disability-related communication preferences may be discriminatory.
Suggest adding an objective that the employee must speak in every meeting to improve their visibility rating next year.
Incorrect: This is exclusionary and may be discriminatory. It pressures the employee to conform.
Encourage the manager to consider how the employee contributes through alternative channels and to adjust expectations to avoid penalising disability-related communication preferences.
Correct: This option recognises the employee’s contributions through alternative channels. It avoids penalising disability-related preferences.
Recommend that the employee be removed from all large meetings since they do not contribute verbally.
Incorrect: Automatic exclusion is discriminatory and limits development.
Useful phrases:
“Let’s consider all the ways this person adds value, not just speaking in large meetings.”
“Visibility can include written updates, 1:1s, and project leadership.”
“We should avoid penalising disability-related communication preferences.”
Question 20
An employee discloses that they are undergoing assessment for a possible neurodivergent condition but have no formal diagnosis yet. They request adjustments such as clearer deadlines and written follow-up to verbal instructions. How should HR guide the manager?
Advise the manager to record the request but take no action unless the employee’s performance deteriorates significantly.
Incorrect: This option adopts a passive “wait and see” stance that can allow difficulties to escalate and may miss an opportunity for early support.
Offer to pay for a private assessment only if the employee agrees to waive their right to adjustments if the diagnosis is negative.
Incorrect: This option ties financial support for assessment to a waiver of rights, which would be ethically questionable and likely unenforceable.
Explain that adjustments can be considered based on impact rather than diagnosis and encourage a trial of the requested changes.
Correct: This option recognises that good practice and legal compliance often involve acting on functional need rather than waiting for medical certainty. HR should guide the manager to discuss the specific barriers with the employee and agree a time-limited trial of adjustments, with clear review points. Straightforward changes such as written summaries and more explicit deadlines typically benefit whole teams, not just one individual. Documenting that the organisation has responded flexibly also strengthens its legal position if disability is later confirmed. The manager should be reassured that adjustments can be revisited if circumstances change, but that the default should be to support where reasonable, not to delay.
Decline any adjustments until a formal diagnosis is confirmed, to avoid setting a precedent for non-disabled staff.
Incorrect: This option makes formal diagnosis a precondition for adjustments, which is not required by law and may cause unnecessary hardship.
Useful phrases:
“We can consider adjustments based on how this is affecting you now.”
“A formal diagnosis is not always necessary to trial reasonable adjustments.”
“Let’s try clearer deadlines and written follow-up and review how it works.”