Episode 4: ADHD, Neurodiversity & HR in the UK: Disclosure, Support, and Reasonable Adjustments

In this episode, Jannine is joined by Nikki Masterman, CEO of Inspired Minds & Inspired HR, for a practical and honest conversation about ADHD, neurodiversity and HR. Together they explore disclosure at work, reasonable adjustments, workplace support, recruitment, performance, hybrid working, and what happens when employers get it right and when they get it wrong.

This is an episode for neurodivergent people who are struggling at work, wondering whether to say something, or trying to work out what support they can ask for. It is also relevant for managers, HR professionals, and employers who want to create safer, fairer and more workable environments.

Jannine and Nikki talk about the balance between employee needs and employer responsibility, why support is not the same as favouritism, and why the goal should be an equal playing field, not forcing everyone to work in the same way.

Transcript

Jannine 0:01

Welcome to ADHD Wise Podcast. I'm Janine Perryman, and this is a space for open conversations about ADHD and neurodiversity, bringing together lived experience, professional insights, and the questions that help us move forward. Wherever you are in your journey, you are welcome here. Hello everybody, and thank you for joining us on ADHD Wise Podcast. Today I'm joined by the amazing Nikki Masterman, who is basically the person that I go to whenever I have an issue for myself or for anybody else relating to human resources and neurodiversity. We are writing a book together. In fact, we're writing four books together, but currently writing one because you know we're writing one. Hello, Nikki. Nice to have you here today. Thank you for having me, Janine. I'm um Nikki, you've had your hair done literally today. Did you have it done specifically on the podcast, or was that just a coincidence?

Nikki 0:56

No, just a coincidence every six weeks to get rid of that grit and remove the yellow and get light again.

Jannine 1:03

Very good, very good. Okay, all right. So we thought when we were talking about this podcast, um, because I go on your podcast and we talk about neurodiversity for HR professionals, whereas this one is HR for neurodivergent individuals. But we do know that we have a following that is also professionals as well. So our predominant audience are people who might be facing difficulties in the workplace or maybe afraid of disclosing in the workplace. So what we thought we'd do, and Nikki and I have agreed this in advance, is try to give you what we think that you're going to need within the space of about 35 minutes, just the basics of what you might need. What's been the most interesting? And I haven't asked you this question in advance. What's been the most interesting neurodivergent-related case that you've been involved in all that you've read about?

Nikki 1:52

Probably the one I've read about, and I refer to this one. I mean, we we deal with a lot. We we obviously, as you know, we specialise in neurodiversity in the workplace and and we work with a lot of organisations and other HR companies on this, and I could tell you loads of tales about our clients. But there's one in particular that I always use as a judgment case study for a reason as to why it's not okay, and there's dual responsibility and things like that. So there was a there's a particular judgment where um an individual threatened another employee, and actually we do see this quite frequently where there's a threat or a physical altercation or someone's sworn at or something like that. And we use this as a kind of boundary um and uh and a judgment to rely upon to kind of go, it's not okay to do that, and use your new adverse condition as a reason for that. And that that particular individual was already on a warning um for it was already on a final warning for threatening staff um and being quite aggressive, and then he did it again. Um, and needless to say, that workplace to protect the employees took a decision um, and it was under the legal framework on this, that um although they acknowledged that his ADHD impacted upon his behaviour, it didn't make him do it. Now he brought a claim, and his argument to the judge was ADHD made me do it. Um, the judge, when he looked at the whole case, said actually I disagree. He said I absolutely acknowledge that the business acknowledged you when you were divergent um and that you were ADHD and they did have reasonable adjustments in place. Um, you know, however, you were already on a final warning for that. You did it again, and saying your ADHD made you do it is not okay. And actually the business took the right decision to protect their employees because somebody else's somebody else would have ended up with the tribunal again, Smith.

Jannine 3:57

They haven't, wouldn't they?

Nikki 3:58

Yeah, exact exactly. I mean, they they would end up with complaints from the rest of the staff and grievances for failing to protect the employees from harassment, bullying, all of those other things. So, you know, that they they and I'm not going to go into the the the law kind of phrasing around it, but basically they took a decision to dismiss him on the grounds of that it's not okay to do that and threaten other staff. Um, and he had already been given an opportunity not to do it again by being on on a final warning. Um, and and obviously he lost his case on that basis. And what that does is and and I have this conversation of meeting somebody's needs doesn't override the needs of other people, in simple terms. There has to be a balance, you have to protect everyone. It's you know, there's not if somebody else's needs don't override another person's, and and that's a conversation I have to have quite a lot. But that enables us to have conversations where you know, we did have a very similar case where somebody, um, and I'm probably going to swear a little bit here. Somebody told um an employee to F off, and we ended up having to have a conversation of it's not okay to do that because what he then said, but I'm autistic, and I've said, but that right or wrong, that is still not acceptable in the workplace. It's not okay to say that to somebody and then blame your newer divergent condition. So this is a conversation we have to have all the time.

Jannine 5:23

And it's so difficult because you can recognise there are needs and vulnerabilities that are underlying in these things, and it's one of the reasons why quite early on in a difficulty with an employer, there's like coaching, for example, is part of things. And you and I both do a lot of screening with regards to helping people to understand their vulnerabilities underneath. Because I can understand that somebody may be dysregulated and act out of character as a as a one-off, and they might need something in that situation. Um, but there is a line, isn't there, between somebody not being in control of themselves in the moment and somebody else feeling like they are being physically or verbally threatened. Um, I'm always I'm a big believer in not taking things personally when someone's dysregulated, however, that is asking an awful lot for the workplace. And if it's happening in front of customers and those sorts of things, things have to be safe. You have the obligation is to create a safe space for everybody, isn't it? Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Then maybe their stress levels are so high that it's not the right position for them to be in. And and sometimes relationships, employment relationships come to an end because they're not the right place for the person. And it's not about condemnation, it is about this isn't the right place for you to be. If you're if it's if it is triggering you to such an extent that you are not in control of yourself, then that's that's really not a great position for anybody to be in, is it?

Nikki 6:47

No, it's not. And and I mean, we have when we look at these things, it's not just having that conversation with the individual. We do explore with them and the employer because it's normally on the back of screening and talking about things that are going on in the workplace, needs that need to be met, um, any performance concerns that we need to kind of support them with when we're looking at their strengths and their challenges and and recommending the kind of strategies and mechanisms or equipment or podcasts or books or coaching or anything, well-being support, anything that needs to be put in place. It's not just a focus on that, it's the bigger picture of actually what led to that. Have you got a quiet place to go in and regulate? Is the business enabling you to go for a five-minute walk and be able to bring those emotions um, you know, under control and regulate your system? So, you know, we do look at all of these different things that can be put in place to enable that person to learn to manage that. It's not just it, it's not a case of telling somebody off, it's going, okay, we can see that affects you. What do we need to put in place that's reasonable within the workplace to enable you to be able to manage that so it doesn't occur again? And it's like anything, when somebody's ill, there's an expectation you're going to go to the doctor and and use the tools and seek the help that you need to to help with these things. It's not just a so and that's what we do when we do the screening. We're giving them the tools, we're giving them the recommendations, we're putting things in place, but they still need to use them. They can't just go, well, it's my ADHD or my autism that's caused it.

Jannine 8:11

I think the dual responsibility is is a really good way of putting it because ultimately the employee has needs, and the employer has an obligation to do their best to meet those needs within what's reasonable. Um, and the employee, the employer has needs, and the employees do what they can to meet those needs to whatever extent is reasonable. And you and I have some amazing conversations when we think of, I mean, I do I was thinking about it when I was, you know, blow-drying my hair, thinking about meeting up with you, and I'm thinking, we do, we because we look for the sweet spot, we look for the win-win. And you'll come to me and you'll say, Janine, this case, I'm a little bit bewildered. Now, you are in your own right, um quite well learned with regards to neurodiversity and inclusion, it is what you do, is your specialism in your own right, but you'll come to me sometimes and you'll be like, Janine, what have I missed? And I just think that is such a constructive thing because you support lots of other HR professionals. So that means that if they've missed something and you've missed something, you come to me and I'm like, Well, and we had one recently, didn't we? And I was just like, We don't have the language that was used in that particular situation. I'm suggesting that person isn't just autistic, there's some trauma in that mix as well because of the language that they used. And you went, I'd not thought of that. And then you went to the other people and they went, I'd not thought of that. And so there's actually that that that that lovely sort of like situation where we have that dialogue, which means that HR professionals can come to you knowing that if you you probably know, and if you don't know, you have somewhere to go and and ask those questions, you know. But I I and I think that is amazing. But from a an employee perspective, I'll be in situations or my team will be in situations where we're coaching an individual or something like that, and then something comes up and we're like, hang on a minute, that doesn't seem right. So I'm quite learned with regards to HR, which is why we're like, you know, with the fact that we're both really good at this, but I'm not an expert on HR. So I will come to you and I'll go, Nikki, what am I missing? And you'll go, Well, and so we have that lovely back and forth, is so good. And the reason we're writing together is because we want those win-wins, but we it helping people to understand there is a dual responsibility, it isn't on one, it isn't on the individual and it's not on the company, it is in the middle. There is a dual responsibility, though I would say it is often the case, particularly with high masking, and particularly women, um, that they are masking like mad, and then the the employer only finds out about it when they have done more than they can do in order to mask, and therefore the employer probably does have to do the lion's share of adjusting because this person has already given all they can give, and then some stress, a stressful situation hits their life on top. Um, their child gets poorly, their parent gets poorly, or they hit menopause, or the menopause journeys or all the parimort menopause stuff. When we're of that, we're of that age as well, where we're, you know, on we're pretty much a good, we're a good way through it. And and it's it's it's that whole thing of recognising that individuals should be able to turn up in the workplace and say, This is what's happening for me. And the employer does have an obligation to say that must be really difficult. What can we do to help? And I don't know that all employers see it that way, but that is their obligation, right?

Nikki 11:46

Yeah, it is. And and and you know, for we we've talked about this a number of occasions because I'm self-recognised um and I've done multiple screenings that indicate I am ADHD with high traits of autism. Um, and again, we've talked on numerous occasions. Uh I discovered this, I ticked all those boxes I realized six years ago on the back of menopause, um, and going down the rabbit hole researching after someone had noticed my son was stimming, um, and I'd suspected he was autistic. So I have the personal lived experience that I am that high masculine, high-functioning female that's gone through menopause um and has all of the typical traits that present in the workplace, and my strategies came down during perimenopause and everything like that. And you know, I I took the decision I didn't want or need um a diagnosis because I understand myself it's what I do for a living, and I went down that rabbit hole six years ago. But you know, for those that that don't know the relationship we had, I I met you God two and a half years ago on the back of deciding to do my ADHD coaching qualification, which you were my tutor. So besides the rabbit hole and the research and the books and everything I've read, you are that expert that surrounds me. I never refer to myself as an expert. We've had this conversation. I've seen myself as a specialist, I have that expertise, but the reality is within within the HR field, that the HR professionals have seem been so caught up in the Employment Right Act changes that the reality is that, and I spotted this gap six years ago, there is a massive gap in knowledge of HR professionals, which is why we've we're on this journey with the book writing, and and you know, we we support a high number of other HR companies and HR consults that don't have the expertise and the specialisms that we've got between us, and we work really closely on that. Um, but there's there's absolutely a need, you know. We I learn from you all the time. Individuals can be. And we can't be the oracle in everything. I think somebody who is good at their job accepts they don't know everything and they reach out to those that can help them.

Jannine 13:54

Well, I get called a know-it all, and I'm so not a know-it-all. I know what I know, and I do, and I will give my title expert with regards to ADHD and broader neurodivergence. Um, but I I am not a know-it-all with regards to so many other things, but what I do have is a network of people who are an expert in what they're an expert in. That's why you and I are so beautifully connected. Okay, so I'm gonna give an example of um when I went to where last time when I was still teaching, the last teaching job that I applied for, I sent in my application. I didn't put it on my application, but at interview I told them that I'm ADHD. Um, and they'd watched me do a lesson observation prior to that. Um, and I sat down very early on in the interview and I said just one to let you know, I I am diagnosed with ADHD. And do you know what they said? Thank you for telling us. We had already noticed. I was going for a job in a special school, so therefore the head teacher, etc. You would expect that they would be aware of those sorts of things. And it just kind of like made me feel so comfortable. Um, because I'd made a decision, because I was bullied in the workplace that I was in prior to that, and I'd made a decision that I wasn't going to go and work anywhere where they weren't going to accept me as me. So there was just no point. Um, and I benefited then from a few years of working for a school, a head teacher, and and a bunch of with colleagues who accepted me for who I am. And then when I started getting media coverage and stuff, so I was in The Guardian um when I was still teaching, for example, they were so supportive. They were like, you know, yes, the guardian's coming, we'll clear this space and we'll get they can come take some photographs there and we'll do this and we'll do that. How amazing is that? They absolutely celebrated me, and they had me train everybody else on ADHD as well, um, which was just fab. But they got somebody else in and then they realized they were learning more from me than they would from that person. But there is a thing with employers that they do tend to try and get external people in rather than that internal thing. But I just look back and I just think that's how it should be. But you and I both know that's not always how it works out when someone does decide to just disclose before interview. What's the best or the worst that you've seen in that situation? I'd like to think the best was mine, was my recruitment.

Nikki 16:25

Um, so I when we recruit, we have we're very transparent now. So we say, you know, we've made all of these adjustments. Um, we we talk about you don't have to put a C V and you can share your link on LinkedIn. We send out the pre-questions, we say, you know, we're we're a um a neurodiverse friendly recruitment practice. And and so I would like to think that where we've recruited recently has created that safe space because somebody I've actually just recently offered a job to, um, and she actually starts with us next week, um, actually admitted during her interview she was neurodivergent. Um, and she's actually specifically asked if I would do the screening on her. Um, now, obviously, because of discrimination, that isn't something that's normally done at an interview. And as and and I did have to say to her, if you would like to request for that, and I'll make it very clear in writing that it will not be considered as part of um any decision making in relation to you. But if you would like to do that to understand yourself a little bit more, I am happy to provide that as part of the process as an adjustment for you, as you know, but you would have to put that in writing to make sure that I'm protected and it doesn't look like I've forced that on you because obviously, once that's planted in somebody's mind, it could be for somebody that maybe doesn't get a job that they think that's the reason they don't get it, it can happen. Um, and so she, you know, we have that completely very transparent, and I thanked her. And she starts with me next week, and I I absolutely see I the strengths actually, if if anything, that report showed me the strength she's gonna bring to the role, the attention to detail. Um, I'm not gonna, you know, I'm not gonna go into detail of what it is that's very private to her, but I saw all of those strengths and the benefits that were going to bring to my business, and then when I actually looked at at the challenges, like we can fix we can support you with all of that, not a problem at all. And I wish every business took that approach because you know that the strengths that I know she will bring, because obviously I've I've got a particular um thing about things being done right, being done right first time, quality over quantity, and and all of her strengths show attention to detail, accuracy, all of that. And I'm like, that's exactly who we're about. What an amazing person she's going to be in this job. And and she I had a beautiful email of of being grateful for her because actually that particular individual hasn't had a great experience in their previous employee that they've just left. Um, and I think I showed her what a good employee could look like. Now, this is something I encourage with our clients. Um, you know, the reality is workplaces are only starting that journey at the moment. They've there's still a lot to be done, a lot. We're at the very, very beginning of workplace. But I've got some wonderful clients that are going to me. How can we put all of this in place for our whole business? And they're wanting to offer screening to all of their employees to understand the deeper strengths that they bring to the business, not just those who are neurodivergent, um, or or declare that they believe they might be neurodivergent. Um, so you know that that's beautiful to see in some of these workplaces that are able to offer that. Um, and I would like to see over time that workplaces will do that, they'll look at it as an opportunity to understand their people, and and and that on itself will just create an amazing, diverse, inclusive workplace that enables people to thrive. And I would like to see that in all. And that's certainly one of the journeys I'm on at the moment. Um, but there's a long way to go.

Jannine 19:53

No, absolutely. So I just want to sort of give an example there, and then we need to go on to the what's the what's your worst example. But I was just thinking about um one of the cases that I'm involved in, um, where I'm underperson's coach, so I know about it because the person tells me about it. And this individual was telling me that she said, my my boss said to me in my in my annual review that um there are some tasks she doesn't give me unless she absolutely has to give me. She will tend to give me the things that I am good at. So in this particular case, it was around sort of um course content creation. So she said she'll she'll give me those things, but she won't give me the sort of like the the form filling in and everything else. And she's just like, I feel a bit uncomfortable because I feel like I'm not pulling my weight. And I'm like, no, that's your employer, leaning into your strengths and leaning into somebody else's strengths. Because maybe the other person isn't great at the creativeness and the being able to sort of like bring things to life as you. And so they're just looking at their team in terms of strengths and challenges and assigning the work. And yes, you're gonna have some form filling in and some admin to do, and she really struggles with her inbox, for example. Inboxes for email inboxes are horrible for when you're putting individuals with ADHD, and she really struggles with that, and that's where she's got a support worker, access to support worker, access to work-funded support worker, I should say, and they deal a lot with her inbox, etc. So they turn that into tasks for her, which is just great. That's what that's for. But she was feeling like she was being unfair on her team. But actually, when you think about it, that's best practice from an employer's perspective, isn't it?

Nikki 21:30

Yeah. Well, why not lean whether someone's neurodivergent or not? If you've got individuals that have a particular strength or skill set, lean into it. It you know, it whether they're neurodivergent or not, you should actually be looking at the bigger picture of all of your team and leaning into them around their strengths and getting them to work and cross over together on their challenges. They can meet the needs of the business together. It doesn't have to be alone.

Jannine 21:56

No, it doesn't, but we we you we see it a lot though, don't we? These everybody has to do their share of this, this, this, this, and this. Okay, on that note, what's your worst example that you've seen of um practice related to neurodiversity, employment practice relating to neurodiversity?

Nikki 22:17

So this the worst one I've actually seen and heard about actually wasn't one that we supported, it was one I heard about from a friend. So a friend you knew I specialized in this, she's a HR consultant, and she actually reached out to me and she had her nephew who was autistic. Now, this individual worked for a big government um public sector organization. Um, I won't say who, someone that you would expect to have this nailed. They have the funding, they have the money. They are a national public sector organization that should be leading by example. They've certainly got the funding to do it. Um, and this particular individual has um he he has high needs to be met within the workplace. And he'd it was following the pandemic, a high number of the workforce worked from home, and then all of a sudden they declared they wanted everybody back in the workplace for two or three days a week. Now, you know, you can't just blanket this from an employment law point of view, it's a huge risk to go we want everybody back in the workplace on Monday. It's PCP without going into detail, it's a risk of discrimination. Um, but they did, and this person suffers with anxiety on public transport um as part of his as part of his his needs. So working from home was meeting his needs, and that was a reasonable adjustment because there was no performance issues, he's done a really good job, he'd been there for four or five years, he was there was no indicators of underperformance, and the view was we want everybody in. I'm like, you cannot blanket this. Actually, you're not meeting his needs by doing that, and you're risking discrimination. Now, this wasn't something we advised on, but when I heard about some of the practice and the conversations and just the downright arrogance of some of the conversations that that HR team were having with him, and he needed his mum to support him in those meetings, and they were refusing for her to go in as well. And it wasn't a great situation, he wasn't getting the support he needed in those meetings. He got invited to a disciplinary because he wasn't wanting to come into the workplace. He was really struggling with travel anxiety, which was one of his autistic traits, uh traits and needs that needed to be met. Um, and they were just trying to force something, so he ended up going off sick, and then they started managing his sickness and putting him on disciplinaries around the sickness. I'm like, really? They're they're counting neurodiverse-related absence that's work-related stress because they're failing to meet his needs as a way to discipline him and put him on warnings.

Jannine 24:53

They're asking for trouble, they're in trouble, aren't they? Because at the end of the day, there was the the uh you know, a hot part of the definition of what reasonable adjustment is, is is is that is like you know, what adjustments to make the pet to enable the person to do their best job. Um, and actually, if we get too stuck on they need to be in the work, they need to be in the in the building, or they need to be in the building every single day. Because actually, hybrid works very well for lots and lots of people. The combination of the two works really well for lots and lots of people.

Nikki 25:23

Lockdown taught us lessons that we seem to have just we are starting to forget them. And this particular individual started during the pandemic, so he's only ever worked from home. And actually, they've got a big open environment. When I when I explored all of this with with you know my my friend in business, and she was telling me it's a big open environment. Now we know he he re he struggled. I know he struggles with sensory. So going into that big open plan office with people walking past him, the sensory, the noise, the fake lights, all of these different things was just going to overwhelm him as well. So it wasn't just that he suffered with a str with the travel anxiety, he was also going to struggle with the environment, and there was just no consideration that they were just so focused on we have been told everyone has to get back into workplace, they were actually not exploring his particular needs, and instead they were disciplining him for it because he'd gone sick on the back of it.

Jannine 26:16

It makes no sense because nobody wins. That's somebody else's stuck thinking, isn't it? And um yeah, we see some we see some real sort of like challenges around that sort of stuck thinking. Okay. Um, is there anything in particular that you would like, being as we've got about another 11 minutes, um, to maybe a little bit less, um like to communicate to a neurodivergent person who let's start with is it is it thinking about embarking upon a new job and is thinking about whether or not they say something or don't say something at the beginning of that process. What would your advice be?

Nikki 26:52

I think there's a lot of fear for people to disclose their neurodiverse when they're going through recruitment because they're they think they're not going to get the job because of it. I'm I'm of the opposite thinking. If anything, I think it protects the decision that is made against you because the reality is that if you suspect, if you've declared your newer diverse and you suspect they haven't recruited you for that reason, then you you are protected from that decision and you could challenge it in the right way and query it. Um, I think it brings a level of because you never know how people are going to think. I think it brings a level of protection rather than disqualifies you from consideration. Um, and why shouldn't you have your needs met to be that best person during the recruitment process? It's okay to ask for the questions ahead of time. It's okay to ask if you can have the meeting recorded, um, you know, to remember what you talked about if you if you struggle with with memory in that meeting or taking notes, you know, it's it's okay to ask for things that are going to enable you to be that best person. Because the reality is if you're going into an interview and you're not disclosing your needs, you may not be that best person that that can really shine and and and do that job.

Jannine 28:05

And if they are going to discriminate against you based on your disclosure and needs, then then they are then then I mean it depends on how desperate you are.

Nikki 28:16

They may not be the employer for you anyway, and and you've potentially they've made a wrong decision that they're at risk of a claim on.

Jannine 28:24

Yeah, yeah, yeah, quite likely. And so everybody loses in that situation, then don't they? Um okay, so let's think about somebody who is in the workplace and um things are sort of like starting to go wrong, or there is a reason for someone to feel like they probably ought to at this point say something about what's going on for them. How would you, what would be your recommendation and advice with regards to how they go about that?

Nikki 28:52

Um, I would be asking for a confidential meeting with HR. Um, I wouldn't, depending on the organization, sometimes they have a good relationship with a line manager. I would normally say HR is is if there is a HR department, have asked for um a confidential meeting with HR. Um your rights are whether so there's still again, this is where the education within HR is still coming in. You don't need a diagnosis, you simply need to believe you are that it's having an impact upon you to be protected under the Equality Act. Now, the Equality Act is, I often, you know, this may sound terrible, it's not a get out of jail free card. It is what does that business obligations mean need to do to meet your needs? And they are called a reasonable adjustment. Now, a reasonable adjustment, when you look at the legal word and around it, it literally says a significant impact upon your day-to-day work and life that is projected to last 12 months or already has exceeded 12 months. Now, in reality, what a lot of people don't realise is they get wrapped up in this word significant, and actually, significant basically means more than minor or trivial. That's all a judge will look for. It's as little as that. That is the threshold, completely minor or trivial. That's it. Just to reiterate, you don't need a diagnosis in order to do that. You don't need a diagnosis, you don't need to prove it. You literally just need to demonstrate that you have a need that needs to be met, and the workplace then has an obligation of reasonable adjustments to support you. And it's about giving you an equal playing field to do your job. It's not you getting anything better than anyone else, it's not you having favorable treatment. The workplace needs to lose out of their mind that it's about someone getting favouritism and getting better than anyone else. It's not, it's what needs do I need to meet to enable you to do the same job at the same level as everyone else? And that's what it's about.

Jannine 30:49

I I look at sort of like the um the the way it's sort of like prescribed, this is how you do this particular thing. And um sometimes that sometimes that discriminates upon some individuals and doesn't bring out the best in them. And actually, it's just like, well, what does what does the end result need to be? And is there a different way, a diverse way of getting to that point that means that person can work differently rather than harder? Now, my view would be that would be inclusive practice, inclusive be reasonable adjustment, it would just be it would just be reasonable practice, and therefore you need fewer adjustments when you have reasonable practice. But how would that stand in a court of law? If if person was saying, I achieve the same things, I go about things in a different way, and I'm being penalised for going about them a different way. How would that stand with regards to HR and employment law?

Nikki 31:38

I think they're at risk because ultimately, when you have a job and a job description, it defines what you need to achieve, not how you need to get there. So it's a risk because we all work differently. I say to my team, this is what we need to get done, how you get there, I'm absolutely fine, where you do your hours, how you do it. I'm fine with that. It may not be the way I work, but what works for you as long as the end goal, how you get there, but we still have some people that get so focused on how they get there, and I'm like, why? The client doesn't care how you get there, just just get there. Um, you know, as long as it's not a detriment to other people, because again, nobody else's needs override anyone else's. It's it's about putting things that's right, you know, that's that's in place, and actually, there's so much practice that we can put in place that could apply to everyone, you know, agendas and questions before meetings, that could help everyone be the best person in that meeting. Um, a recording device to record that meeting, nobody needs to take notes if you've got a recording device like a plaud or otter AI or something in that meeting that's the recording it for you that then sends it out to everyone. Although do be careful with that because you know, we we we did come across a client that um had it set up to send it out as soon as the meeting ended. But when somebody had actually left the meeting and the two managers continued to talk, they said a couple of things that shouldn't have been said, and then it got sent to that in person, which we then had to pick the pieces up on.

Jannine 33:06

But generally speaking, with regards to having meetings recorded, people shouldn't be saying things in meetings that they're not wanting to be held to account for, you know. So actually, having meetings recorded should just be a reason, well, I think it should just be a reasonable practice.

Nikki 33:22

We we do it as normal in our practice and have done for years, and we have it in our privacy policy that all of our telephone calls are recorded, our meetings are recorded, we use auto AI in our Zoom, we have devices that we put on the desk when we do meetings. Because actually, when we're listening to meetings and we're listening to that person talk, we cannot actively concentrate and listen to what they're saying when we're too busy trying to write notes and get it right. Um, instead, we you know we use a dive that enables me to concentrate on that person in front of us and make sure we we're all the best person we can be in that meeting. And if someone's saying, No, I'm not recording it, I don't want it recorded, then my answer is always, well, what have you got to hide? Because if you're doing your job properly and you're being professional in that meeting, um, and and don't get me wrong, it's actually done us favours sometimes because we're maybe we've had a union rep that's got a little bit um a little bit too aggressive um in their approach or something's been said that shouldn't have been, um, it's it's it's enabled us to go back to that person and go, that was really unprofessional and inappropriate. So it kind of keeps people in check as well and makes them act professionally. But more than anything, if you've got nothing to hide, just record it. And and there's pl I mean, we've got non-learning platforms, we've got platforms that don't go out into the domain. You've got nothing to hide, just share it with people. So you like I say, we have transcription services, so we have a transcription device that sends the transcription to that person, we're able to provide it afterwards, and we do that as part of our screening. So when we do screening, for example, um, when me and Jenny doing it, and I know when you do it, with our screening, we use a transcription system that records our conversation, so it then produces a report which we can check for accuracy of yes, they're the strengths we're covered, there, the challenges, these are things you disclosed to us. Um, you know, these are the recommendations we've we've recommended, and and this is what we've discussed. It summarizes it because that person, it's such an emotive meeting that it enables them to get it right for the workplace and the individual. And the reality is it goes to the individual first for them to approve it. And, you know, if there's something we've missed, they'll tell us and we'll add it back in if it's if it's missing. We won't change our professional opinions, but we will, if there's something factually missing um or something that needs updating, we will absolutely do that before it goes to the workplace as a meeting follow-up, because that's what makes sure the right adjustments get put in place for them.

Jannine 35:47

Yeah, I do know some individuals who would hate the idea of having their personal meetings, meetings around them personally being recorded. But again, let that person take responsibility for it.

Nikki 35:58

We give them the we give them the choice. So, you know, we say, you know, obviously not everyone's going to remember this, and we do say that that recording as it is is not um it's not disclosed to the employer as it is. We summarize the key points that's going to meet their needs and send it to them to get their feedback. Do they want it redacted? Do they want it withheld? It's we follow a very strict consent process around that. It doesn't go to the workplace. And the workplace have been in that meeting. It isn't anything they haven't already sat and listened to.

Jannine 36:28

Yeah, I mean, that's like one of those complications, isn't it? But it's it's um, I I actually think that recording of meetings such as that just kind of makes sense for everybody. And if people know that's happening, then um, you know, if you're not behaving properly in a meeting, then there's why not? Um, and you know, if it's a if if it's a need-based thing or it's a cultural thing, etc., then we have to kind of look at those things because the intersections of all of this are part of of everything that we that we do.

Nikki 36:57

Um I mean we don't do it for coaching, um, because that needs to be a safe space. We we don't do it for coaching unless somebody has asked us to do it for them and this, but so I do have one one lady that I coach. Um, she's a HR professional that's new adverse. She specifically asks for it to be recorded, and I send her the whole raw, the whole raw transcription. There's nothing she she manipulates it into what she wants, and that's about her remembering what she needs to do because she can't concentrate on taking her actions coming out of that, and that's her choice. We're happy to do that for them, but we don't do it as normal like we do with screening because that's about getting their adjustments right. Yes, yes, yes, yes.

Jannine 37:37

But ultimately, you've just basically got a uh an AI tool that is taking the minutes for you, which means you're able to engage in the meeting. Um, because we know that with with the working memory of somebody with with ADHD, for example, they might be writing it and then it kind of like just goes out of their head. So all right. We have talked about a large array of bits and pieces there, and I and I there's so many more things I kind of want to talk about, um, and then and lots of things there we I don't feel like we've quite done justice. So I would love you to come back another time, Nikki. And of course I record I I go on your podcast as well. But um, I hope people have found this interesting and and helpful, um, and giving you pause of thought, um, you know, we we are here and we're about the win-wins. You might not like everything that we have said, that doesn't make us wrong, and you might see it differently and that doesn't make you wrong. It just means that I mean, Nikki and I we don't we don't agree on everything, but that's actually why we work together because if it's when you have conversations people you don't agree with that you actually find where the win-wins are, because you might bring something to me, or anybody might bring something to me, and I might sit there and go, Oh, yeah, I missed that. And that's that whole thing around being I I know my stuff well enough to feel like I can learn. So if you think we've got anything wrong on this, I really encourage you to send us an email and say, hang on a second, what about this? Because we need to have those rich conversations so that we can improve our practice, because we improve our practice, we improve the practice. Nikki and I are all about the win-wins. So feel free to think we've missed something. Please comment, particularly if you like what we've talked about, because obviously, you know, it helps to sort of spread the word. If you think this has been helpful, if you want your HR manager to hear it, you want your line manager to hear it, you share it with them. That's what this is for. It's been lovely to spend this time with you, Nikki. Thank you, everybody, for in listening, and um, we will see you all next time on another ADHD orc or other neurodiversity-related topic. Um, lovely to see everybody. Thank you, Nikki. Thanks. You're welcome. Thanks for having me. Thank you for listening to ADHDWISE podcast. ADHD WISE exists to help bridge understanding and support for people exploring ADHD and broader neurodiversity. If you would like to know more about us and our services, please visit www.adhdwise.uk. Follow ADHDwiseuk on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and LinkedIn. Take care and we'll see you next time.