A new scientific publication sheds light on the neglected sphere of inclusion in the workplace.
The latest issue of Social Policy features an article entitled “Analysis of legal regulations concerning neurodiverse people in the labor market.” This is an important and long-awaited voice in the debate on neurodiversity in the context of labor law, in which the authors point out not only serious deficiencies in national and international regulations, but also propose specific directions for reform.
Authors of the publication:
all associated with the Gdańsk University of Technology.
Article available online:
Neurodivergent people make up as much as 20% of society. The law is still silent.
Neurodiversity is a natural diversity in human cognitive functioning, i.e. how we process information about the world. We consider neurodivergent people to be those whose cognitive system works differently than the majority of society and it is estimated that it characterizes 20% of the population. It includes, among others, people on the autism and ADHD spectrum, dyslexics or with high sensory sensitivity.
Despite such a large scale of the phenomenon, neurodiversity has long remained on the margins of equality policies – in contrast to issues such as gender, age or origin. As a result, both legislators and employers still rarely include it in recruitment strategies, team management practices or support systems.
This translates not only into the exclusion of neurodivergent people from the labor market, but also into the unused potential of competences and perspectives that they can bring to teams.
Legal gap – diagnosis and consequences.
The main goal of the publication was to analyze the existing legal regulations regarding neurodiversity – both in Poland and in EU and international legislation. The conclusions are clear:
There is a serious legal gap regarding the rights and obligations of neurodivergent people in the labor market.
There is a lack of not only specific provisions, but also unambiguous definitions. This causes difficulties in applying the law, as well as in enforcing protection against discrimination. Employers also do not have clear guidelines on the obligations or good practices supporting neurodivergent people.
Three possible regulatory models – and which one has a chance of working.
The authors analyze three possible approaches to regulating neurodiversity in labor law:
It is this mixed model that the authors consider the most promising – as a possible foundation for building real inclusion of neurodiversity in the work environment.
What can organizations do?
In addition to systemic changes, the authors also point to actions that can be taken at the organizational level:
How do we support change at the Atypika Foundation?
At the Atypika Foundation, we believe that neurodivergence is not a problem to be “fixed”, but a social resource. That is why for years we have been combining education, consulting and research to support institutions, teams and leaders in creating accessible, supportive work environments.
Among other things, we offer:
If you want to start a change in your company or institution – write to us. We help wisely and systematically.