Public relations worker with ADHD criticised for being ‘disorganised’ wins incapacity discrimination case

A public relations worker with ADHD who was criticised for being ‘disorganised’ when she missed calls because she went to Starbucks, shopping, or for a massage, has won a disability discrimination case.

Nicole Hogger was described as being ‘disorganised’ by her manager after she missed a meeting without telling anyone she would be absent.

Miss Hogger would also miss calls because ‘she had been out for a massage, to Starbucks, or to the supermarket’, a tribunal heard. 

However, it has been ruled that using the word ‘disorganised’ to describe a co-worker can amount to disability discrimination under UK employment law.

The comment can ‘undermine’ someone and even ‘violate their dignity’, a judge at Cambridge Employment Tribunal said.

Miss Hogger is now in line to receive compensation after successfully suing Genesis PR, which is based in Ipswich, Suffolk, for claims of disability harassment, disability discrimination, and unfair constructive dismissal.

Employment Judge Roger Tynan concluded that Genesis PR did not consider Miss Hogger’s ADHD and that there ‘was little, if anything’ Miss Hogger could ‘usefully do’ with the feedback she was given.

The judge added that there were no ‘practical steps’ made by the company ‘to avoid a similar situation arising in the future’.

On Miss Hogger being called ‘disorganised’, Judge Tynan said: ‘In our judgement, even if this was not intended, Ms Straker’s comments undermined [her].

‘They served to highlight her disorganisation without, however, suggesting any practical steps to avoid a similar situation arising in the future.

‘There was little, if anything, that [Miss Hogger] could usefully do with the feedback.

‘Ms Straker maintains that it was intended as constructive feedback.

‘We suggest that a more constructive approach would have been to explore with [Miss Hogger] whether and, if so, what steps might be taken to raise awareness of her condition, and indeed other neurodivergent conditions, within the workplace, or at least amongst [Miss Hogger’s] immediate colleagues.’

It was heard that Miss Hogger joined Genesis PR in October 2018 as a Senior PR Account Executive, before being promoted to PR Account Manager in 2020.  

She was responsible for leading client projects, managing communication campaigns and organising events.

Alison Straker, a member of the senior leadership team, ‘championed’ her promotion because of her effective work and then became her line manager in 2021.

That year, Miss Hogger was diagnosed with ADHD, with her doctor stating that she showed ‘poor organisation, forgetfulness and difficulty getting started on tasks requiring significant mental effort’.

A diagnosis report also stated that she had difficulty ‘maintaining attention’ and that ‘procrastination has always been a problem’.

However, Miss Hogger never gave this report to her employers, instead mentioning the diagnosis to Ms Straker privately.

At the start of 2022, managers began noticing that Miss Hogger was ‘anxious’ and not coping well with the workload.

One manager emailed Ms Straker that ‘Nicole seems to be slipping behind with work again’.

He added that clients had been chasing her for work and that she hadn’t informed anyone, saying that ‘she doesn’t seem to flag if she’s tight on capacity but instead just goes quiet’.

That manager said their workload was getting heavier because he was having to ‘oversee’ Miss Hogger’s work to make sure nothing was missed.

Ms Straker tried to help Miss Hogger by talking to her and even transferred some of her workload to a colleague, it was heard.

Miss Hogger said she felt like ‘a weight had been lifted’, but she soon began missing calls and managers were raising concerns about her performance.

It was only at this point that Ms Straker began to agree with the other managers, saying she found Miss Hogger’s repeated performance issues ‘concerning’.

In October 2022, a senior accounts manager said that Miss Hogger ‘had gone dark again’, and wasn’t responding or communicating with her colleagues when ‘critical’ work was due.

Ms Straker replied: ‘Not acceptable. If she was due in to help and hasn’t turned up or contacted the account team that’s not good enough.’

In June 2023, Ms Straker spoke to Miss Hogger about the fact that she had missed the start of an important meeting.

Ms Straker mentioned that when her colleagues couldn’t get hold of her, Miss Hogger would sometimes later tell them ‘she had been out for a massage, to Starbucks or to the supermarket’ while she was supposed to be contactable.

She added that this could lead Miss Hogger’s ‘colleagues to think she was disorganised or uncommitted’ but her ADHD wasn’t brought up as a reason for why she’d missed the meeting.

Miss Hogger arrived 40 minutes late when her colleagues reminded her that it was taking place in the office as she’d become ‘confused’ and thought the meeting was online.

Ms Straker said she was putting Miss Hogger on a performance improvement plan, but the next day Miss Hogger resigned with her letter only saying that she ‘strongly felt it was time for her to take a new path and continue her professional development elsewhere’.

She set up her own business later.

Judge Tynan said: ‘We consider that it was reasonable for [Miss Hogger] to feel that her dignity had been violated and that an adverse environment had been created as a result of the comments on 19 June 2023.

‘As we have said already, the comments were undermining, as they merely served to highlight a negative aspect of [Miss Hogger’s] disability. We uphold [Miss Hogger’s] complaint about that matter.’

Addressing the claim of constructive dismissal, Judge Tynan said: ‘[Genesis PR] acted in these matters without reasonable and proper cause.

‘It discriminated against the [Miss Hogger] by: failing to make a reasonable adjustment; subjecting her to an adverse environment on June 19 2023; and taking a disproportionate approach to performance issues in July 2023.

‘In the circumstances we uphold [Miss Hogger’s] complaint that she was unfairly dismissed and her further complaint that her constructive dismissal was also an act of unlawful direct discrimination in so far as it was in response to contraventions of the Equality Act 2010.’