question about disclosing at work

Before disclosing, I would really suggest to read the Equality Act carefully and reflect on the reasons you want to disclose and the line you are going to take.

One need to read and understand the meaning of disability - doing  things differently, while achieving the same result.

Note that one still need to be able to do the job, be qualified, have skills and qualities required by the job description. Otherwise they are in their right to dismiss. One need to be able to demonstrate that the disability does not prevent from performing the duties to the same results as others, but may require reasonable adjustments on the how we do it.

There is a fine line on how to articulate the disclosure: what exactly are the daily activities that are impaired, how are they impaired and how it doesn't preclude from doing the job...but how it make us doing it differently, hence the need for reasonable adjustments. It is always a good idea to do some prior research to have examples of possible reasonable adjustments, to know what you want. 

Disclosing is always risky as many already explained.

I was at a stage once when I really wanted to disclose it even during application, to say this is who I am. A recruitment consultant dismissed the idea in horror and ridicule, saying it is not relevant, employers don't need to know that. They need to know that you are 'talent' and you are good at your job. This upset and disheartened me a lot. I felt invalidated and disempowered. But this is a glimpse of sad reality. There are a lot of people out there who do not fully embrace neurodiversity. 

There were incidences where people disclosed and were dismissed for not disclosing earlier during application. This went to tribunal and I think was deemed to be discrimination. But it could happen.

It makes sense to disclose if one need reasonable adjustments and if the dx explains some of the issues the employer has already noticed.

It makes less sense do disclose just because... But then again, it is part of our identity, so unless we start pushing it right in the face of employers so to speak, there will continue to be the attitude that it is something to hide.

It's your decision, but you want it to be informed and carefully thought through:)

I second the thank you from qwerty.  This is really good advice.  

Qwerty I disclosed to my employer and things got a lot worse for me.  I don't want to put you off, and obviously I have no idea who your employer is or what they are like.  A good line manager really does make so much difference.  I was told before disclosing there were no concerns with my work, but since disclosing they've pretty much done all they can to make it as difficult for me as possible so they can turn round and say I'm not capable of doing my job.  I think i'm facing dismissal very soon.  I've not had any adjustments made, and the ones I've asked for that are standard adjustments for people with autism have all been rejected, but they continue to stick together and say they've offered me support.  I would disclose it again in future however, and hope my next employer is more reasonable and understanding.  

Yep, this can definitely be an outcome! I disclosed in my previous job which went *really* well - they were a bit surprised, then I could see the penny drop (like it explained a lot - the sort of look you get from friends when you disclose) - they just let me work at home and whenever I said anything outrageously blunt or took a while to comprehend NT speek they would just twinkle and giggle so we got on really well after I disclosed, I used to have lunch with various members on my Board and it was all fine. They were really positive about my work and really supportive. In my current job, it's just added to the hell and chaos. I think it might be a bit of a pot luck thing - so much depends on the sanity and decency of your line management.

I think it may vary with academics too. It often takes a lot of luck to stay in academia. And I feel that those who are fortunate enough (to have a lot of support and opportunities when they were doing their degree) don't really appreciate how difficult it can be for the less fortunate. They often think their success is due to their effort. Some can be quite condescending when it comes to disabilities like autism or dyslexia, and might think asking for adjustments is an act of being lazy. So their reasoning might be to not give adjustments so that the student can learn more.

I think the personal laptop reply is for photonic_electrons from an earlier reply.

I think the assistive technology is a good idea. I don't have any problems around my personal laptop though. I don't have a lot of work stuff saved on it - I usually just use Remote Desktop to access what I need on my work computer.

I know, it's really hard to tell - in my experience, the people who deal with it least worst are academics - and I think that's because they're able to detach and look at something reasonably. They're also used to dealing with all kinds of genuine eccentrics. I find the worst people are those who *think* they're eccentric but are actually socially conformist 'pack animals' - they just belong to a marginal pack. Guys rolling their hair up with a couple of chopsticks doesn't make them original thinkers   I've had lots of trouble in charities and arts orgs where people think they're really humanitarian and/or edgy - and I've taken them at their own valuation (I don't do that anymore). It's the people who feel a strong need to belong to an identifiable social group (especially authoritarian types) who really can't cope with autie people. As far as I can tell, it's because they don't have a strong sense of self and belonging to their 'pack' makes them feel stronger and more important. They tend to see auties as a 'threat' to the cohesion of the pack (which actually we are).

The kind of person who can't adjust to us at work is usually both a pack animal and/or not very competent and the autie is, in fact, constantly pointing out their failings without meaning to. I've had ridiculous problems with infrastructure in tech orgs - particularly public sector.

I feel your pain also with having to use a personal laptop then your boss complaining - and refusing to deal with the infrastructural shortcomings which made you *have* to use your personal laptop. I've taken over sites where people are transferring and processing credit card data in plain text with no firewall protecting the server; I've just sat down and logged into a commercial remote server as root without the admin password because some fool is using an auto-login setup on an unprotected MS desktop OS to access remote root and admin pwd is on an unprotected browser keyring; sites using outdated technology which can no longer be managed or even audited but which people are still using on an operating system that's no longer supported and hopeless bandwidth so they've just lashed stuff on with in-text anchors and lists cos the site nav can no longer be edited; charities where people are processing data on vulnerable children without a whisper of encryption on personal laptops with auto-logins etc etc.  Obvs, pointing out, however discreetly and indirectly, that it's motherf******g stupid, insecure, irresponsible, and/or un-economic makes them mad however much you try to be gentle and sugar the pill - but you can't *not* tell them for God's sake - half the time they're downright illegal as well as irresponsible <there's no emoticon but I'm rolling my eyes>  NTs like to shoot the messenger. 

So now I tell them I have to use my personal laptop because it's got assistive tech for my AS on it - and it has to be Linux cos I've no idea how you would reverse out the display a MS laptop (maybe you can these days but you didn't used to be able to) - and I get frustrated at really slow systems (true, I will have a meltdown if I spend too much time looking at an effing spinner unnecessarily). My current employer has agreed to that. So if you *do* disclose you might be able to hang some of the tech infrastructure requirements onto it - just waffle about assistive tech, they'll usually be delighted to let adjusting your laptop be your problem? You can sit down with their sysadmin and agree how you're lashing your personal laptop onto their secure systems. In my case, the sysadmin found it sufficiently annoying they butted out and let me get on with it. That's what I do ;)

I know, it's really hard to tell - in my experience, the people who deal with it least worst are academics - and I think that's because they're able to detach and look at something reasonably. They're also used to dealing with all kinds of genuine eccentrics. I find the worst people are those who *think* they're eccentric but are actually socially conformist 'pack animals' - they just belong to a marginal pack. Guys rolling their hair up with a couple of chopsticks doesn't make them original thinkers   I've had lots of trouble in charities and arts orgs where people think they're really humanitarian and/or edgy - and I've taken them at their own valuation (I don't do that anymore). It's the people who feel a strong need to belong to an identifiable social group (especially authoritarian types) who really can't cope with autie people. As far as I can tell, it's because they don't have a strong sense of self and belonging to their 'pack' makes them feel stronger and more important. They tend to see auties as a 'threat' to the cohesion of the pack (which actually we are).

The kind of person who can't adjust to us at work is usually both a pack animal and/or not very competent and the autie is, in fact, constantly pointing out their failings without meaning to. I've had ridiculous problems with infrastructure in tech orgs - particularly public sector.

I feel your pain also with having to use a personal laptop then your boss complaining - and refusing to deal with the infrastructural shortcomings which made you *have* to use your personal laptop. I've taken over sites where people are transferring and processing credit card data in plain text with no firewall protecting the server; I've just sat down and logged into a commercial remote server as root without the admin password because some fool is using an auto-login setup on an unprotected MS desktop OS to access remote root and admin pwd is on an unprotected browser keyring; sites using outdated technology which can no longer be managed or even audited but which people are still using on an operating system that's no longer supported and hopeless bandwidth so they've just lashed stuff on with in-text anchors and lists cos the site nav can no longer be edited; charities where people are processing data on vulnerable children without a whisper of encryption on personal laptops with auto-logins etc etc.  Obvs, pointing out, however discreetly and indirectly, that it's motherf******g stupid, insecure, irresponsible, and/or un-economic makes them mad however much you try to be gentle and sugar the pill - but you can't *not* tell them for God's sake - half the time they're downright illegal as well as irresponsible <there's no emoticon but I'm rolling my eyes>  NTs like to shoot the messenger. 

So now I tell them I have to use my personal laptop because it's got assistive tech for my AS on it - and it has to be Linux cos I've no idea how you would reverse out the display a MS laptop (maybe you can these days but you didn't used to be able to) - and I get frustrated at really slow systems (true, I will have a meltdown if I spend too much time looking at an effing spinner unnecessarily). My current employer has agreed to that. So if you *do* disclose you might be able to hang some of the tech infrastructure requirements onto it - just waffle about assistive tech, they'll usually be delighted to let adjusting your laptop be your problem? You can sit down with their sysadmin and agree how you're lashing your personal laptop onto their secure systems. In my case, the sysadmin found it sufficiently annoying they butted out and let me get on with it. That's what I do ;)

I think it may vary with academics too. It often takes a lot of luck to stay in academia. And I feel that those who are fortunate enough (to have a lot of support and opportunities when they were doing their degree) don't really appreciate how difficult it can be for the less fortunate. They often think their success is due to their effort. Some can be quite condescending when it comes to disabilities like autism or dyslexia, and might think asking for adjustments is an act of being lazy. So their reasoning might be to not give adjustments so that the student can learn more.

I think the personal laptop reply is for photonic_electrons from an earlier reply.

I think the assistive technology is a good idea. I don't have any problems around my personal laptop though. I don't have a lot of work stuff saved on it - I usually just use Remote Desktop to access what I need on my work computer.