Work very critical of DH, but did not know he has ASD - discriminatory?

Good points.

Firstly the 48 hours averages over 17 weeks, secondly anyone can sign to opt out, thirdly it needs to be tracked on timesheets for an employer to identify the problem.

Sometimes people think there is an issue because they are choosing to do a few hours work at the weekend; once lunchbreaks and other gaps are taken into account it turns out to be fewer hours than they think.

I luffs all the unsaid things on threads, thanks for that point ItTook9Yrs.

Am also realising his 7d/week work is probably secret from the employers, too.

Is it law? Lawyers notoriously can work 70 hr weeks.

And given the OP was, not so long by ago, planning to instigate divorce proceedings due to the husband’s (then undiagnosed) autism, it’s a bit much to be bleating unfairness over colleagues struggling with some of them as well.

Isn't he closing the stable door after the horse has bolted?

It’s nice that you genuinely want to help. But your advice was wrong and based on assumptions. Which in the long run isn’t helpful.

That's not true. You do not have to disclose anything you don't want to, but equally your employer can't take into account a diagnosis they don't know about in terms of making reasonable adjustments and accommodations.

That said, the OP’s husband is clearly not getting enough support from work. It is such a horrible way to find out people are struggling with his communication and I really do feel for him. It may not be discrimination but it’s not a respectful, productive way to treat someone.

None of us know what the OP's dh does for his job, and how important soft skills and communication skills are in that role.

You say "it is a horrible way to find out people are struggling with his communication" but it is more than feasible this has been raised previously, probably more subtly, and he hasn't picked up on the hints and gentler remarks, and the body language and tone. It is perfectly reasonable to assume this isn't the first time this has been raised, but that it might be the first time the OP's dh has understood that people are offended by the way he communicates.
Also, he might have had it raised before and not communicated that to the OP.

I think for colleague to raise it with management, we can assume the poor communication level is quite significant, otherwise people would probably just roll their eyes and say 'Mr321' is at it again.

Ok, so you didn't know you were being abrasive. If you don't think the OP has given enough info to comment on, maybe ask for clarification of situation rather than posting not very nice comments to people genuinely trying to assist in future. Thanks

Just here, trying to use my knowledge for good and correcting the (generally shit) HR advice people usually give.

OP hasn’t given enough detail for any of us to know what is going on.

where on earth do you get the 48 hours every other week from? It’s EITHER 24 hours in 1 week OR 48 in 2.

There are plenty of people working 7 days a week for all manner of employers, including the NHS.

omg, go you, try and shame someone for pointing OP to working time directive to try and help her and her DH understand work rights. And if that's not enough, SHOUT ABOUT IT IN CAPITAL LETTERS (which you did, not sure why). If you've got something positive to say, I'm sure it might be well received.

Perfectly compliant working pattern across 7 days and less than 48 hours, as an example.

AGAIN, the 24 hours does not have to be one day.

it can be from 6pm on Friday to 6pm on Saturday AND THAT IS COMPLIANT.

We also have no idea why he is working every day. Maybe his employers aren’t aware because it is another secret he is keeping.

No, I for one absolutely understand anticipatory duty. I've used it to help many. But employers aren't mind readers to an undisclosed and not obvious condition. The DH needs to be open and honest. Also, sorry to repeat, it won't be helping OP's DH working 7 days a week. They should check out the Working Time Directive rest breaks. Everyone should have a minimum of one day off a week but also two days off every other week. Nobody should be working 7 days a week for an employer.

No one is NT everyone is ND.

This isn’t discrimination but it sounds like a poor
organisation.

People on this thread have not understood the anticipatory duty for reasonable adjustments. I have worked in this area. It tends to be more generic - ensuring buildings are accessible, ensuring quiet spaces for people who can’t work in loud rooms. For example; my work build little one person “pod” rooms. We have a stash of ergonomic keyboards and bigger screens etc. There are 1:1 considerations but the EA does not permit an employer to see an employee displaying common traits of a condition and act upon it. It means the managers should approach it gently and cautiously but not directly or even indirectly allude to it!!

That said, the OP’s husband is clearly not getting enough support from work. It is such a horrible way to find out people are struggling with his communication and I really do feel for him. It may not be discrimination but it’s not a respectful, productive way to treat someone.

True, but it helps if you actually want to get them.

You can ask for whatever you fancy but an employer doesn’t have to give it to you.

Me?

What I said is the actual law.
Do you have any case law that proves an employer should assume a person has a disability that is recognised by the EA?

Sorry but "it was all done in a personal and in [your] opinion" a harsh manner. Were you present at the appraisal? Why is your DH working 7 days a week? That's a bad idea. If your DH needs adjustments because his ASD is disabling, he needs to actually tell his employer this. I've helped many disabled colleagues in the past get help but the employers aren't mind readers. If someone doesn't disclose they have issues and need adjustments, how's the employer supposed to know and act on the information? I strongly recommend your DH finds a way to stop working 7 days a week. That is not sustainable for anyone. Good luck helping him resolve.

Of course not, they can't discriminate against him for a condition they didn't know about and his appraisal should stand. If he wanted them to make exceptions for him under disability grounds he should have asked but he didn't so it's on DH 🤷‍♀️

Pushing at whether this is discrimination is not going to help your DH to retain his job and progress. I've worked with a lot of ND individuals, diagnosed and not, because of STEM experience. My strong advice is that if you really want to help your DH, you'll focus on him keeping this job. If he forces his way out of the job by legal routes, he may struggle to get his confidence back and to get work again. Knocks can really be taken much harder with ASD. It would be better for you to remain calm, and help your DH in figuring out how best to explain his needs to his employer. That may include that the comments upset him and that he needs adjustments around communication, as well as improving in that area himself.

If you had read my other posts, you would have seen that my original post was based on the (mistaken) belief that this issue with communication and social interaction had been ongoing, perhaps precipitating his attempt to seek diagnosis even.

Also, my original post was not about him "owing" an explanation but rather , if this issue had been ongoing, to explain why he had not disclosed previously when the issues were already flagged (although, as it turns out, they had not been).

My point was always that ops dh needs to disclose and seek support, and part of that might have involved explaining why he was only flagging this now.

Or you could follow the actual law...

OP, I know many organisations use this type of feedback but I’ve found it to be very harsh in certain sectors. You’ve been given some good advice here on where to seek help. I’ve found Occ Health really unhelpful at my work but Access to Work were amazing.

”I’m not sure why so many people on here keep insisting that there is a) no legal right to protection without a diagnosis and b) that diagnosis must be declared to obtain reasonable adjustments, based on nothing more than their own opinion/vague inclination. More than one poster has posted the relevant legislation that debunks this view and others have posted from respected sources such as Acas that backs this up.“

Diagnosis does not necessarily have to be declared but the key is what is reasonable. If Dave joins the organisation, does not declare he is legally blind, but has a guide dog and asks for braille, the EA 2010 would be relevant in that it would expect the employer to be considerate of Dave’s needs. If Emma uses a wheelchair but never declares a physical disability and the employer asks her to visit a site which is 1st floor and no lift, the EA 2010 would expect the employer to meet needs.

You cannot make assumptions about someone. It’s not reasonable and there is no law that permits employers to act in the manner as if they have a disability. Of course good employer is bound by other duties and should be adaptable but the duty of reasonable adjustment cannot apply in cases where, for example, it is not black and white - as in the ones I described above.

I was talking issue with the tone of "@OhBling's post", which implies that he owes his employer an explanation for his decision not to disclose earlier.

If he wants to get reasonable adjustments, he will, of course, need to disclose now, but he has not wronged his employer by not mentioning it earlier as there is no legal obligation for him to do so. It's a matter of personal choice.

Most people with neurodiverse profiles will not disclose until /if an issue crops up, because why would you invite the possibility of people discriminating against you unless you absolutely had to?