To find it ridiculous that my work is encouraging those with neurodivergence to add details of their neurodivergence to their email signatures “so colleagues can accommodate your needs?”

[SnugShaker]

I get the intention behind it but it just feels like an uncomfortable and unnecessary step. Why should employees be expected to disclose their neurodivergence in a public way, especially when it could lead to unwanted assumptions or even stigma? There’s a line between creating an inclusive environment and putting the burden of disclosure on individuals, and it seems like this might be crossing that line. Shouldn’t accommodations be handled in a more private, respectful way without having to broadcast personal information?

It’s the kind of idea that sounds good when it’s proposed in a meeting but is utterly stupid in practice.

Not everyone will want to declare neurodivergence to all and sundry, internally or externally.

Also, how are people supposed to know how to accommodate it - are they suggesting that you put details of specific adjustments in the signature.

Also, I barely read signatures - what if someone misses it and doesn’t comply?

Also, what if someone doesn’t do it, is it going to be thrown back at them?

Well meaning but badly thought through.

This is outrageous. The best way to create an inclusive workplace and accommodate needs is to foster a respectful environment where people feel valued.
This definitely feels like putting labels on people for the sake of it and could lead to ND employees feeling bullied into disclosing their neurodivergence. And what about those who have no diagnosis - are they not to be accommodated??
A bonkers idea probably dreamt up in a HR away day.

Accomodations are not universal so this doesn't make sense. There's no one size fits all way to deal with neurodivergent people. Are they asking people to detail what accomodations they require?

I agree with OP. This puts a lot of pressure on people to 'out' their personal medical information and not everyone is comfortable with showing their Achilles heel to bitchy or competitive colleagues.

Daft idea. I can’t imagine many people feeling comfortable doing this.

This is an awful idea, it's confidential information! We'd all love to live in a world where there is no unconscious bias or outright discrimination but that just isn't reality.

I can't tell if this is a really stupid idea or a really Machiavellian one... so many implications if people actually did it.

The older I get, the crazier the world proves to be, so maybe most people will do it. I just don't know what to expect anymore.

This would actually really help me. I could let people know the best format to use for an email (bullet points, no football metaphors, no long dense paragraphs or I'll miss details) - that's the immediate thing that comes to mind. I'm sick of masking.

Yeah that's a firm no from me
I can understand signing off an email with please contact me for any further information via email / phone (as a preference to visual or audio instructions)

To a certain extent people have to figure out how they work best In a work environment and advocate for themselves and tell their line management that they require all tasks in written format etc but there is a limit you can ask of someone

I’ve received some emails that have said something along the lines of “I have dyslexia and may not be aware of any typos in this email, please don’t hesitate to contact me if you need clarification” which I thought was a nice touch.

BUT if everyone who was ND did it, we'd soon ALL (even the naysayers) understand that actually ND is the norm.

Exactly this. The intention might be good but the execution feels clumsy. Disclosure should always be voluntary, private and respected, not something you’re nudged to put on display like a footnote. And you’re right, who’s reading email signatures that closely anyway? It’s not a reliable system for communicating access needs and it risks more harm than help.

It's fine if it's a choice, but what if you have to reply all and some recipients have conflicting preferences?

Two of my colleagues use a variant of that.

Stops the kind of snark that you find on MN when someone misuses an em-dash or a subjunctive.

Surely it is optional though?

Will everyone else be adding their medical conditions to their emails? Greg with his piles or mary with her thyroid condition?

You’ve nailed it - fostering inclusion shouldn’t reply on public labelling or pressuring people to disclose private information. Neurodivergent colleagues (diagnosed or not) should feel supported by the culture, not compelled to put something in their signature like a disclaimer. And yes, there’s often this HR fantasyland where ideas sound inclusive on paper but in practice just create more anxiety and confusion.

Honestly, I think it would save an awful lot of pussyfooting around and all the akward bollocks that comes with never entierly knowing what the ND on the team have etc. Its a pain in the arse.

#If they dont disclose to the rest then its not the rest of the teams fault if they get pissed off at the "allowances" that are being made have a negative impact on the rest.

I once received an automatic reply from some work shy punk which said something along the lines of ‘ I won’t be accepting meetings that start on the hour. Please leave 15 minutes after the hour for meeting start times. Due to mental health’ .

I think it’s quite good.

Another one I liked was along the lines of “I’ve got ADHD and work strange hours, please don’t feel pressured to reply outside of your normal working hours” - a self employed person who would email at 2am! Again, it wasn’t anything overly complicated. Just a little heads up

Yanbu. I have adhd. I will talk about it freely on an anonymous forum like MN but I have no wish to broadcast it to people in the real world. It is known to my family, my close friends and a couple of close colleagues who I have chosen to tell. It isn't really anyone else's business. I don't expect special treatment from anyone and I don't want to be stereotyped.

Exactly this. Accommodations are deeply individual, just like the people needing them. Expecting employees to summarise their needs (or even their diagnoses) in an email signature is reductive and unfair. It risks turning personal information into office gossip fodder, especially in competitive or unsupportive environments. If a workplace really cares about inclusivity, they’ll build systems that don’t hinge on public self-disclosure.

YANBU, but the organisation is BU.
What about the nuances, particularities and peculiarities of individual cases/situations that are grouped under a named condition.
You'd have to write an essay for your signature in order for it to be more than 'lip service'.

Exactly, there’s no way to accommodate everyone’s preferences or needs via an email signature. What happens when ND access needs conflict? It’s not a fair or practical system. Inclusion should be structural, not reliant on oversharing or on colleagues somehow parsing signature lines like accessibility cheat codes.

I have a friend who asked to be accommodated by having her weekly catchup Teams call on a Tuesday. This was solely so she can finish the call with the line “see you next Tuesday”. It’s been going on for years & not one manager has copped it yet.

Yes, technically optional but if senior leadership or HR strongly encourage it, or if others start doing it en masse, the pressure to conform becomes very real. Optional doesn’t always mean free from consequences or expectations, especially in workplace dynamics.