Workplace disputes involving disability discrimination have risen sharply, with mental health-related conditions contributing to the increase as 16 percent of workplace disputes now relate to disability – up from 9 percent in 2022/23, data shows.
An analysis by law firm Nockolds based on data from Acas, the government’s conciliation and arbitration service, shows that early conciliation notification forms referencing disability discrimination rose from 15,361 in 2023/24 to 20,180 in 2024/25, marking a 31 percent increase. These forms are submitted when employees and employers attempt to resolve disputes without proceeding to a tribunal.
Cases referred to Acas by the Employment Tribunal Service following tribunal claims also rose significantly. These climbed from 8,496 in 2023/24 to 11,958 in 2024/25, a 41 percent increase. Currently, 28 percent of all tribunal-related early conciliation cases concern disability discrimination, compared to 25 percent the previous year and 23 percent in 2022/23.
Mental health and changing definitions of disability
The firm attributes this growth in part to a broader understanding of what qualifies as a disability under the Equality Act 2010, especially with regards to mental health conditions.
“Although public understanding of mental health has grown significantly, many organisations are struggling to translate this awareness into meaningful workplace policies,” said Joanna Sutton, Principal Associate at Nockolds. “Mental health support too often remains superficial or reactive, rather than embedded in workplace culture.”
She said that pressure to improve productivity in a slow economic climate has led some employers to restrict flexible working arrangements, sometimes at the expense of employee wellbeing. “This disconnect between expectations and support mechanisms is increasingly contributing to workplace tensions, grievances and formal disputes,” she added.
Sutton said that the rise in disputes shows a change in how disability is understood, noting that the 2005 amendments to the Disability Discrimination Act focused largely on physical infrastructure changes.
“The now-common phrase ‘not all disabilities are visible’ marks a cultural shift, but one that arrived slowly and unevenly. Many workplaces are still catching up,” she said.
Training gaps increase litigation risks
The Equality Act 2010 defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. While some employers have adapted to accommodate non-visible conditions, Sutton said others remain unaware of their legal obligations.
“While conditions like dementia and schizophrenia are widely acknowledged as serious mental health disorders, there’s increasing recognition that less overt or episodic conditions – such as depression, anxiety and even menopause – can also qualify as disabilities under the Equality Act 2010, provided they meet the statutory threshold.”
The key legal test is whether the condition has a substantial and long-term effect, with disability status to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
“On one side, it may embolden a minority of disingenuous claimants to exploit the system, overstating symptoms to gain protection or leverage, while on the other it risks legitimate conditions being dismissed by employers who are either unaware of their obligations or sceptical of invisible impairments.”
Sutton said that the rise in disability-related disputes highlights the need for improved training among HR teams and line managers.
“Many line managers lack sufficient training in employment law as it relates to mental health, especially around the nuanced obligations under the Equality Act 2010. When concerns relating to mental health are raised, managers may be ill-prepared to respond appropriately by making reasonable adjustments or worried about saying the wrong thing. The result is a growing risk of litigation, not necessarily due to malice, but due to ignorance or procedural inertia.”
