Is It Unfair to Ask for Flex Time if You Have ADHD? Why Leaders Need to Reframe Fairness

Not long ago, someone asked me directly: “Is it unfair to ask for flex time if you have ADHD?”

It is a good question. And it is one that stirs a lot of frustration in workplaces, not only around ADHD but with any request for adjustments. Too often, the stock response is the same: that it gives someone an “unfair advantage” or that it is “not fair on everyone else.” It got me thinking about the plethora of reasonable adjustments and exactly who decides what is reasonable.

I remember reviewing a request for additional time during practical assessments. It was a difficult one. In a written exam, extra time can be reasonable and achievable. But in a real-world, time-critical scenario the same adjustment may not be practical. When the situation demands immediate decision-making, extending the clock is not realistic.

That does not mean we simply say no. The build-up to the assessment can be adapted. Training can allow students to practise strategies that help them respond under pressure. The balance is in supporting the individual’s needs while respecting the demands of the role.

I should pause here. I am writing from a UK perspective. I am not a lawyer, and while our legal frameworks are specific, what follows is lived experience, insight, and practice that makes a difference. I should also say I don't know everything, I speak from my experiences, and those shared with me.

Equality is not the same as fairness

A common mistake in leadership is to confuse equality with equity. Equality means everyone gets the same thing. Equity means everyone gets what they need to achieve the same outcome.

Think of it this way: giving everyone the same size shoes may look fair, but it is not if half the team cannot walk in them. In this specific case, flex time is not about lowering standards or handing out special privileges. It is about making sure the shoes fit, so people can actually run the same race. Would we rather set someone on a path to Unsatisfactory Performance because of the associated brain fog, confusion, lack of productivity..or...if the situation allows, afford that flexibility so we don't have to reach that finality?

The wider picture of adjustments

This question about ADHD is not unique. The same debate arises whenever adjustments are requested for autism, dyslexia, long-term health conditions, or even caring responsibilities. The reflex “that is not fair on others” is a leadership blind spot. If you're honest with yourselves, how many times have you heard a reasonable adjustment request reframed as a deficit to another person rather than levelling the playing field for the person requesting?

In reality, adjustments are about enabling everyone to:

• Achieve their objectives

• Perform at their best

• Feel safe and supported

• Enjoy their work

When people feel supported, engagement rises. Productivity follows. Retention improves. The team wins.

A leadership script for reframing fairness

Leaders often want practical language they can use. Here is a simple three-step script:

1. Acknowledge the request openly. “I hear what you are asking for and I want to understand what would help you do your best.”

2. Connect it to performance and wellbeing. “Flex time can help manage energy and focus, which means higher quality work and fewer burnout risks.”

3. Show fairness through consistency of expectations, not identical rules. “Our goal is the same for everyone: deliver the outcome, hit the standard, and stay well. The path may look different, and that is fine.”

Measuring fairness

To reassure both employees and leaders, fairness needs to be grounded in evidence. Useful measures include:

• Output consistency: are deadlines being met and quality maintained?

• Engagement: are sickness levels reduced and retention improved?

• Trust: do team surveys or 1:1 check-ins show people feel supported?

These measures help shift the conversation away from “special treatment” and toward “shared outcomes.”

A final thought

Flex time for ADHD is not unfair. Adjustments for neurodivergent staff are not handouts. They are tools that allow people to perform on equal footing. Too often we remain stuck with old narratives and perceived biases that aren't there.

I recall having a conversation with a manager in another organisation many years ago when they had called out exactly that for a reasonable adjustment, "well that just makes it easier for them and if they have it, everyone will want it." It was like talking to a wall at points, until I remembered an experience I had when I broke my leg at work in the first couple of years of my career. Luckily I was in a single storey office and once I was up and about with crutches I wanted to get back to work (young and keen you see). After a quick chat with Occupational Health and the Health & Safety team, we put a plan in place around restricted duties and flexible times to work (so as not to sit in traffic with my leg in awkward positions etc).

"But you had a broken leg, that's different, something like dyslexia is just in..." they never finished that sentence, I think I even heard the proverbial penny drop in that moment.

My only reminder there was a simple question that reinforced that moment...We wouldn’t deny a physical adjustment, so why do we question cognitive ones?

Equity is not about lowering the bar. It is about removing the barriers so everyone has the chance to clear it.

If leaders can reframe fairness in this way, they will not only unlock better performance but also create a culture where people feel safe, valued, and able to thrive. And that benefits everyone.

If you want to explore this further, I put together NeuroEdge

If you want to explore this further, I put together NeuroEdge, a practical toolkit for both neurodivergent professionals and leaders. It is built to help people understand different perspectives, shape more inclusive workplaces, and reframe the way we think about performance and equity.