A very quick search indicates a relationship between ADHD and lateness so caution is required. I would suggest getting a Occ Health report to guide you.

Welcome to the Communities
There is lateness and there is lateness
It depends on what the effects are on colleagues.customers/stakeholders.

Welcome to the communities.

1. Lets forget the alleged ADHD for the moment. I'd suggest he needs wording somewhat stronger than you have been telling him. I cosy little chat often is the best bet - at first. If it doesn't improve I'd use much stronger words and if it continued once or twice more I'd making very clear that I'd either be docking them or taking them down the disciplinary route.

By letting them off with 'informal chats', you are simply telling the employee you don't mean what you say. That said:-

2. You don't know if they have ADHD, It is not always clear cut. so I'd also get them off to an OHP and see what they say - They will probably ask the employee for permission to obtain their doctors records etc., Its hard to diagnose - I've been told a number of times I've got ADHD, but not by a GP as not all doctors are know enough about ADHD when it comes to mental health etc., Are they late leaving work? Are they taking longer breaks than they should? ADHD is a label. I'd want to know what causes their ADHD. Can't they get out of bed on time? If so why not? Do they spend time doing other things such as looking on Facebook etc., Do they spend more than five minutes deciding what to wear. Do they eat a long and leisurely breakfast? They may just be lazy, they may just find these things difficult. They may just get distracted by things which are more interesting at the time (I'm meant to be doing my tax returns and Mrs P isn't here to ensure I complete them any time soon. - I got distracted by looking on this site!!).

3. If - if, the lateness is caused by ADHD then you may need to make 'reasonable adjustments'. These are not set out in law and depend on the circumstances of both you, their job, the company resources and so on. That does not make them immune from disciplinary action including dismissal.

4. Also to fall fowl of the law if you did dismiss them, AND they decided you unfairly dismissed them, they'd have to prove they had ADHD AND, that that was the cause of their lateness!!

ADHD might be a reason for someone turning up on time - I don't think it is always an excuse!!

As well as the good advice you've received, I'd take a moment to reflect on the requirements of being on time as they affect your business. Do they need to be present at 8:30am because they are a keyholder and the rest of the staff are waiting outside? Or do they need to answer phones from a particular time because the organisation opens for business then? Or actually, do they simply need to do their tasks, but in a way that isn't time-bound? If it's the latter, there is far more potential to be flexible in the way you approach their role and their lateness - starting and finishing at 9:10/5:10 may be material or may not be.

In reply to David Perry:

My wife is probably ADHD, in her she has very poor estimation of how long things will take. Whilst i like to be somewhere 5-10mins early if she thinks she will be early she is apt to go "ooh I could just do x first" which invariably takes longer than her poor time estimation and she is late.
Her entire family took to giving her a deadline 30 mins earlier than they meant for any meet up etc, but she learnt and just allowed for it turning up later still.

There can be any number of reasons why your member of staff is late and understanding may help mitigate

Are they in a role where some level of flexi-time can be agreed? E.g. if their start time is 8:30am but the location is open from 8am, can you agree their start time is 8am, with 30mins or 60mins flex? If they turn up at 8am, they leave at (e.g.) 4:30. If they turn up at 8:30, they leave at 5. If they turn up at 9am, they leave at 5:30pm. They are only considered late if they turn up after 9am.

I'd disagree with David - the employee has told you they have ADHD and it is very common for those suffering with ADHD to struggle with time-keeping so it isn't unreasonable for them to attribute their lateness to this. An Occ Health assessment *may* be useful to understand any wider implications, but if you can make the required adjustments without requesting Occ Health or Drs info...then just make them. Asking them to prove this and undergo further appts is likely to further damage the relationship. I would only ask them to do this if you want to capture all adjustment and you anticipate that they may need more than they have already identified, or if you as a business feel you are struggling to identify appropriate adjustments.

In reply to Sophie:

  Sophie

"I'd dIsagree with David  - the employee has told you they have ADHD....."   

The fact that the employee has told you they have ADHD does not mean they have ADHD.  I did not say I do not believe them - I just want to know if they have or have not got ADHD.  Only then  can you make both a correct cause and decide which course of action to take.  

 Case law on medical issues has long established that most employers are not qualified to make medical diagnosis - which is why most of our profession either use doctors and/or an OHP service.

I believe there are tests for tADHD - my granddaughter was diagnosed with ADHD and took a test as a part of the assessment. I can't be bothered to take the test because I simply cannot be bothered and the only one who has to make 'reasonable adjustments' is Mrs Perry.

In reply to David Perry:

The employer isn't making the diagnosis. The employee is reporting a diagnosis. There is no need for the employer to make a diagnosis or even to confirm a diagnosis here, provided adjustments can be easily made.

If the employer "should reasonably know" that the employee is disabled, and the employee is not reporting this, the employer may wish to go through Occ Health/GP report to confirm or refute their "reasonable knowledge" - because the employer can't make a diagnosis. But no one is asking the employer to diagnose anything here, just to believe or disbelieve the employee reporting a health condition.

In reply to Sophie:

So an employee comes to you and says I've got this or that illness, condition or disability, would you not check it out with someone qualified to make such diagnosis or would you just believe them regardless?

In fairness I might well give them a little leeway at first and not tackle the issue at this stage until I did find out one way or another. 

In reply to David Perry:

No, I wouldn't routinely check it out with someone qualified. Nor would I believe them "regardless". I'd evaluate the specific circumstances, with something like the below:

1. Why is the person telling me about the diagnosis? What do they want from this and how easy is it to accommodate? If it's easy, then whether they have the diagnosis or not I would still accommodate it, so validating the diagnosis is needless and is likely to make them feel not trusted. If it's difficult to accommodate, would having the diagnosis make it any easier to accommodate? In most cases...no. If we can't accommodate it, we can't accommodate it.
2. Are there other adjustments they might need and can I identify what they are? If I can't make accommodations, can I identify suitable alternatives? If I can, I don't need the diagnosis validated - we can work together to make required/alternative adjustments and I can make these whether the diagnosis is valid or not.
3. Do I have wider concerns about this individual's conduct or performance that may be influenced by this diagnosis? If I do, this is a good opportunity to fully understand the impact of the diagnosis and save time later.

If I can make suitable accommodations and have no concerns, the diagnosis is irrelevant - it's simply been the catalyst to open the conversation with the individual. If I can't make accommodations and can't identify other suitable ones, or I have concerns that the individual themselves isn't fully understanding the impact on their conduct/competence, or I have concerns that the conduct/competence is not related or can't be mitigated and I think the employee may dispute this later, then I would refer to OH or GP notes for advice.

Ultimately someone saying they have a diagnosis falls into one of three categories:
- they genuinely do have the diagnosis confirmed by a qualified medical professional. If I ask them to have this validated again, it is likely to damage our relationship, make them feel like I don't trust them, exacerbate any exhaustion they've had in getting that diagnosis in the first place and possibly increase anxiety around the diagnosis. If things go wrong later down the line, it could be given as an example of me undermining or postponing things in an unhelpful way without any justification.
- they genuinely believe they have this diagnosis, but haven't confirmed it with a medical professional. If I ask for confirmation, this could take a while to come through given the state of diagnostic testing (and as you say for some neurodivergence this isn't always clear cut anyway). If they are diagnosed, I have all the risks above *plus* I have prolonged their discomfort by not making adjustments timely. If the diagnosis isn't confirmed, they are likely still struggling with the things that made them ask for adjustments in the first place - if I can make the adjustments without unreasonable business impact, why wouldn't I do that even if there isn't a medical reason to?
- they don't have the diagnosis, don't believe they do, and they're just using it as an excuse or distractor. The quickest way to remove their ammo is to make the adjustments that you'd make if they did have the diagnosis.

Long-winded answer, sorry David! But hope that gives an idea of my thought process

During the recruitment and onboarding process, is it a prerequisite to declare any illnesse and does your company has a health declaration form in place. Additionally, I suggest conducting an internal investigation to gather all relevant information. Based on the findings, you can determine whether disciplinary action is necessary or if it would be beneficial to involve occupational health services if they are available.

In reply to Nina Waters:

Hi Nina,

Yes for this role, being on time 8.30 is a prerequisite and they were made fully aware of this when they where in the interview process.

In reply to David Perry:

Hi David,

thank you so much for your input.

In all honesty, they are only ever late coming into the office and at lunch time.

With the added context what would you suggest?

I have told the manager to issue a formal warning as the employee is still in probation and they have been informally warned 3 times now.

In reply to Sophie:

Hi Sophie,

thank you for your input. My concern here is, they only seem to be late coming into the office and at lunch time. I appreciate that they have let me know about their ADHD, however we do have medical declarations in the onboarding process and it was not highlighted until they were pulled aside about their lateness.

In this instance what are your thoughts?

In reply to Ope:

I'd still go back to "can you make adjustments?" - you've said elsewhere that arriving by 8:30 is a prerequisite for the role, is that because it is the start time for the whole company, or because this specific role requires it? E.g. are they a keyholder or on reception or opening phone lines etc? And how late are they usually? The company all starting at 8:30 is not a good enough reason to not adjust the start time or offer flexi-time to this one person. An occupational requirement to have their presence by 8:30 isn't either - it can be a reason you can't tolerate them being later than 8:30, but no reason you can't offer flexi-time to arrive earlier.

If they are usually 10-15mins late, can you propose changing their start time to 8:15-8:30 so that even when late, they are always there by 8:30?

Have you made any adjustments so far? What are their suggestions for helping to manage their ADHD and making adjustments?

If they weren't late, would you still be looking to dismiss - is there anything else worrying in their employment?

I'm not surprised that the ADHD wasn't mentioned in the onboarding process and I feel this is irrelevant. Many people don't declare disabilities to employers at the onboarding stage - it can be a very vulnerable declaration and they have no idea how their employer will respond. To ask at onboarding in a cold hard form whether someone has a medical condition is asking for very personal information in an impersonal way without any reassurance of how that information will be responded to. That's not to be critical, I think it's how most of us manage the requirement - but I don't think we should be holding individuals to account for not disclosing something at that time. It's not like we're cautioning them - "it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court" :)

Look at the adjustments that you can make, and make them. If you can't think of any, ask the individual what could work for them and consider if it is feasible. My cynical self says that you will probably make the adjustments and probably come up against the same issue, but then you will probably be in a position to dismiss with low-risk. But I've also had experiences where I fully expected that to be the case, and actually making the adjustment has made the world of difference to the employee, reduced their cynicism over how employers will treat them, and turned them into a very successful employee and a shining star in advocating for the organisation.