A JD Wetherspoon employee has been awarded more than £25,000 in compensation after being wrongly disciplined over a simple mistake involving his staff discount. The case has sparked fresh debate about how employers handle neurodiverse staff.
Autistic Wetherspoons Worker Wins Tribunal After Misunderstood Discount Use
Brandon Halstead, a kitchen associate at The Albany Place branch in Trowbridge, Wiltshire, was thrust into the centre of an internal investigation after using his staff discount during a meal with family.
In August 2023, Mr Halstead dined at a Wetherspoon pub with his mother and five relatives who were visiting.
When he paid for the group of seven, he used his employee discount saving £19.17 unaware that the company’s policy only allowed staff to use the discount for up to four people, including themselves.
Just five days later, he was called in for a formal meeting with his shift manager, where he was informed he was under investigation for violating the discount policy.
The company also raised concerns that his mother had access to his Wetherspoon app, something Mr Halstead explained was only to help her view his rota and arrange transport.
What followed left Mr Halstead feeling “persecuted and let down.” Diagnosed as autistic, he explained that the incident triggered significant anxiety, forcing him to take sick leave from work.
Despite informing his employer of his condition and the fact he required his mother’s support during formal meetings, Wetherspoons failed to make accommodations.
His mother was not invited to the disciplinary hearing, and no alternative arrangements such as a Zoom meeting, advanced questions, or a written statement were offered.
“We have seen from numerous sources of written and oral evidence that Mr Halstead requires his mother to be present at any formal meetings,” wrote Employment Judge Murdoch.
The tribunal concluded that Wetherspoons failed to make reasonable adjustments for Mr Halstead’s autism, and that the standard procedures used placed him at a “substantial disadvantage” compared to neurotypical staff.
Misunderstanding escalates into a misconduct hearing
Despite apologising immediately and stating he was unaware of the policy, Mr Halstead was later accused of dishonesty, abusing his discount privilege, and breaching data policies—all of which led to a gross misconduct hearing.
His request for support at meetings was repeatedly ignored. He and his mother explained that due to his autism, she needed access to the app to coordinate his travel, something she deleted immediately after the first meeting when told it breached policy.
Yet the case moved forward without flexibility or further consideration of his neurodivergent needs.
Compensation awarded for employer failings
Following an employment tribunal, Wetherspoons was ordered to pay Mr Halstead:
- £3,520 for financial losses
- £18,500 for injury to feelings
- £3,392 in interest
Total payout: £25,412
“The claimant admitted straight away to breaking the rules of the discount policy because he was unaware of the rules. A typical feature of autism is a strong desire to adhere to rules. The claimant stated immediately that he was sorry and that it would not happen again now he understood what the rules were,” Judge Murdoch added.
Despite a plea from his mother for a goodwill gesture during discussions around his return to work, the company declined.
JD Wetherspoon has so far refused to comment on the tribunal’s findings or the compensation order.
Growing pressure on employers to adapt
This case reignites the conversation around neurodiversity in the workplace. While many large employers promote inclusivity, real-world cases like Mr Halstead’s show that there is often a gap between policy and practice.
Experts argue that neurodivergent employees—those with conditions like autism, ADHD, or dyslexia can face disproportionately harsh treatment for minor misunderstandings, especially in rigid workplace structures.
With over 900 pubs across the UK, Wetherspoons is one of the largest employers in the hospitality industry. This ruling could prompt the company and others to rethink how they train managers and support neurodiverse team members.
More than just a discount dispute
What began as a £19 saving turned into a deeply distressing episode for Mr Halstead. But thanks to the tribunal ruling, his case has become a landmark moment highlighting the real cost of not supporting neurodivergent workers fairly.
Let us know your thoughts: Should more be done to protect employees with hidden disabilities in the workplace?
