Teacher at arts school launches ADHD discrimination claim

A judge has ruled that a discrimination claim mounted by a former teacher with ADHD against a London arts school can proceed after finding that despite being a freelance tutor, they should be considered an employee.

The claim has been made against City Academy Arts, based in Camden, by a writer, poet and qualified teacher who worked at the school, which specialises in performing and creative classes for adults, as a freelance tutor from March 2021 until March 2023.

In a preliminary hearing, the teacher contended that they had a long-term mental impairment, having recently been diagnosed with ADHD, the symptoms of which caused them to seek time off and turn down two offers to teach courses in late 2022.

After this, the teacher said they experienced negative “repercussions” regarding being offered further work.

The teacher said, “I lost 80% of my work. Up until the time I turned down classes [the respondent] gave me work every week. After turning down this work… the amount offered was reduced by 80%”.

They are seeking to bring a complaint of disability, sex and race discrimination, including harassment and victimisation, against City Academy Arts. However, the school attempted to block the case at the preliminary hearing, arguing that the tutor was neither disabled nor an employee.

A ‘debilitating’ condition

The claimant was formally diagnosed with ADHD in May 2024 during the course of the tribunal proceedings. However, City Academy Arts suggested ADHD was not an issue for the teacher before diagnosis.

The teacher disputed this, saying that they sought therapy in 2022, calling the condition “debilitating” and explaining that it caused issues with working memory, organisational skills and administration.

“If my class is at 6.30 pm, I will be in [the] area at 5pm, I have to plan the whole day to achieve this,” said the tutor.

The school argued that the teacher’s ADHD and other mental health conditions, including being a ‘highly sensitive person’ and having anxiety, did not amount to a disability and did not have a substantial impact on their ability to undertake day-to-day activities.

City Arts Academy also said that the teacher had expressed that their condition had a “positive” effect on them.

Employment judge Emery disagreed with the school and concluded that during their employment, the tutor had a mental health condition which caused a substantial effect on day-to-day activities and was, therefore, a disabled person because of ADHD.

A ‘very loose’ relationship

The school also insisted that the tutor was not an “employee”, as they were hired on a freelance contract and were responsible for filing tax returns detailing their income.

A representative for the school argued that the professional relationship with tutors was “very loose”, explaining that the school has no control over the curriculum or the contents of the lessons.

They noted that tutors’ contracts included the right to send a substitute and the freedom to teach elsewhere, including for similar course providers.

However, the claimant said substituting another tutor after a course started was strongly discouraged.

The judge agreed, finding that if substitutions were made for a reason the school found unacceptable or perceived as happening too frequently, tutors were unlikely to be offered courses in the future.

“In practice, therefore, if a tutor wanted a continuing relationship with the respondent, they would not substitute someone to do their role unless on grounds of sickness or emergency; and substitution for these reasons could well have a detrimental effect on future bookings,” said the judge.

“I conclude that this is not a genuine substitution clause, it has significant penalties attached if it is exercised. In practice, the respondent wanted personal service during each course and would not tolerate substitution unless in very occasional and exceptional circumstances.”

After hearing further evidence, including that the school required tutors to be subject to internal grievance and harassment procedures if an allegation was made against them, the judge ruled that the claimant was an employee of the school and that the claimant’s complaint will proceed.

A full hearing will take place at a later date.