Legal & General has launched a neurodiversity support as part of its group income protection (GIP) claims proposition.
The neurodiversity pathway is designed for employees who are absent from work and their pre-existing neurodiverse condition is a contributory factor, or has been exacerbated by the reason for absence.
The insurer is also providing training, information and guidance for HR and line managers to help them provide support, whether employees are in work or absent.
Neurodiversity support for long term absent employees covered by GIP through their employer, includes:
- clinical assessment by vocational clinical specialists to assess whether early intervention and referral to mental health specialist partner Onebright is appropriate;
- return to work support and planning by liaising with employee and employer and exploring reasonable adjustments;
- yearly support package for those needing enhanced support upon returning to work;
- referral to neurology rehabilitation partner Krysalis where long-term rehabilitative support is clinically indicated.
Support for businesses includes: training for line managers and HR to give them the tools to help them intervene early in an employee’s absence, helping them understand neurodiverse conditions; awareness materials; bespoke return to work plans; employer visits and discussions around reasonable adjustments.
Support is also being provided to HR and line managers whether employees are absent or not, in terms of information and signposting on neurodiverse conditions.
Vanessa Sallows, claims and governance director of Legal & General Group Protection, (pictured) said: “We’re proud to bring to market our new neurodiversity pathway, helping employers respond to the individual needs of their neurodiverse employees.
“Successful wellbeing support programmes rest on matching services to need, and employee input is an important part of the design as it helps to drive relevance and therefore engagement.
“Our latest Wellbeing at Work Barometer found a 20-percentage point disparity between employer and employee views on how well their organisation’s benefits and services supported diversity and inclusion goals, which may indicate that employee input needs to be strengthened.
“A net rating of ‘good’ was given by 77% of employers in comparison to only 57% of employees.”
