Any views expressed within media held on this service are those of the contributors, should not be taken as approved or endorsed by the University, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University in respect of any particular issue.
If you’ve noticed that my blog thumbnail is just a small red square, that’s not an accident.
It’s actually the NATO maritime signal flag for Foxtrot (F).
In the International Code of Signals, every single flag has a specific meaning when flown on its own. For example:
The Alpha (A) flag means:
“I have a diver down; keep well clear at slow speed.”
It’s a way of communicating vital information quickly and clearly, across language barriers.
So what does Foxtrot mean?
“I am disabled; communicate with me.”
And honestly, that fits this blog about as perfectly as anything could.
At the heart of disability and autism advocacy is a simple principle:
Nothing about us without us.
We don’t want decisions made over us.
We don’t want policies designed for us without our input.
We don’t want to be “managed”, “handled”, or quietly sidelined.
We want communication.
We want partnership.
We want to be part of the conversation.
That’s exactly what Foxtrot signals:
“I’m here. I have needs. Talk to me.”
It’s also a little nod to the fact that I love sailing, and that maritime signalling systems are, in many ways, a brilliant example of inclusive design: clear, standardised, visual, and accessible across cultures and abilities.
The University has over 200 of policies. (All here)
They overlap, cross-reference each other, and are written for different audiences.
That is overwhelming, and very few people — disabled or not — read them all.
This guide is here to:
point you to the few policies that actually matter most for disabled staff,
explain why they matter,
and help you understand what to do in practice, without expecting you to become an HR or legal expert.
The one policy every disabled staff member should read
Reasonable Adjustments Policy
If you only read one policy, make it this one. (Link)
This policy sets out:
your right to reasonable adjustments at work,
the University’s legal duties under equality law,
how adjustments should be requested, considered, and implemented.
Reasonable adjustments can include (but are not limited to):
changes to hours, workload, or deadlines
flexibility in location or working pattern
physical or digital accessibility changes
support with communication, meetings, or assessment processes
📌 Important:
You do not have to be “visibly disabled”, formally registered, or struggling badly before asking.
Adjustments are about enabling you to do your job on an equal footing, not about proving hardship.
Policies that are especially relevant for disabled staff
You don’t need to read all of these right now — but it is useful to know they exist.
Absence Management Policy
Read here. Disabled staff are statistically more likely to:
have fluctuating health,
need time off for treatment,
experience periods of higher absence.
This policy explains:
how sickness absence is recorded,
what happens at review points,
how disability-related absence should be considered differently.
📌 Why this matters:
If absence becomes an issue, this policy interacts closely with reasonable adjustments.
Knowing this exists helps you advocate early, rather than only once problems arise.
Capability (Performance Management) Policy
The University also has a Capability Policy (sometimes referred to as performance management). Read here.
Disabled staff are statistically more likely to be drawn into capability processes, particularly where:
health fluctuates,
fatigue, pain, or cognitive load affect output,
or reasonable adjustments have not yet been put in place.
This policy explains how the University manages concerns about performance.
📌 Important:
If you are disabled, reasonable adjustments must be considered and put in place first where performance concerns may be linked to disability.
Adjustments should:
be agreed,
be implemented properly,
and be given time to work.
As a rule of thumb, adjustments should normally be in place for around three months before capability or performance management is considered, so it is possible to see whether they resolve the issue.
If capability is raised before adjustments are in place, or without allowing time for them to have an effect, that is a red flag.
If performance concerns arise and you are disabled, you can:
ask whether reasonable adjustments have been considered,
contact the Disability Officer for support,
or seek advice from HR or your trade union.
📌 Key point:
Capability processes should not be used as a substitute for putting reasonable adjustments in place. Knowing this policy exists helps you challenge that early, rather than once a formal process has started.
📌 Why:
If a building, system, or piece of digital content is inaccessible:
that isn’t just “unfortunate”,
it may be a policy breach.
That gives you:
stronger footing when raising issues,
clearer routes for challenge,
and language that moves the conversation from “personal problem” to “institutional responsibility”.
Menopause Policy
The University also has a Menopause Policy. Read here.
Menopause and perimenopause can affect people in very different ways.
Symptoms can be:
physical,
cognitive,
psychological,
and may fluctuate over time.
For some people, this can have a significant impact on work, including attendance, concentration, memory, temperature regulation, sleep, and energy levels. Therefore it falls under the widest interpretation of the Disability Umbrella.
This policy sets out that:
support is available,
reasonable adjustments can be put in place,
and menopause is treated in the same way as other long-term or fluctuating health conditions.
📌 Key point:
You do not have to “push through”, minimise your symptoms, or wait until things become unmanageable before asking for support. The policy exists to support you, not as a last resort.
A reality check (and some reassurance)
The University is trying to be inclusive.
The policies are there, and in the right spirit. Implementation lags behind, not due to malice but due to systemic issues.
But:
implementation is uneven,
knowledge varies wildly between managers,
and disabled staff often end up doing extra labour just to make things work.
📌 The important bit:
You have rights, and you have policies you can point to.
That matters — even when progress feels slow.
What to do if you need adjustments
If you know what you need
Talk to your line manager
Ask for reasonable adjustments.Best case, that’s all you need.
If adjustments are agreed, they should be implemented and reviewed, not treated as a one-off favour.
If adjustments aren’t happening, or you’re not sure what you need
Contact the Disability Officer. Website and email.
Their role is to:
help you identify appropriate adjustments,
support discussions with managers,
and reduce the burden on you to “get it right first time”.
This is a normal, supported route — not an escalation.
Occupational Health while OccHealth can assist with adjustments for medical conditions, they are very rarely your first point of call unless you return from long sickness leave. We would recommend reaching out to the Staff Disability Advice Service first.
You’re not doing this alone!
Flowchart: What to do
Text version of the flowchart
Start.
Ask yourself:
Do you need a change or support at work because of a disability, long-term condition, or health issue?
If the answer is no:
You do not need to do anything right now.
It is still useful to be aware of your rights in case your situation changes in the future.
If the answer is yes:
Ask yourself the next question.
Do you already know what adjustments would help?
If the answer is yes:
Talk to your line manager and ask for reasonable adjustments.
Next, consider:
Are the adjustments agreed and put in place?
If the answer is yes:
No further action is needed at this time.
Review the adjustments later if your needs change.
If the answer is no:
Contact the Disability Officer for support and guidance.
If you did not know what adjustments would help:
Contact the Disability Officer.
The Disability Officer can help you to:
identify appropriate adjustments,
support conversations with your manager, and
reduce the burden on you to work out solutions on your own.
Final outcome:
Adjustments are discussed and agreed, with support if needed.
Today in “things that are inclusive and you didn’t realise they are”:
the International Code of Signals (ICS)
From the INTERNATIONAL CODE OF SIGNALS UNITED STATES EDITION 1969 Edition (Revised 2003)
We tend to think of inclusion as something modern — a recent design concern introduced in the last decade or two. But hidden throughout history are whole systems that ended up being quietly, unintentionally inclusive because they had to work for everyone, under every condition.
One of the best examples? The International Code of Signals (ICS).
What is the ICS?
The International Code of Signals is a global communication system used by ships at sea. Long before radios were reliable, vessels relied on flags, lights, shapes, and sound signals to communicate essential information between ships, between ship and shore, or during emergencies.
The modern ICS alphabet was standardised in the mid-19th century, gradually refined by the British Board of Trade, and formally internationalised in the 20th century. The point was simple: every ship in the world, regardless of language, must be able to understand the same messages.
How the system works
The ICS includes:
26 alphabetical flags (A–Z)
10 numeral pennants (0–9)
3 repeaters (1st, 2nd, 3rd) to repeat letters in hoists
Special flags for code groups and signalling conditions
Each flag has a distinctive combination of shapes, stripes, blocks, and layout. Crucially: each flag also carries a meaning beyond its letter.
Examples include:
A – Alfa: “I have a diver down; keep well clear.”
B – Bravo: “I am carrying dangerous cargo.”
O – Oscar: “Man overboard.”
V – Victor: “I require assistance.”
It is an entire international language, designed to cut through uncertainty, weather, and linguistic barriers.
Victor means “I require assistance.” or ” Ich benötige Hilfe” or “Je demande assistance.” or “Ég þarfnast aðstoðar.”…you get the idea.
In an emergency even an old times sailor (who historically often couldn’t write or read, as opposed to officers) could raise a “I require medical assistance.” flag (Whiskey) with know how to spell any of that.
So where does inclusion come in?
The ICS had to work:
In fog
In storm conditions
When flags faded in the sun
From long distances
On ships crewed by people from all over the world
And crucially: without relying solely on colour
This last point is where the hidden accessibility appears.
Historically, navies and merchant fleets were overwhelmingly male environments — and roughly 8% of men have some form of colour-blindness. For most of history, there was no colour-vision testing for sailors. You simply took whoever could work a deck, haul a line, or man a watch. (Or in the earlier days of the Royal Navy, any drunk bastard who could make three xxx on a piece of paper and was too drunk to run away…)
If the flag system had depended on exact colour discrimination, it would have failed immediately in real-world use.
So the system was designed to be recognised through pattern, geometry, and contrast, not colour alone.
Why ICS is inherently colour-blind inclusive
Even though the flags are coloured, what actually makes them identifiable is:
Horizontal vs. vertical stripes
Diagonal bars
Chequered patterns
Centre squares or blocks
Unique proportions
Strong dark–light contrast (important in greyscale vision)
Shapes that still read correctly when bleached by sun or salt
This means a sailor with red–green colour-blindness (by far the most common) can distinguish “Oscar” from “Zulu”, or “Bravo” from “Hotel”, from the pattern alone.
The ICS is, unintentionally, a great example of pre-modern universal design.
It is inclusion by necessity — because you cannot run a global system that depends on perfect colour perception, perfect weather, or perfect conditions.
A lesson from maritime history
The ICS shows something important:
When a system is designed to succeed under pressure, uncertainty, and real-world conditions, it often ends up being more inclusive.
Accessibility isn’t always a modern invention. Sometimes, it’s baked into the oldest tools we have — quietly doing its job, unnoticed, because it had to serve everyone long before inclusion became a buzzword.
Hidden inclusion really is everywhere.
Everyone Wins
That’s the heart of it: inclusive design never creates a burden — it creates clarity.
Even with perfect colour vision, I find it far easier to read what the ship in front of me wants because the system was built to work for everyone. Inclusion doesn’t make things easier for disabled people and harder for everyone else; inclusion makes things easier, safer, and more reliable for all of us.
Universal Design and Individual Tailoring: Why We Need Both
People often frame accessibility as a choice: do we build universally, or do we tailor individually? The reality is—of course—we need both.
Universal Design: dignity, efficiency, and reduced labour of inclusion.
Universal Design (UD) is often sold as a magic solution that will “catch everyone.” It won’t. It never will. And that’s fine, because UD isn’t about perfection—it’s about coverage.
When we design materials, systems, spaces, and processes so they work for as many people as possible, several good things happen:
Fewer people have to declare their disability, which protects dignity and reduces the emotional admin of constantly explaining your needs, it reduces Labour of Inclusion.
Time and money are freed up to support the people who do require tailored adjustments.
Workload becomes manageable, because you’re not reinventing the wheel for every individual request.
A simple teaching example:
I have 120 students in a lecture. Out of them:
10 are dyslexic
1 has visual issues (I don’t use impairment anymore, the Blind community feels strongly about this!)
1 needs large print
If I make inaccessible slides (e.g., Times New Roman, poor contrast, cluttered layout), I now have to respond to 12 individual adjustment schedules and produce multiple versions.
That is not a good use of my labour or institutional resources.
If I instead make one fully accessible slide deck from the start—clear font, high contrast, good structure— I immediately meet the needs of 11 students. Now there is only one student who requires a tailored version, and I actually have time and energy to give them what they need.
UD actually is a resource management tool.
Universal Design is not universal
There’s a myth that UD, if done well enough, will cover everybody. It won’t. Human variation is vast and always will be.
UD doesn’t replace individual adjustments. UD creates capacity for individual adjustments.
Think of it like triage in reverse: cover the majority up front, so you can do justice to the minority who require something different.
That is what real equity looks like.
Why both approaches matter
UD preserves dignity by removing the need for constant declarations. Tailoring preserves equity by responding meaningfully to those whom UD cannot help.
Both matter.
And both are required.
But we also need systems to support this balance—for example:
Digital adjustment records that follow a person across departments or institutions
Reduction of repetitive disclosure
Consistent accessible design standards
The point is simple: Universal Design is not a replacement for individual adjustment. It is the foundation that makes genuine equity possible—by freeing up resources to respond well, respectfully, and promptly to those whose needs fall outside the majority design.
Dual approaches aren’t a compromise. They’re the only way forward.
A quick guide to help you find what you’re looking for:
About Me Start here if you want to know who I am, what I do, and how all the threads of my work and interests tie together.
(Dis)ability Posts on disability, access (and why we should say dignity instead!), lived experience, and the practical realities of navigating systems as a disabled person.
Policy Research My work on human factors, implementation gaps, and how institutional policies can be designed to actually function in real life.
Teaching Materials, reflections on pedagogy, and resources from my teaching practice.
Training and Coaching Workshops, tools, guidance, and applied methods for organisations and individuals.
Personal Everything else — mines, planes, movement arts, cave rescue, and the occasional muddy adventure.
The 5 T approach has been designed to support supervisors and personal tutors for neurodivergent students, it is part of DSN’s training. (And works as well for other disabilities or line managers of disabled/neurodivergent staff!)
In the following paragraph you will read about each of the 5 Ts. There will always be a “Why” section first, that will give you the reasoning and background to the T in questions, followed by a “How” section, that gives you concrete ideas and tools to use. So, why do we always start with “why”? We want to enable informed and aware action. Understanding and knowing allows for empathy, and it empowers you to develop your own ideas and tools, tailored to your own circumstances.
Talk
Have an open conversation about your professional relationship, work, studies, and about how to have conversations.
(Print off a useful checklist here that will guide you through the Talk!)
Why?
The one sentence you will hear again and again in inclusion and disability work is “Nothing About Us Without Us”. As a minoritised group, disabled people are often spoken about but not to. While those who discuss inclusion without actually including a disabled person may mean well, they deny us agency and thus equality. Almost all disabled students/staff have experienced that. Having the conversation about how to best support them without them is not only denying them agency, it’s robbing yourself of a very powerful resource, i.e. someone who has managed the student’s neurodivergence for about 20 years: the student/staff member!
Many disabilities and especially forms of neurodivergence come with communication styles and needs that are different from what you might be used to. These differences may be purely due to disability and/or neurodivergence or due to cultural and linguistic differences, or both. That is not a bad thing and diversity is precious, but to avoid misunderstandings and misinterpretation of the other person’s action, it’s best spoken about openly.
Predictability is generally calming and helpful for everyone, but for many disabled people it’s essential. Making the process accessible and transparent helps everyone involved and makes sure everyone has realistic expectations.
How?
No matter what it is you need to discuss about the student’s/your direct report’s work or support, include them! Always speak to them rather than about them.
Have the Talk about talking to each other and working with each other.
How do we want to communicate with each other?
Frequency: how often do you want to meet?
Medium: do you want to meet in person? On a video call? Should we speak or write to each other?
Length: are shorter meetings better or longer meetings?
Notes: are we good at writing action points down ourselves or should we exchange a quick email after the meeting to clarify what we agreed on?
Style: Can we hint at something or should we always be explicit? Can we use metaphors? (yes, really!)
What can we expect of each other?
How much time do we realistically have for each other?
How much work/feedback do we expect of each other and when?
What are our working hours? When can we reach each other and how?
What we need:
Consider the needs of both parties and find something that works for both.
Try to openly discuss needs, but be prepared that the student might be ashamed or scared and not tell you everything right away.
Keep talking!
Make clear that the Talk is not a 1-off. They have forgotten or not dared to mention some needs? You two can talk more later. Their needs have changed? No problem, you can renegotiate how to communicate. You two agreed on talking with no written notes and you feel it doesn’t work? Talk about it openly with the student and agree on notes from now on.
Talking is a process, keep communicating!
Trust
Why?
Building a relationship of trust with your student is crucial, because only trust allows them to open up about their needs and to believe that your offers of help are genuine. Disabled students have reasons not to trust. They have experienced being ridiculed or belittled when voicing their needs or struggles. They have to feel that you are a safe person to talk to.
How?
Building trust between yourself and the student might be harder because they have had many bad experiences. What might help you get there is trusting them first.
Listen. Empathise. Believe them.
They are the expert on their neurodivergence or their other disabilities. If they say that they cannot work in this bright light, believe them. If they say the office is too loud, take their word for it. Don’t try to minimise their problem (worst case “it’s okay for the others though, are you sure?”), but trust their assessment of the e.g. workspace. They can tell you what is not suitable for their specific needs, and if they do so, that is a huge leap of faith and a sign they trust you with their vulnerability. Show them it was the right decision by listening and taking them seriously.
Give them reasons to trust you:
Make sure your words and actions align.
If you made a mistake or missed a meeting, own it and say sorry.
If you ask something of them, tell them the reason.
When they open up to you, you know what to do: Listen. Empathise. Believe them.
Tailor
Why?
People’s needs are vastly different. Techniques and adjustments that help one person might make another person worse. That is why we want more than equality (everyone gets the same), we want Equity (everyone gets what they need). This has to be said so explicitly because we increasingly see the rise of discrimination in the name of equality. E.g.
“We offer only apples for dessert so everyone gets the same.”
“I’m allergic to apples, can I have a banana instead?”
“I’m sorry. Giving you a banana would mean you don’t have the same experience as everyone else. It’s apples only, because we want parity and equality (sic!)”
How?
Tailor your approach to the individual student. Consider:
Some need pressure, some need space.
Some need more contact, some quiet.
Some need more feedback, some more autonomy.
But all of them need the 5 T. Every disabled person needs you to believe them, to consider them, to ask them what would help them. Listen. Empathise. Believe them.
Trauma
Why?
You won’t find a disabled person that does not have traumatic experiences in their past.
– Bullying
– Exclusion
– Having to mask
– Gas-lighting
– Ableist abuse
That is the sad reality of our society. Every disabled person you will encounter is traumatised.
Every. Single. One.
You cannot change that, but you can be aware of it.
A traumatised person can “overreact” to something you might consider harmless or even helpful/friendly.
A traumatised person might verbally lash out at you, and will immediately feel bad about it.
A traumatised person might shut down completely in response to something you said.
How?
If you want to turn the other cheek and interpret an outburst has the student loudly suffering in your presence rather than rudeness, remember:
That has to be your personal choice. No one can ask you to do this. You have the right to dignity and respect at work. You can remove yourself from the situation.
Choice can only happen out of a position of safety.
But if you can make that choice and see their pain, that might help a lot. Even if it doesn’t make things better overnight. What you can do then is:
De-escalate. Be calm.
Listen. Empathise. Believe them.
And very important: Tell yourself that it’s NOT your fault. You stepped on a trigger you didn’t know existed. That happens to professionals, that happens to people who know the person. It’s never nice when it happens but it’s not you. Remembering that is important for your own sake but also for the student’s/report’s sake. If you can remain calm and resting in yourself, they will calm down.
Trust yourself, so they can trust you.
A cup of Tea
Why?
In German we have a saying “Ratschläge sind auch Schläge” (Advice is also a beating). Help you offer, no matter how well intended, could retrigger the student’s trauma. That is of course sad and painful for you, because you really want to help and standing by watching while someone struggles is quite a burden. But for the student/your staff the offer of help could be anything but helpful. It could make them feel ashamed that they cannot do it by themselves, as they have been told for most of their life “everyone else can do so you are just lazy”. It could trigger anxiety, as they might feel they disappoint you. It could make them feel that they are not good enough. Remember, if that happens, it’s not you who caused this. You just put your finger on an old wound. So, where does the tea come in?
How?
Imagine the help you want to offer like a cup of Tea. What would you do with a cup of tea?
Offer it to someone in distress? Absolutely!
Keep offering it, warmly and plenty, even if it’s not always taken? Also yes!
Advertise it by saying you also like this tea and drink it often? Maybe.
Offer a different kind of tea if the first cup isn’t accepted? Perhaps.
Be offended or hurt if someone doesn’t want tea right now? No.
Force them to drink the tea? No way!
Help works exactly in the same way. Offer it, offer it warmly and plenty. Even if it wasn’t taken the last time. Someone might not dare to ask for help after they didn’t accept your help initially. Offer it again the next time, even if it wasn’t wanted the first time around. If they feel they can trust you, and they are ready to accept the help, they will take it if it’s still there.
I grew up in Cologne and first found my way into emergency response as a teenager, serving as a volunteer paramedic with the German Red Cross. I began by studying a little civil and agricultural engineering, but my interests eventually pulled me toward philology — a blend of linguistics and literary studies — and later across the North Sea.
After moving to Scotland, I completed a master’s degree in Language Contact and began doctoral research exploring how mathematical and phylogenetic approaches from epidemiology might be applied to historical linguistic change. My work sits at the intersection of language, systems thinking, and the mechanics of change over time.
Alongside academia, I have worked as a caseworker and gained qualifications in Employment Law and Occupational Health & Safety, as well as additional first responder training. I continue to stay close to emergency-response work through volunteering with Scottish Cave Rescue, so more underground environments, risk, and casualty care.
I am also a trustee of the Nenthead Mines Conservation Society. Historical mines are one of my great passions: I spend much of my free time involved in mine conservation, underground restoration, and exploration archaeology. I am fascinated by the engineering, history, and human stories behind these spaces — and I like playing in the mud.
Outside of work, I stay anchored through movement. I practise ballet, kung fu, and both lion and dragon dance — disciplines that challenge coordination, balance, and focus in very different ways while being deeply rooted in history. I also used to train in historical fencing, which first sparked my love of embodied history and the mechanics of movement across cultures and eras.
Beyond research and rescue, I have a lifelong love of “navigational fluids” and the things that move through them — ships, aircraft, weather systems, and the beautiful logic of fluid mechanics. Navigation, motion, and complex systems are recurring themes across all my interests, whether I’m reading old texts, climbing into a mine, or watching the wind shear shift over a runway.
In my current role as a Research Fellow, I work on disability, policy systems, and human factors — examining how institutions design policies, why implementation so often fails, and how organisational structures can be reshaped to genuinely support disabled staff. My work combines insights from linguistics, systems engineering, aviation safety, and inclusion research to map the “policy machinery” behind reasonable adjustments and identify the structural and cognitive factors that shape real-world outcomes. At its core, my research is about building institutions that work as intended — not only on paper, but in practice, for the people who rely on them.
This blog brings these threads together: languages, systems, safety, policy, engineering, and the odd bit of mud from whichever mine I’ve wandered into most recently.
Old Workshop and water wheel launder
