A family’s pride in a young man’s routine and contribution has turned to hurt, raising questions many shoppers may recognise.
The case of a 27-year-old autistic man who gave hundreds of hours to a Waitrose branch has ignited a wider debate about work, dignity and the duty to adjust roles so people can thrive.
What the family says happened
Tom Boyd, 27, spent more than four years on work experience at the Waitrose in Cheadle Hulme, Greater Manchester. He attended for two full mornings each week. He focused on practical tasks that he knew well.
His mother, Frances, says her son kept to a steady routine, mainly unloading stock cages and stacking shelves. Staff encouraged him and he felt part of the team.
More than 600 hours across four years, two mornings a week, largely restocking and unloading multiple cages each shift.
After years of the same pattern, the family asked if Tom could move to paid hours. They did not ask for charity. They asked for recognition of consistent work and a role shaped around tasks he already did.
Frances says the store told them a paid role was not possible because Tom “couldn’t do the full role”. She believes the company failed to consider reasonable adjustments that would let him succeed in a defined set of duties.
The family says the answer was no because he could not do the full role, rather than a role shaped to his strengths.
What the supermarket says
Waitrose says it aims to be inclusive and experienced in making changes for disabled workers. The company says it partners with charities to provide work experience. It says it cannot discuss individual cases, but it is looking into this one.
Waitrose says it is investigating the case as a priority and points to its work with inclusion programmes.
A long routine of unpaid graft
The case has triggered unease because of its length and regularity. Four years is far beyond a typical short-term placement. Two mornings each week brought structure and purpose for Tom. The family says he unloaded four or more cages per shift and restocked without complaint. They say he wanted to belong and contribute.
For readers, the tension lies here. When does work experience stop being experience and start looking like ongoing, unpaid labour?
Where the law stands on unpaid experience
UK law treats “work experience”, “volunteering” and “employment” differently. Genuine volunteers do not receive wages. Students on short placements also follow specific rules. If a person is a “worker”, they usually qualify for the National Minimum Wage, paid holidays and other protections. Status depends on facts, not labels.
- Regular hours and set duties can indicate worker status.
- Benefit to the business may be considered.
- Control, supervision and integration into rotas are relevant factors.
- Written agreements help, but the daily reality matters more.
Disability rights sit alongside wage rules. Under the Equality Act 2010, employers must make reasonable adjustments for disabled applicants and employees where a practice or requirement puts them at a substantial disadvantage. Adjustments can include task specialisation, predictable shifts, communication tweaks and assistive support.
Reasonable adjustments explained
An adjustment is “reasonable” if it is effective and proportionate. Size and resources of the employer matter. So do costs, practicality and the impact on operations. Many changes cost little. Government’s Access to Work scheme can fund a job coach, travel support or equipment.
| Adjustment | Why it helps | Typical cost |
|---|---|---|
| Fixed shift pattern | Predictability reduces anxiety and improves performance | Low |
| Task specialisation | Focus on known strengths, such as restocking instead of tills | Low |
| Buddy or job coach | Guidance, feedback and reassurance during busy periods | Low to moderate, often funded |
| Quiet break space | Recovery time during sensory overload | Low |
| Visual checklists | Clear steps for stock, rotation and safety | Minimal |
How this fits a wider pattern
Autistic people face a stark employment gap. Recent UK estimates suggest around three in ten autistic adults are in work. Many want to work and can excel when routines and expectations are clear. Barriers often arise at hiring, not in performance.
Retail offers many roles that can be made predictable and methodical. Stock control, date rotation, click-and-collect picking and replenishment all lend themselves to clarity and repetition. “Job carving” creates roles from tasks already needed by the business, then measures output to prove value. Shops already do this informally. Formalising it turns contribution into a contract.
Numbers that raise questions
The numbers in this case cut through public debate. Four years suggests stability. Two mornings each week suggests a pattern. More than 600 hours suggests commitment. Many readers will ask the same thing: was there nothing that could be carved into a paid, bounded role?
What readers can do next
If this story feels close to home, there are steps you can take. Families, advocates and managers can make progress by being precise and practical.
- Put requests for reasonable adjustments in writing and be specific about tasks and hours.
- Propose a time-limited paid trial with measurable outputs, such as cages unloaded per shift.
- Ask for an Access to Work assessment to fund coaching or support.
- Request a workplace risk and sensory assessment with clear actions.
- Escalate through HR and use the grievance process if replies stall.
- Seek free early conciliation through Acas for disputes that cannot be resolved.
- Shortlist employers with strong Disability Confident practices and visible adjustments in job ads.
Why this matters beyond one shop
Retail margins are tight, yet turnover and training are costly. A consistent worker who thrives on clear, repeatable tasks can save time, reduce errors and lift morale. Customers notice when a store lives its values. They also notice when stories like this surface.
This case highlights a simple test. Can a national chain adapt roles so a person who has already proved reliability can get a contract for the work they are already doing? Many businesses have answered yes and built teams around strengths. The tools exist. The funding exists. The need is obvious.
For autistic jobseekers, predictability, a fair wage and respect often matter more than variety. For managers, clarity of task, patient feedback and a stable rota can unlock strong performance. Where a “full role” is too broad, a carved role with a clear output can be both lawful and commercial.
Shoppers will draw their own conclusions. A routine that once offered belonging has become a test of corporate promises. The investigation now under way will need to show where things went wrong, what can be put right, and whether a role can be shaped around proven strengths rather than ruled out by a one-size-fits-all job description.
Four years of “experience” sounds like unpaid labour. Serioulsy, how did HR sign this off?
If someone reliably unloads four+ cages per shift, that’s measurable value. Why not a carved “Replenisher” contract and a paid trial for £12 an hour?