2016 Budget Announcements

Termination Payments

Chancellor George Osborne has announced that from April 2018, termination payments over £30,000 will be subject to employer’s National Insurance Contributions as well as Income Tax, which is already payable. Under £30,000 will still be free of tax. He said in his speech that “the rules are complex and the exemptions incentivise employers to manipulate the rules, structuring arrangements to include payments that are ordinarily taxable such as notice and bonuses to minimise the tax and NICs due”.

For people who lose their job, payments up to £30,000 will remain tax-free, and they will not need to pay National Insurance on any of the payment.

It appears that more complex proposals floated by HMRC in their recent consultation on this issue, have not been taken further at this stage. But, they are also planning further consulting on wider changes to the tax and NI treatment of termination payments, including:

  • taxing Payments In Lieu of Notice (PILONs) irrespective of whether they are contractual in nature or not; and,
  • bringing in new rules to prevent contractual termination payments being “disguised” as damages in order to avoid tax and NI on them;

These changes will be an additional cost to employers – potentially making termination settlements much more expensive in the future. It is worth noting that had the £30,000 exemption kept pace with earnings, it would now be over £72,000, but the amount has remained static for a very long time.

In two years time, employers are less likely to be generous in what they are prepared to offer to staff in termination situations, as they look for ways to absorb the additional costs that the change will bring. As we get closer to the 2018 implementation date, some employers who are planning to restructure their workforce, are likely to look to push their plans forward sooner than they might otherwise, to avoid the national insurance charge.

Employers and employees may also be disappointed that an opportunity for simplification has been missed.

Salary Sacrifice

The Government is also considering limiting the range of benefits that attract income tax and NICs advantages when they are provided as part of salary sacrifice schemes, although the Treasury makes clear that pension saving, childcare and health-related benefits, such as Cycle to Work, will continue to benefit from income tax and NICs relief when provided through salary sacrifice arrangements.

Minimum Wage 2016

The standard rate of the national minimum wage for 21 to 24 year-olds will increase by 3.7% to £6.95 per hour, from October 2016, based on recommendations for the new rates from the Low Pay Commission.

Workers aged between 18 and 20 will see their pay rates rise by 4.7% to £5.55 per hour. The minimum wage for 16 to 17 year-olds increases to £4.00 per hour, a rise of 3.4%, while the apprentice rate increases 3% to £3.40.

The Government said the increase will mean that, for the first time, the national minimum wage for 21 to 24 year-olds is restored to its highest level in real terms, above its previous peak before the recession.

The National Living Wage, the minimum wage rate for workers aged 25 and over of £7.20 per hour, will be effective on 1st April 2016.

Commentary

The challenge for employers is keeping up with pay, whilst juggling a number of other employment-related costs. It is increasingly difficult to disentangle rises to the national minimum wage rates with other business costs, such as the new apprenticeship levy, and pensions auto-enrolment. Necessary actions for employers are:

  • From 2018, termination payments over £30,000 will need to add NI contributions to the calculations to establish the true cost.
  • Review whether salary sacrifice is really a good long term option.
  • Plan for the further changes to the NMW to ensure they do not mismanage the increases due in October this year.

New Statutory Figures

The annual increase in compensation limits has been announced. The new limits are applicable where the event that gives rise to the award or payment occurs on or after 6th April 2016 and are:

  • £479.00 – the maximum amount of a week’s pay for calculating statutory redundancy pay and the basic award; (up from £475.00)
  • £14,370.00 – the maximum statutory redundancy payment or basic award, i.e. 30 weeks; and
  • £78,962.00 – the maximum compensatory award which can be made for unfair dismissal (up from £78,335.00) or one year’s gross pay whichever is the lower

These increases mean that the maximum total unfair dismissal award is now £93,332.00, although uplifts can add a further 25%.

It remains very important to follow good practice in your HR procedures; carefully consider all dismissals, and ensure that the handling of appeals is conducted as thoroughly as possible. It is also important to remember that there is no cap at all on the awards that can be made in many cases, including discrimination claims.

Employees may be entitled to receive guarantee payments for up to five days of lay-off in any three-month period. The maximum amount of such a statutory guarantee payment for any one day will remain at £26.00.

From 6th April 2016

Statutory Adoption, Maternity, Paternity and Shared Parental Leave Pay, and Maternity Allowance, will all remain at £139.58 per week.

Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) will also remain at £88.45 per week.

The Lower Earning Limit (LEL) also remains static at £112.00 per week, i.e. £5,824.00 per annum.

We have produced a new useful Information card with these rates. If you would like a copy, please contact us. Our Consultants will be pleased to answer questions on any of the above, or you can find much of the data by clicking on Frequently Asked Questions.

Managers may be required to investigate all sorts of issues, ranging from an employee or customer complaint, a quality issue, through to an accident or near miss. In just about all cases, the chain of events leading up to the incident may not have been planned, but the investigation, with the benefit of hindsight, can invariably identify that it was an incident waiting to happen, i.e. it was foreseeable. Put another way, most incidents happen for a reason, which is usually down to human error, or management failings, but invariably a mixture of both. Indeed, it has been estimated that in the case of accidents, only 5% are events that could not have possibly been predicted.

Therefore, part of the process of any good investigation is to work out more than just what happened, but why, i.e. the root cause. What were the influencing factors? For example, what was people’s motivation for behaving the way they did? Were people taking accepted short cuts which management were well aware of, and permitted to happen by doing nothing to stop it? How well was management overseeing activities, and what part did they play in the acts and omissions that took place, prior to the incident happening?

The purpose of an investigation, therefore, goes beyond establishing the facts leading up to the incident, but involves identifying what were the real factors that led up to the event happening. Like it or not, management usually play a starring role in letting issues happen. The easy option for an investigator is to blame an individual, or series of individuals, but does that actually solve why the incident happened. The more important part of any investigation is to actually make (i) balanced conclusions as to the factors that influenced the incident happening, and (ii) recommendations regarding what steps need to now be put in place to prevent such an incident happening again. Whilst the rest of this article really is more about accident investigation, I would argue that the principles are the same, regardless of what incident is being investigated.

There is no specific legal requirement to investigate accidents and incidents. However, such investigations are a core, if not fundamental, part of a successful health and safety management system. The Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) document, HSG65 Managing for Health and Safety, promotes a Plan, Do, Check, Act approach. Investigation of accidents and incidents is part of the “Check” step, and may highlight shortcomings in the organisation’s management system for health and safety. The purpose of accident and incident investigation, if done well, should lead to the prevention of such events in the future.

For an investigation to be meaningful there must be a methodology in place, which ensures such outcomes. Managers need to understand how to investigate accidents effectively, and that their remit goes far beyond merely establishing whose fault was it. Sadly, many investigations end up being merely a scapegoating exercise, which is why in the health and safety policies we do for clients, we make it clear that this is not the purpose of an accident investigation.

It is usually not practicable to investigate all minor or apparently trivial accidents, so it is important that organisations take a sensible and proportionate approach to the investigation of accidents. Therefore, decisions need to be made as to what accidents need investigating. It is the potential consequences and the likelihood of the adverse event recurring that really should determine the level of investigation, not simply the injury or ill health suffered on a particular occasion.

Similarly, the causes of a near miss can have the potential to cause injury and ill health, and a decision must be made as to the investigation of such near misses. It will also be important to consider who was injured in the accidents, and it may be necessary to give higher priority to investigations where, for example, young people or members of the public are involved.

The organisation’s policy should also decide when the investigation should take place. The urgency of an investigation will depend on the magnitude and immediacy of the risk involved (e.g. a major accident involving an everyday job will need to be investigated quickly). In practice, where the decision has been made to investigate an accident, it should take place as soon as possible, otherwise evidence may be lost and, individual recollections of the accident may be less reliable. There may also be external demands for an investigation to take place within a defined timescale, e.g. the enforcing authorities or insurance companies may require an investigation.

Who should investigate accidents?

This will depend on the size of the management team, and whether there is someone that takes responsibility for health and safety matters. It is usually a good idea that it is not the Manager that investigates, as there may not be sufficient independence. What I mean by this is that the temptation to cover up acts and omissions may be too great, and it is unlikely that they may admit that poor supervision was a major contributory factor. If the organisation has proper health and safety representatives, it is a good idea to ask for their input, especially if they routinely perform the work or processes themselves.

Data collection

The collection of information must be detailed. Photographs or videos of the scene should be taken and, where necessary, dimensions and other technical measurements can be helpful, e.g. machine speeds, or the precise measurement of how far someone fell.

Interviewing witnesses will form an important part of any accident investigation. To ensure a clear recollection of events, witnesses need to be interviewed as soon as possible after the accident. Where the injured have been seriously harmed, it may be necessary to delay interviews depending on required medical treatment. Where there are a number of witnesses, it is good practice to separate them immediately after the accident, and prior to interview, to avoid any deliberate or inadvertent collusion, or worse, witnesses are pressurised into not admitting the full extent of what people were doing at the time of the incident.

In all cases, it is important to manage interviews with witnesses carefully. Some may be nervous, and even in shock, if a very serious accident has occurred. It is essential to explain that the purpose of the investigation is to prevent a recurrence, and not to allocate blame.

When interviewing witnesses, and, in particular, when taking statements from witnesses, it is important not to use leading questions, or to put words in the witness’s mouth. The interviewer must also bear in mind that not all witnesses will be helpful and co-operative. Some may be deliberately misleading. Others may be trying to pursue a false claim, or be attempting to cover up actions of their own that were involved in the accident. Consequently, the organisation’s policy for accident investigation should stipulate that giving false evidence during an accident investigation could lead to disciplinary action.

The collection of information, as part of accident investigation, will also include the examination of records relevant to the accident. These may include:

  • risk assessments relating to the activities or processes involved in the accident
  • relevant working procedures and practices, including any applicable safe systems of work, written or verbal
  • training records
  • maintenance or cleaning and inspection records
  • previous accident investigation reports
  • sickness and absence records
  • disciplinary records

The process of the collection of information during an investigation should be recorded, and should meet the following criteria:

  • It must be objective and unbiased.
  • It must identify the sequence of events, and conditions that led up to the accident or incident.
  • It must identify the immediate causes.
  • It must identify underlying causes, i.e. previous actions that have perhaps been allowed, or caused undetected, unsafe conditions or practices.
  • It must identify root causes, such as poor supervision, inadequate monitoring, insufficient training or a lack of resources to name but a few, contributing factors that lead to an inadequate health and safety management system.

Recommendations

Following the investigation, suggested outcomes for improvement must be carefully analysed, and an action plan for the implementation of additional control measures should be developed, and implemented. It will be important at this stage to involve senior management, especially if more resources and expenditure will be required.

The action plan should have SMART objectives (be Specific, Measurable, Agreed, Realistic, with Timescales). For the proposed action plan to be SMART, management, employees and their representatives should all contribute to a constructive discussion, prior to agreeing the final action plan. The implementation of additional control measures must also be sensible (including timescales for implementation) and proportionate with the level of risk involved.

Summary

The investigation of accidents and incidents is a key activity, and plays an important part in the management of health and safety. It should be taken seriously, should not be a knee jerk reaction, apportioning blame and alike.
Organisations must carefully plan how they will investigate accidents, and to make sure that those involved have received adequate training, and are fully aware of the organisation’s policies and procedures.

A quality accident investigation, which identifies weaknesses in the management of health and safety that are then corrected or improved upon, will lead to the reduction of more accidents in the future.

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

Despite increased business awareness of the importance of actively supporting health and well-being in the workplace, there remains a stubborn ‘implementation gap’ in UK workplaces, which is threatening individuals’ health and long-term business sustainability.

This is according to a new report from the CIPD, Growing the health and well-being agenda: From first steps to full potential, which highlights that the average cost of absence now stands at £554 per employee per year. It also reveals that:

  • Only 8% of UK employers currently have a stand-alone well-being strategy that supports the wider organisational strategy.
  • The majority of employers are more reactive than proactive in their approach to well-being (61%).
  • Almost two-fifths of employees are under excessive pressure at work at least once a week.
  • 43% say that long hours working is the norm for their organisation.
  • Well-being is taken into account in business decisions only to a little extent, or not at all, in the majority (57%) of cases.
  • Less than two-fifths of organisations monitor the cost of employee absence.

It is reported that many well-being efforts consist of one-off initiatives that aren’t joined up, and therefore often fail to have a long-term impact in the workplace. To address this, the CIPD recommends that a proactive employee well-being programme – based on the foundations of good people management, leadership and culture – should be at the core of how an organisation fulfils its mission and carries out its operations.

Sir Professor Cary Cooper, CIPD President and well-being expert, said: “A workforce that is well works well, but we’re still seeing far too many people doing more work than they can cope with, working long or unsociable hours, suffering from technology overload and unable to switch off. Organisations need to take better care of their people and recognise how the demands of work can affect their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to perform well at work. Prevention is better than a cure; it’s high time that business leaders recognise this and create cultures in organisations in which well-being is centre stage and people are happy, healthy and committed to achieving organisational success.”

To stem the rising cost and prevalence of employee ill-health, the CIPD, the professional body for HR and people development, is urging employers and policy-makers to recognise not just the potential cost of inaction on well-being, but also the growing body of evidence that positively links the introduction of well-being programmes at work, with improved employee engagement and business performance.

To progress the health and well-being agenda, the CIPD has the following recommendations for employers:

  • Implement a holistic approach to health and well-being that is preventative and proactive, and respond quickly to offer support when issues emerge. Their approach should promote good physical health, good mental health and ‘good work’.
  • Line Managers are pivotal in shaping employees’ experience of work, bringing people management policies to life, and managing the potential causes of stress. Training is vital to ensure they have a clear understanding of health and well-being responsibilities, and have the confidence and skills to implement policies, and handle difficult conversations with staff in a sensitive and effective way.
  • Creating a healthy culture is perhaps the greatest challenge for organisations. It requires commitment and role-modelling from senior leaders and Managers.

Mental Health Awareness

The CIPD’s initiative comes at roughly the same time as increased public awareness of the importance of ensuring good mental health at work and elsewhere. Almost 6% of people with mental health conditions are currently unable to work, despite evidence showing employment can be a crucial part of treatment. The Prime Minister recently announced that action will be taken across government, the NHS and private companies, to treat potentially debilitating mental health conditions early on, through improved access to care and to help those already struggling with mental health issues to find or return to work. He highlighted the need for a shift in attitude to people with mental health conditions in the workplace and to agree new workplace standards.

Practical Steps

In our experience, less than two-fifths of organisations monitor the cost of employee absence, which is surprising given the cost impact of even average levels of staff absence.

We would agree with the CIPD that there is a lot to be said for taking a positive approach to well-being, indeed much of it comes down to good management in creating an environment which people want to attend, and give 100% commitment. Most of us know that it is the best motivated of our colleagues who attend work most regularly. Management are responsible for providing the motivation that makes us less prone to illness, and more likely to come in when we are ‘a bit under the weather’. Generating a positive environment in which your staff can perform and develop doing worthwhile work, will go a long way to controlling our attendance levels.

There are, however, many other more tangible control measures which you can do without making the environment inhospitable. The first thing to do is, ensure that you have good accurate records of non-attendance at work. This not only avoids embarrassment and claims of unfair treatment, but gives you a base for appropriate KPIs and cost measurement.

The next most important measure to take is to ensure that you are doing Return to Work interviews properly. There are three good reasons for this:

  1. To ensure employees are fit for work. Allowing someone to work, who is not safe to themselves, or others, is an unnecessary risk.
  2. To show appropriate concern for the good attendee.
  3. To let the poor attendee know that they have been missed, and what may happen if they are off work again.

Such meetings provide the opportunity to explore ways in which you can help the individual to attend as required, and to discuss ways that they can better manage their own attendance. You may need to stress that it is non-attendance which is of concern, not their honesty. People with good attendance records can be praised for their record, which should reinforce the desired attendance behaviours.

Managing attendance is not easy or simple, but it does require a range of approaches which have to be adapted to fit the individual’s circumstances, and job role.

We will be exploring all of these themes further at our forthcoming course “How to Deal with the Absent Employee” being run in April and May.

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

In the Budget last summer, it was announced that a “Living Wage” will replace the current levels of National Minimum Wage (NMW).

The Government is to introduce a ‘National Living Wage’ premium, on top of the NMW for workers aged 25 and over from 1st April 2016. This means that the minimum wage for workers aged 25 and over will have gone up twice in the last 12 months. On 1st October 2015, the standard adult rate of the NMW increased to £6.70 ﴾from £6.50﴿ and then in April 2016 it will go up again, for those aged 25+, to £7.20. Notably, the National Living Wage will not apply to adult workers aged under 25, and this group will continue to be entitled only to the National Minimum Wage, which is currently £6.70, and will be reviewed again in October 2016.

In future, the Low Pay Commission will make annual recommendations as to the level at which the premium should be set (and the level of the NMW). The Government has made it clear that it intends the living wage, i.e. the NMW combined with the living wage premium, to reach 60% of median earnings by 2020, which should put it at in excess of £9 per hour.

It is admirable that the Government wishes to create a more productive and high paid workforce. They have said they are “determined to move to a higher wage economy”. However, this policy will only deliver higher pay without significant job losses, if it is accompanied by a drive to increase productivity. In low pay sectors, such as retail, hospitality and the care sector, it is all too easy to promote greater productivity as a solution, but this works less well in the service sector. It has been met with mixed reactions from employers, some believing it to be unrealistic and unaffordable, while others maintain that it is fair and attainable.

What you must do:

  • If you have people employed on the NMW, review what you can do to limit the impact.
  • If you have people who are currently paid between the minimum wage and the new living wage, then you also need to calculate the additional cost impact to your organisation.
  • If you employ people on just above the living wage, then consider whether you will remain competitive in your reward strategy.
  • Do not consider trying to avoid payment, as the financial and PR consequences can be substantial.*
  • If applicable, communicate with your staff the impact on their pay, and consult over ways to improve productivity.
  • *Failure to pay the minimum wage may result in both civil liabilities to make payment to workers, and/or criminal penalties. Furthermore, BIS has recently announced a package of measures intended to improve compliance with National Minimum Wage legislation. The current penalty is 100% of the worker’s underpayment. From April 2016, this will increase to 200%. The maximum penalty is £20,000. Furthermore, BIS’s proposed measures include increasing the budget for the enforcement of the minimum wage, and establishing a new HMRC team dedicated to pursuing the most serious cases of employers deliberating not paying, or avoiding paying minimum wage. HMRC can also ‘name and shame’ offenders.

If you are impacted by this change, then it is not too late to start planning for the rise now, and considering how to respond to the challenges it throws up. Some of the options you can take are:

  • Improve productivity by capital investment
  • Get out of unprofitable areas of your business
  • Train your workforce so they can do more
  • Reduce your workforce size by recruitment freeze or redundancy
  • Reduce premium payments for overtime or weekend/shift working
  • Improve employee attendance by good control and good management
  • Improve the quality of your management to get more out of less, which is probably best done by training them
  • Review working hours, so that you are paying people only for the work that is really needed
  • Use innovative strategies to improve quality and improve employee engagement

We are not saying that these options are easy, and some will have employment law and employee relations implications, but doing nothing is not an option, so please speak to your Consultant about taking an active approach.

Our Autumn training course, entitled Improving Workplace Productivity, will be discussing practical steps that Managers can take to get the best out of their employees, by using the three “R”s, namely Reward, Responsibility and Respect.

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

The issue of the UK’s productivity has recently hit the headlines with the release of a report by the Chancellor Fixing Foundations: Creating a more prosperous nation. The plan focused on two key areas: encouraging long-term investment and promoting a ‘dynamic economy’. Some of the key points were higher pay, lower welfare society and a highly skilled workforce. It coincided with the Governor of the Bank of England initiating a debate about the alleged failure of the British economy to become more productive.

Economic Context

The UK’s productivity, (gross domestic product per worker), is currently a fifth lower than the G7 average. What this means more specifically is that while the UK’s economy seems to be recovering with a 2.8% growth rate and the highest employment levels ever recorded, its GDP is lagging seriously behind other developed nations. While employment has consistently increased over the last two years, output per hour is still nearly 2% lower than it was when the recession started in early 2008, and the productivity gap with our major competitors has increased. As a result growth in pay and living standards is also still weak. The Government’s intention to substantially increase and rename the minimum wage will be a major challenge to many employers even if it only affects a small number of staff. The UK’s productivity problems cannot be wholly attributed to the downturn. What we are facing instead is a complex history of underperformance in this area, with many inter-related factors playing their part.

Much of the debate about how to boost the UK’s productivity and competitiveness has focused on big capital investments such as HS2 and a potential third runway for Heathrow and there is, of course, no doubt that infrastructure investment is important. However, investment in the UK’s human capital – the knowledge and skills people have and how effectively these are deployed and put to use in workplaces across the country – is equally critical. So what can employers can do in their own workplaces? In that respect I would agree with an ACAS publication which states that to improve the UK’s productivity, organisations need to rely less on economics textbooks and think more about real life and the role of good employment relations in boosting productivity.

ACAS Report

The publication demonstrates that without attention to work organisation and job design, employees will be unable ‘to deploy the full range of their skills to productive effect or to engage in many forms of workplace innovation’. It also recommends employers to have ‘clear and easily understood workplace policies in key areas of employment relations such as discipline, grievance, equality and absence’, backed up with ‘better communications that put people at their heart’.

ACAS has identified seven levers for workplace productivity. Its comprehensive new report, Productivity: Getting the Best out of People explains how workplaces can unlock their potential to be more productive, through:

  1. Well designed work: jobs and work should be organised in ways that increase efficiency and make the most of people’s skills. The two key ingredients are discretion and autonomy, i.e. having some degree of control over the way jobs are done. Employees should be clear about their job role and have the ability to influence the way their job is done.
  2. Skilled Managers: Managers with the confidence and training to manage and lead effectively. This means being able to motivate, communicate up and down the organisation and handle difficult situations. This is partly about good selection but also needs effective training as not all these skills come naturally. It is also about managing change skilfully.
  3. Managing conflict effectively: systems in place to reduce the likelihood of problems arising and to deal with problems at every stage. Prevention is better than cure as is responding quickly to deal with conflict early. If employers can manage change well then there is likely to be much less resistance and the positive outcomes expected can be met. Good employers encourage informal conflict resolution to find win-win solutions.
  4. Clarity about rights and responsibilities: a working environment where everyone understands their rights and responsibilities. This is not just about complying with the law; good policies reflect organisational culture and values and can have a positive impact on motivation and morale. They reflect what is sometimes called the ‘psychological contract’ at work. Good policies provide the foundation to build expectations and norms of behaviour.
  5. Fairness: employees who feel valued and treated fairly. This is potentially a difficult issue as it can be very subjective and means going beyond the law. It is bound up with employees feeling that their well-being is taken into account which is strongly correlated with job satisfaction, commitment and loyalty.
  6. Strong employee voice: informed employees who can contribute and are listened to. By this they mean good communication either directly via one-to one meetings or team meetings or indirectly via some form of consultation arrangement(s). Effective communications can be particularly beneficial in times of change. For leaders this means listening as much as talking.
  7. High trust: relationships based on trust, with employers sharing information at the earliest opportunity. This is directly related to employee engagement which is essential if employees are going to add discretionary effort. It is key to resolving conflict. Their top tips for building trust are; being open and honest, walking the floor for direct communication and asking people how they would solve problems (then taking appropriate action).

All of the above sounds quite simple and easy but all seven levers are not widely utilised, or, organisations get no more than four of these factors right. Good employee relations means creating an environment which delivers what people want at work. They want to feel good about who they are, what they do and where they work.

Productivity and Workplace Culture

In our experience, performance tends to be better in businesses where there is a focus on higher quality products or services rather than on low cost and where the workplace culture is clearly aligned with the future direction of the business. Investment in workforce training and an intelligent approach to the implementation of ‘smart’ or agile working practices also has a positive impact.
The quality of management and people practices within an organisation, trust and employee engagement can all have an impact on an organisation’s productivity yet they have received very little attention from Government. This is partly due to the fact that such issues fall between the gaps of Government departmental responsibility and thinking but it’s also because they are seen as ‘soft’ issues, best dealt with by individual employers.

Management Skills

One of the big problems faced by employers is managing change and the stress which change and other factors can introduce into the workplace .A report from strategic consultancy Lansons, Britain At Work, confirms that workplace stress and a lack of work-life balance is still a problem for the UK’s ‘over-engaged’ employees.

The study, consisting of two online surveys of over 2,000 UK workers, reveals that a quarter of those surveyed say they are apathetic about their jobs. This finding contrasts with the stories of the over-worked workforce we have become accustomed to, but could explain some of the reasons for the UK’s low productivity.

It appears that many of us are either too engaged, leading to burnout and stress, or not engaged enough, leading to apathy and low productivity. While 63% report positive relationships with their Line Managers, it is true to say that communication between employees and Managers could still be better.

When 44% of workers reported feeling that their Manager does not actively communicate openly and honestly with them, and 40% feel that their achievements are not recognised, we have a problem. It means that we ought to recruit Managers with good social, interpersonal skills who are capable of managing and building relationships. Ultimately this is the responsibility of business leaders in relation to recruitment, training and setting a good example. We need to invest in the right management skills if we are to see any dramatic improvements in the UK’s productivity.

Management Improvement

Managing the employment relationship rests heavily on the shoulders of Line Managers, but their competence in this area is seriously neglected. Government and indeed employers do not invest much in the undervalued area of soft skills or other management development and this is a mistake. There are numerous things they can do to help create the right economic and operating conditions for business’s productivity rates to thrive. However, we should not however rely on Government and in any event employers large or small should focus on productivity as key to the future. We would advocate the following:

  • Communicate well and regularly with your workforce.
  • Build trust and confidence based on mutual respect.
  • Use your employees to help boost productivity.
  • Focus on what is right rather than what you can get away with.
  • Educate your workforce about the market you work in and how they can impact on your business success.

The Three R’s

An alternative way of looking at the issue is to go back to basics with the three R’s.

Reward goes well beyond monetary rewards; which is just one way of showing gratitude for good work. Reward your people as well as you can afford and this will help build engagement and retain a happy, well-motivated workforce. .Recognition in any appropriate form is equally important in terms of setting a positive culture and building morale.

Responsibility means showing your employees that you trust them by giving them responsibilities that empower them and that allow them to grow and feel an important part of the organisation. Encourage them to gain new skills, competencies and capacities by internal recruitment if possible and by promoting employees at appropriate times.

Respect is essential to engagement. Employees need to know they are respected as people and that their contributions are appreciated. If you treat their work lightly or fail to acknowledge them they will either leave or switch off. This does not mean that their behaviours or output is always respected-but the respect you hold for that individual and their unique talents should always be clear.

Successful employers do not plan their business operations without a sound budget and financial plan so the same approach should be adopted for another important asset, its people. Having a plan to achieve positive employee relations is we believe as important as having a sound financial plan. Putting the employee relationship at the top of your list of priorities will allow you to improve productivity and create a competitive advantage.

Our annual training programme always includes soft skills people management training and for clients some places are free and yet many clients fail to send any one on the courses. When we ask why we are usually told that staff cannot be spared. Taking such a short term view to management development will never help an organisation to grow in the long term and is likely to have a detrimental effect on productivity as well.

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

Does the time that workers (who are not assigned to a fixed or habitual place of work) spend travelling from home to their first customer, and from the last customer back to their homes, count as ‘working time’ for the purposes of the Working Time Directive? According to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the case of Federación de Servicios Privados del sindicato Comisiones Obreras v Tyco, it does count as working time.

According to the ECJ, there are three aspects to ‘working time’: being (1) at the workplace; (2) at the disposal of the employer; and (3) engaged in work duties. For ‘peripatetic’ workers, travelling is an integral part of their job because it is all part of providing services to their customers.

For peripatetic workers, aspect (1) was fulfilled because travelling is an integral part of the job, such that the workplace cannot only be considered as performing work at clients’ premises; aspect (2) was fulfilled because routes and destinations are determined by the employer who could at any point modify the instruction; and aspect (3) was fulfilled because, again, travelling is integral to the peripatetic work.

This means that it should be regarded as part of their working activities, and hence their working hours. Working time’ and ‘rest time’ are mutually exclusive concepts and there can be no ‘grey periods’.

The workers in this case are Spanish security equipment engineers looking after particular parts of Spain. They have company vehicles and start and finish most days from home. They are in contact with their employer by mobile phone, and are not generally required to travel to an office or a central location, save for the weekly purpose of collecting tools and materials. Their employer counted their working hours from the time of arriving at their first customer to the time they left their last customer, and this is what their workers have challenged through the court system.

Tyco argued that their travelling time was a “rest period” rather than working time because they were not carrying out any installations or maintenance during those periods. The CJEU disagreed, stating that such an argument “would distort that concept and jeopardise the objective of protecting the safety and health of workers” and that it was working time.

Why does this matter to employers in the UK?

The answer is that our courts will have to apply the judgment to people like sales representatives, maintenance technicians, domiciliary care workers, and, arguably to occasional drivers like Managers or people going on training courses. Travel to work is not working time unless it is actually part of the work activity, so it will not impact on everyone. It is unlikely that a travelling worker’s travel will count where, at the start and end of the day, they visit a central premises to pick up a vehicle or supplies.

It could be a potentially very difficult judgment for employers, many of whom adopt the ‘Spanish approach’ and discount some, or all, travel to and from customers, at the start and end of the working day. It will impact on employers in at least three ways:

  1. Employers will have to ensure that they comply with the Working Time Regulations, so this may well increase working hours within, or above the ’48 hour rule’.
  2. Employees, who are on minimum wage or just above, will find it easier to claim that their actual average hourly rate is below the Minimum Wage, and therefore claim a pay rise, to ensure they are paid at least the minimum wage for the hours that they are working.
  3. Some employees will take the view that if they are ‘working’ extra hours that they should be paid extra for these hours.

It is easy to say that this judgment only defines working time, but less easy to frame a response to the claim for extra pay suggested above. Much will depend on affordability, but few employers would find it easy to pass on, or absorb, such an additional cost. The good news is that, the ECJ rejected the UK Government’s argument that this conclusion would lead to an inevitable increase in costs for the employer. The ECJ pointed out that the employer remained free to determine the remuneration for travelling time and that, save in the special case of paid annual leave, the Directive does not apply to the remuneration of workers. Thus, the method of remuneration would be left to the relevant provisions of national law. In other words, it should not impact on pay. We would advise:

  • Do not panic.
  • Consider how to change your recording of working time, and use of opt-outs.
  • Consider fitting trackers to vehicles, if you think the judgment will encourage abuse.
  • Review whether low paid staff might have a strong basis for claiming they are being paid less than the minimum wage.
  • Prepare answers for employees who tell you this decision means you must pay them more money.

We would generally not have recommended that travel to first job did not count for working time purposes in any event. Our clients who employ people in this way have a variety of practices in relation to payment; some of whom pay for the time they leave home and others from the time of their first job. Others do not pay them for the allocated minutes, being the equivalent of what would otherwise have been their normal journey time from office/depot to work, and the same logic at the end of the day. This can be similar to any formula agreed with the HMRC regarding an initial amount of mileage cannot be claimed in lieu of home to work. We would be very concerned if this were more than one hour each way, other than if someone was required to work away on an occasional basis. We are very aware that our clients all have different needs and histories, and that whatever is paid has to be affordable!

If this case is worrying you despite what we have said above, please do not hesitate to contact our Consultants who would be pleased to assist.

Introduction

The paper counterpart to the UK driving licence became obsolete from June 2015. The change is reported to be saving the DVLA £5m a year in reduced administrative costs. What will this really mean to employers who need to validate licences for staff that undertake work-related driving?

Employers can no longer take a copy of an employee’s licence, or check it to see whether the driver has any points, unless they still have the pre-1998 paper licence which is still valid. Information regarding any convictions will now only be held on the DVLA computer. Visual checks were never an accurate or secure way of verifying a licence, because anyone intent on fraud would find it fairly easy to obtain a duplicate licence to show their employers. Visual checks were also a big drain on internal resources, especially for firms with large fleets.

Employees who don’t have a photo-card licence, and only hold pre-1998 paper driving licences, which were before the photo-card was introduced, are unaffected as those paper licences will remain valid, so should not be destroyed. It would, however, be administratively difficult to do two sorts of checks, and given the unreliability of such paper copies, it would be wise to only do online checks in future.

Context

There are around one million drivers in the UK who are within 3 points, or one conviction, of a driving ban. As an employer, it is essential that you are not asking employees to drive who could be unlicensed. It is also thought that about 2% of people driving do not have a valid driving licence.

Some employers believe that, providing they comply with the relevant road traffic legislation – for example, their vehicles have valid MOT certificates and their employees have a valid driving licence – this is enough to ensure the safety of their employees while driving for work. Others think that unless they employ lorry or coach drivers, driving is not really a work issue; nothing could be further from the truth. Over half of all cars used on business are expected to suffer some form of damage each year. A third of road traffic accidents involve persons at work, and every year there are 14,000 road deaths and serious injuries involving people at work.

Many crashes are caused by drivers in poor health, with tiredness and poor eyesight being amongst the most common factor. Driving for work is probably the most dangerous of work activities, and one that must be carefully considered and dealt with.

Employers have legal and financial responsibilities to manage driving activities properly, and take measures to keep workers safe. For every £1 recovered through insurance, between £8 and £36 may be lost via uninsured costs.

Employer Actions

Employers must risk assess their driving for work activities, and manage those risks effectively within a safety management system. Employers have an explicit duty of care to all road users while their employees are driving on their business.

Work-related road safety must be incorporated into an organisation’s safety management system, and dealt with in the same way that all work-related risks are managed. The essential starting point is to establish a clear policy for managing work-related road safety. Such a policy must:

  • be genuinely supported by senior personnel
  • set out clear responsibilities and roles for all those involved
  • describe the procedures and systems that need to be followed
  • state the arrangements in place for monitoring compliance
  • set out the arrangements in place for monitoring the effectiveness of the policy

Policy is important, but even more important is culture. Road safety requires a culture where drivers feel they can challenge their Line Manager if they are being asked to increase their risk on the road while working, whether this is being encouraged to speed or, to answer their mobile phone while driving. Many employers assume, wrongly, that if a person has a valid driving license this is sufficient. Incorrectly operating a vehicle can, and regularly does, have fatal consequences and should this happen whilst at work, the employer could be liable.

Some of that culture will be reflected in the training given:

  • when they join the company; and
  • when they are exposed to new, or increased risks in the workplace;

Where possible, employers should tailor training to the worker’s individual needs. The most effective way is to offer additional driver training, either run by a competent in-house trainer, or an outside external driver assessor/training organisation. You need to keep training records for each driver.

Licences Again

In the event of a road traffic fatality involving an employee without a valid licence, the employer would need to show adequate policies and procedures to try to prevent such an occurrence.

How to make licence checks:

  • Ask your employees’ permission to go on the DVLA website to check their details. This means each driver has to register on the DVLA website and go to the View/Share Driver Record web page to create a one-time use consent code. By providing their employer with this one-off PIN number code is providing e-consent.
  • The employee will need to have their own personal details to hand in order to verify their I.D. It is proposed that the online ID verification is soon going to be made more thorough, requiring the employee to have details of their passport number and evidence of utility bills to prove who they are.
  • This will present a problem if employees do not have their own computer, or method of online access. We have been advised that the DVLA are checking IP addresses to make sure that no one is pretending to be someone they are not. It is unlawful to do these checks without their consent.
  • The PIN number lasts only for 21 days (since 10th July 2015) and can only be used once, so if the time scale expires, or you need to check their licence regularly, you will need to ask the employee to go online and give you a new PIN number each time.
  • An employee can withdraw their consent to the checks if the employer does not have a valid reason, i.e. they are not undertaking work-related driving.
  • You will also need to build up your own management system for recording, checking and auditing. This is particularly important if any employee has a high level of points on their licence, which may require regular monitoring. It has been suggested that if you have more than 10 drivers, then it may be more economical to outsource. This figure seems low but actually there is a lot to building up the necessary checking and auditing system in-house.
  • Alternatively, the administration involved means it can make more sense to outsource the work to one of the many businesses who will do this for you. Using an outside service to automate licence checking, and view the results online, may well cost less than in-house administration and offers greater scrutiny, directly against the DVLA data, so you can be absolutely sure of verifying your employee’s entitlement to drive.
  • Some outsourced companies are able to provide their clients with real time alerts, which mean that you are told immediately about penalty codes issued to your drivers. This real time later system is limited currently to only a few organisations, who have negotiated this facility directly with the DVLA.

However online licence checking helps you:

  • Identify ‘at risk’ drivers. Codes to pay particular attention to are:o SP codes are speeding penalties
    o CD codes are to do with driving without due care and attention
    o CU80 is lack of control of a vehicle, usually using a mobile phone
    o DR codes are drink-related
    o DD codes are reckless or dangerous driving
    o TT99 penalty code signifies a “totting up” procedure of 12 penalty points or more within 3 years, and indicates that the driver is liable to be disqualified
  • Reduce the accident rate by removing vehicle abuse committed by unqualified drivers
  • Save time by minimising manual intervention
  • Reduces administration through accurate, easily accessible online information about drivers’ status

Conclusion

Employers should also implement vehicle spot checks, or check service and MOT history of their ‘grey fleet’. Whatever you do, we must stress the importance of making sure that employees are familiar with work-related driving employment policies, found in the Handbooks we put together for clients. You need to document the risk factors associated with driving for work, to ensure that safety remains in the forefront of your employee’s minds.

If you have a lot of work-related drivers, then the legal obligations are clear and, it is now time to decide what type of systems you develop to undertake these important driving checks. I have repeatedly said that driving is the riskiest activity you will ever undertake during the course of your work. Protect your employees, and protect your organisation by taking this matter seriously.

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

For many employers employing young people seems just a bit tricky because they “do not know much” and there are legal restrictions which make it seems more problematic. In Personnel Today and Learndirect’s research into recruiting young people, almost nine in 10 employers said they felt school leavers were not ready for the world of work at 16, and 70% had no plans to take a young person on straight from school. We do not share these fears and believe employers should be employing young people. There are legal obligations but they are not unduly onerous to employers who are already taking their obligations to their employees seriously.

Definitions

A young person is under eighteen years old and over school leaving age.

For the purposes of this article we are not talking of children who are below school leaving age. The rules on employing children are very strict and there are also local authority bylaws to be aware of as well which usually involve employers completing forms which get sent to the local authority for approval, prior to ‘employing’ children. The exception to this being if an employer is providing work experience through schools.

Starters

Under health and safety law, every employer must ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and safety of all their employees, irrespective of age. As part of this, there are certain considerations that need to be made for young people.

The law recognises that young people at work may be at particular risk because of their:

  • possible physical and psychological immaturity;
  • lack of awareness of the risks involved in the work they may be asked to do;
  • ignorance of risks associated with plant, equipment and substances;
  • eagerness to impress or to please; and
  • tendency to high spirits;

Prohibitions

Except where it is necessary for their training and where they are supervised by a competent person and where the risk will be reduced to the lowest level reasonably practicable, young people are prohibited from doing work which:

  • is beyond their physical capacity;
  • could expose them to toxic carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic agents, or anything which can chronically affect human health;
  • could expose them to harmful radiation;
  • involves accident risks which cannot be recognised by young persons; and which involves; and
  • risks to health due to extreme heat or cold, noise or vibration;

To determine whether unacceptable risks are present from these sources, employers must take account of the results of risk assessment, making sure it takes into account a young person’s attributes and limitations. Risks have to be assessed before young people start work. Where they are under the minimum school leaving age, there is a requirement to provide information on risks and control measures to parents/ guardians before work starts. Workers between school age and 18 may only be employed in certain dangerous environments if it is necessary for their training, provided they are supervised, and if the risks are minimised.

Induction

Training of young people takes a bit more planning and implementation because most young people lack the work experience that older workers possess. The important thing to remember is that all the things we take for granted at work will be new to them, so do not assume that they know what we know.

Pay

Workers above school age but below 18 are entitled to the minimum wage of £3.79 per hour up to the end of September 2015 when it will increase to £3.87. The Apprentice wage is currently £2.73 per hour but will increase to £3.30 on 1st October.

Hours of Work

A young worker cannot usually be made to work more than eight hours per day or 40 hours per week. A daily rest break should be provided of not less than 12 hours in each 24-hour period during which the young worker works for his or her employer, which could be interrupted where the periods of work are split up over the day or are of short duration. A rest break for the young worker should be given of at least 30 minutes after 4.5 hours work, which shall be consecutive if possible, and the worker is entitled to spend it away from his or her workstation if applicable. They are entitled to a weekly rest period of 48 hours in every seven-day period, which could be interrupted where the periods of work are split up over the day or are of short duration and may be reduced to not less than 36 hours where this can be justified by technical or organisational reasons. Young workers cannot easily do night work.

Time Off

Since 1999, young employees who are eligible have been entitled to reasonable paid time off, for study or training purposes. This applies to employees:

  • Who are aged 16 or 17 and who left school or college with few, if any, qualifications are entitled to reasonable paid time off for study or training to get NVQ Level 2 or specified equivalents.
  • Who are 18, and who had already begun their study or training with another employer, and who subsequently changed jobs. In this situation, the young person will be entitled to complete their course or study or reach the age of 19.

These rights apply where the 16 or 17 year old worker in question has not reached the prescribed standard of education or training and is not receiving full time secondary or further education. The Regulations put no figure on how much time off would be considered reasonable, but a government guide suggests that one day per week would be reasonable.

Problems – Grievances & Discipline

Unless contractually entitled, no employees have a statutory right to be accompanied by a family member at a disciplinary or grievance hearing, unless the family member is a work colleague or trade union official, in which case he or she will be a permissible companion, under the statutory right to be accompanied. However, there is nothing to prevent an employer from allowing a worker to be accompanied by a family member and it may well be appropriate to allow this in the case of young people.

Guidance

The following steps may help to create a suitable working environment for young people and help demonstrate compliance with safeguarding duties:

  • Consider ensuring young people have “buddies” and/or mentors when they join so they can ask questions.
  • Ensure that any young people are managed by a suitably trained manager, and that a senior manager has overall responsibility.
  • Appoint a Manager to oversee the supervision of young people in the workplace, and arrange training for relevant members of staff.

Conclusions

Fear of red tape and confusion around funding means many businesses fail to recognise the benefits of recruiting young people, when in fact they can help push growth. With greater clarity around how to make the most of youngsters, many more organisations could be using them as a way to boost productivity now and in the future.

Young people, although often perceived to lack the necessary attitudes, behaviours and communication skills for the workplace, can be a real asset to an employer. Taking on a young person offers businesses an opportunity to develop a talent pipeline for the future, if the recruitment and development of that person is managed correctly.

Our Consultant would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

The return of a Conservative Government without any sort of coalition should produce much more certainty about the future of employment law, over the next five years, than most of us were expecting. Having said that, the Conservative Party manifesto and election pledges do look to be the least ‘exciting’ of the proposals put forward by the other major parties, so maybe we will get some stability. It is difficult to see any of their plans being urgent, although it is possible that their plans for Trade Unions and Strikes may be prioritised if they are expecting some degree of ‘industrial unrest’, particularly in Scotland or on the railways. The new Business Secretary (see below) has said that this will be a priority.

Trade Unions/Strikes

The Conservatives pledge to – “protect you from disruptive and undemocratic strike action” in essential services, by requiring at least 50% turnout at the ballot and the support of 40% of those voting, to legitimise strike action. They will repeal the ban on using agency staff to cover for striking workers and tackle intimidation of non-striking workers.

Apprenticeships/Training

They hope to boost apprenticeships by 3 million over the next five years, to be paid for by benefit cuts. They also promise to use fines imposed on banks involved in rigging interest rates. This windfall will be used to “train young people and get them off the dole and in to work”.

Equality

The Government plans to increase opportunities for the disabled in the workplace by taking steps to help those suffering from long term, but treatable conditions, back into work. They intend to work for full gender equality, including enforcing the requirement that companies, with 250 or more employees, publish gender pay statistics, i.e. the difference between the average pay of male and female employees. They may pursue the matter of adding maternity pay for self-employed mothers. They are already committed to cap public sector redundancy payments at £95,000.

Pay

The Conservative manifesto commits the Government to be “on course for a minimum wage of over £8 per hour by the end of the decade”. It also pledged support for the living wage (2014 – London £9:15 and elsewhere £7:85) and encouraged businesses to pay it, when they can afford it. They are also likely to take steps to eradicate abuse of workers, such as non-payment of the National Minimum Wage.

Casual Workers

There is likely to be a ban on exclusivity provisions in zero-hours contracts, as well as enhanced information and guidance to improve transparency over terms. They also have promised measures to tackle illegal working and exploitation of migrant workers. This will involve implementing the Modern Slavery Act, requiring businesses to report on steps taken to be ‘slavery and trafficking free’, including in supply chains.

Volunteering Leave

A new policy promising employees a ‘volunteering leave’ entitlement will present challenges for larger employers. Public sector employers and companies with more than 250 employees will be required to give employees up to three paid days off a year to do voluntary work.

Tribunals

There will be no change to the Tribunal system (keep the current fee structure in place). This is, however, still subject to on-going litigation, so change may be forced on them.

Europe

Of far greater significance to employment law (and much else) is the promise to hold an EU in/out referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU by the end of 2017. Any re-negotiation of the UK’s terms of membership, and any withdrawal from the EU, has the potential for great upheaval in employment law, given the impact of EU law on employment rights in the UK.

Implementation

10 Downing Street has announced the Ministers filling the roles of relevance to employment matters. They are:

Employment Minister: Priti Patel

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills: Sajid Javid

Secretary of State for Justice: Michael Gove

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.

When I talk health & safety with clients, I invariably comment that people who work in offices are at low risk, which is true when we are talking about safety, but the same cannot be said when we are discussing peoples’ health. Why? There are hidden dangers from having a sedentary job; such as heart disease, type II diabetes, cancers and poor mental health; which have all been linked to being inactive at work, even for those that class themselves as fit. Prolonged sitting is thought to slow the metabolism and affect the way the body controls sugar levels, blood pressure and the breakdown of fat.

A survey of 2,000 office workers, generated from the partnership between Get Britain Standing and the British Heart Foundation (BHF) charity, suggested:

  • 45% of women and 37% of men spend less than 30 minutes of their working day up on their feet;
  • more than half regularly eat their lunch at their desk, which is also known not to be particularly hygienic given the fact that desks are not cleaned that much;
  • 78% office workers felt they spent too much time sitting down; and
  • nearly two-thirds were worried sitting at work was having a negative impact on their health;

It has been estimated that it is possible to lose 5.2 lbs (2.4 kg) by standing up for an extra 30 minutes a day for a year. Put another way, Get Britain Standing says standing burns an extra 50 calories per hour than being seated. Other ideas include using the stairs instead of a lift, eating lunch away from your desk, taking a break from your computer every 30 minutes, and walking to a colleague’s desk rather than phoning or emailing them.

As manual jobs continue to reduce and are mechanised, the amount of physical activity most of us get at work is minimal, so just moving around at little bit more, even just standing up, can make a big difference to calories burned and how alert, creative and productive we are.

The joint campaign put forward a range of ideas that we can consider, and my personal favourites are:

  • Take regular breaks from your computer, stand up, stretch and walk around.
  • Make phone calls standing up.
  • Use the stairs.
  • Have standing or walking meetings.
  • Get everyone to move around with each new agenda item.
  • Ban internal emails. Everyone must walk to colleagues to discuss work. Be prepared that some people may have aged – depending on how long you’ve left it.
  • Organise a lunchtime walk.

More recently, in June of this year, a new study, the first to give expert guidance of this kind in the UK, has gone further stating that the health risks of too much sitting down at work and sedentary living in general could well be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality.

The report goes on to recommend that office workers should be on their feet for a minimum of two hours a day, according to new health guidelines commissioned by Public Health England (PHE). This daily quota should increase to four hours a day, breaking up prolonged periods of sitting with standing-based work and regular walkabouts.

Authors of the report highlight sedentary behaviour in the UK accounts for 60% of people’s waking hours. It comes as a growing body of evidence links prolonged periods of physical inactivity with a heightened risk of serious illness and premature death. Indeed, the report said: “For those working in offices, 65%-75% of their working hours are spent sitting, of which more than 50% is accumulated in prolonged periods of sustained sitting.”

Professor John Buckley, lead author of the new guidance is quoted as saying “What may be most shocking is that irrespective of your level of physical activity, prolonged sedentary working leads to a significant increase in the risk of heart disease, diabetes, obesity, certain cancers, depression, muscle and joint problems.”

The study also suggests it makes good business sense by improving productivity through reducing sickness, if proper staff breaks are encouraged, and people are encouraged to stand and move around, as well as having workplaces designed to allow people to work more easily, either at their desk or other part of the office, whilst standing up. They also suggest bosses should encourage staff to cut down on drinking and smoking, eat a healthy diet, find ways to alleviate stress and warn their workers about the dangers of sitting down all day.

In comparison with Scandinavia, where 90% of office workers now have access to sit-stand work stations, only 1% of British workers have this choice according to the study. The concept of standing whilst working is not, however, new. Several well-known figures are been known to have worked standing up, including former Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who would often work on his book manuscripts at an upright desk, as did the US founding father Benjamin Franklin. Virginia Woolf also wrote novels whilst standing at a special high desk.

When our Managing Director last year purchased an adjustable desk so that he can either sit at it or work standing up, I was intrigued. However, now that I know that I could possibly lose weight using such a desk, and I could be helping myself to reduce future health problems, I am much more interested. It is not uncommon that when clients ring my mobile, I will use that as an excuse to get up and walk about, so if you start to hear a kettle in the background you will know that I have also taken some exercise and walked downstairs to make myself a mug of tea as well, in an effort to decrease my sedentary lifestyle!!!

Our Consultants would be pleased to advise you on any element of the issues arising from this newsletter.