Now that we have had a taste of summer over the last week, and the traditional holiday season is upon us, so we thought we would go over the basic rules around holiday and annual leave. It’s been a while since we touched on this subject in the blog but staff holiday is one of the most consistent subjects we give advice about on the helpline, so perhaps you can bookmark this page for future reference.

There is a raft of legislation that governs how you must deal with staff holidays, but staff morale and productivity are equally compelling reasons to get policies and procedures correct and to do the right thing. Keeping on top of your staff’s holiday bookings, especially as we enter the more popular school holiday period, will help to avoid clashes or overlap of holidays, and also you to monitor whether staff absences leave any skills shortages in the business.

Statutory holiday, the legal minimum that employees, including part-time and most agency and free-lance workers, are entitled to, is 5.6 weeks per year. That equates to 20 days annual leave plus eight days for public holidays. We’ve had extra public holidays in the last couple of years for the Queen’s funeral and the King’s Coronation, but these are discretionary.

You can choose how you describe holiday entitlement in your staff handbook or employment contracts as either 20 days plus 8 public holidays, OR as 28 days including public holidays. We recommend the latter as it generally makes it easier to calculate holidays, especially for part-time workers, but also because in many industries such as hospitality, retail, leisure and care, employees are required to work on public holidays. By rolling annual leave entitlement up into a single figure, workers in these industries won’t miss out on any holiday.

Part time workers get a pro-rata amount of holiday measured against a standard full-time employee. For example, an employee who only works three days per week would get three fifths of the statutory amount; so 16.8 days, which we would round up to 17. You cannot round down. Note that a part time worker who worked, say, 10.00am to 2.00pm five days a week would still get the full 28 days because the time they would be absent would only be counted against their part time hours.

An anomaly of employees who work compressed hours, eg, the hours of a five day week worked in just four days, is that their annual leave seems to be reduced. In reality, their holiday is compressed also. As in the above example, someone who worked a standard 37.5 hours but over four days, taking Fridays off, would only get 22.4 days statutory leave, but these would only need to be taken against Mondays to Thursdays because the Fridays wouldn’t count.

You holiday year, the annual cycle upon which you calculate holiday, can begin at any time but it can be complicated to change. Some companies choose a standard calendar year whilst others align it with their financial year. This can also cause complications if this is around March/April owing to the variable dates that Easter falls meaning, strictly speaking, a company could have two or no Easters in the same holiday year and therefore two extra or two less public holidays in Good Friday and Easter Monday.

Employers are permitted to dictate to employees when they must take their holiday provided they give adequate notice. This must be at least twice the period of leave. So, if an employer wanted an employee to take a particular week as holiday, they would need to give them at least two weeks notice.

The period between Christmas and New Year is a good example of when many companies might insist that employees reserve some of their holiday allocation. If it happens every year, we would expect to see it stated in the company staff handbook. Some factories still operate shutdown periods two or three times a year, effectively dictating exactly when staff must take their holiday; although high absence rates at other times of the year can prove to be an issue under such conditions.

Employees should always confirm their holiday time with work before booking holidays, flights etc. as employers are not obliged to give employees specific dates if they have good reason not to; resources for a new contract are required for example. We would say though that employers should have clear and fair rules around holiday bookings amongst their teams. Taking terms to have preference when booking holiday will probably see as more diplomatic than a simple first-come first served basis. This is especially true if a high proportion of your workforce have school age children and are restricted or confined by term times.

Annual leave entitlement can be enhanced but not reduced below the statutory amount. We usually see extra leave granted as a reward for long service so an extra day or day might be given after working for a company for five years.

Finally, it is the employer’s responsibility to ensure that all employees take their annual leave, dictating when it must be taken inf necessary. It is not permitted to carry statutory leave into the following year. This was permitted during Covid, predominantly designed to benefit NHS staff, but it has since been rescinded.

Specific holiday entitlement is a contractual term and so should be included in everyone’s contract of employment. We would normally expect to see the rules for requesting and taking holiday in the staff handbook. When an employee leaves, they should be paid for any holiday they have accrued but not taken, and the employer is within their rights to withhold from final pay, any time the employee has taken off but not accrued in that holiday year.

This covers the essential rules of annual leave but there will always be a nuanced question about specific individuals so we’re here to help on 01452 331331 or by email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Do you want to upskill your managers and get money back?

Is your company based in Worcestershire or do you have employees that live in Worcestershire? If you do, then you might be eligible for the SkillsBoost Worcestershire programme. This is a new funding scheme to help organisations with the costs of upskilling and training your employees.

Your business can upskill its employees for up to £12,000 and claim 50% of the costs back (up to £6000) from the SkillsBoost programme.

SkillsBoost is funded via the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, distributed via all the District Councils within Worcestershire and delivered in partnership between Worcestershire Growth Hub and Worcestershire County Council.

Help your employees to drive business growth:

• For businesses based outside of Worcestershire, the employee must live in either Bromsgrove, Worcester City, or Wyre Forest
• For businesses based in Malvern or Wychavon, the employee can live anywhere
• For businesses based in Bromsgrove, Redditch, Worcester City or Wyre Forest, the employee must live in Worcestershire 
• The grant supports accredited, non accredited and bespoke training 
• All businesses of any size is eligible 
• No one individual employee can have more than a £1500 funding grant 
• The business maximum grant is £6000
• Available for one year between 1st April 2024 - 31st March 2025. Please note that training can start after 31st March 2025 but needs to be invoiced before 31st March 2025. 

What training can you undertake?

This exciting funding programme does not exclude any type of people management or soft skills training. Here is a flavour of what your team can do:

Name *

Please, contact me via *

Phone

Email

Other

Email address *

Phone Number *

+1

AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAmerican SamoaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBoliviaBonaireBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCook IslandsCosta RicaCote d'IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDemocratic Republic of the CongoDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuamGuatemalaGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedoniaMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorwayOmanPakistanPalauPalestinian TerritoryPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalPuerto RicoQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRwandaSabaSaint HelenaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint EustatiusSlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuelaVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishVirgin Islands, U.S.Wallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabwe

Comments *

Please add any comments

hCaptcha security *

Request Callback

First Name

 "The training was delivered in a good working environment. There were opportunities for my team to ask questions and have insightful discussion. My team were able to apply their new knowledge within their role immediately" - HR Manager, Roxel Propulsion Systems 

Get in touch today to upskill your team and get money back. Email info@hrchampions.co.uk or call 01452 331331.

By now, you will know that an accidental manager is someone promoted to a management position without necessarily having good leadership skills.

With the General Election coming up, it’s worth noticing the parallels of accidental managers within the private and public sector.

Employees find themselves promoted into a management role more for their technical strength in their junior position rather than their people management abilities. More importantly, they are now people managers who do not have the required skill set nor have received training to develop their people management skills. The Chartered Management Institute believe that some 2.4 million of 3.4 million managers are ‘accidental managers’. This means that 70% of managers are then let loose on the workforce.

Of course, accidental managers can harm productivity, employee engagement and create a toxic workplace.

However, what is the true financial cost of having accidental managers in the workplace?

Employee Retention Costs
When employees feel inadequately supported or led, they are more likely to seek opportunities elsewhere. Ineffective leadership creates dissatisfaction amongst employees. Accidental managers may struggle to provide the essentials of leadership i.e. coaching, direction and effective communication resulting in disengagement and attrition. For the business, replacing an employee can cost between six to nine months of their salary. According to PwC, 1 in 5 employees are job searching. Take a team of 10. By not training accidental managers, a business risks wasting two employee’s salary for six months trying to replace them.

The Cost of Communication
Accidental managers often lack the communication skills necessary to convey expectations, provide feedback and resolve conflict effectively. As a result, miscommunication and misunderstanding become common leading to decreased productivity and morale. According to a Linkedin report, UK companies spend 17 hours per week clarifying communication. That means that half the working week is wasted on trying to communicate effectively rather than being spent on business output. Projects are slow, deadlines are missed, and frustration increases due to accidental managers not having the confidence to communicate.

Productivity Costs Engagement
Accidental managers create uncertainty and inefficiency which impacts on the team achieving their goals. Without clear direction and support, employees are unsure of their roles, how to prioritise and the business vision. Gallup states that organisations with highly engaged employees are 17% more productive. Ultimately, that would create a 17% increase on the company’s bottom line at the end of the year. Accidental managers need to receive training on increasing their confident to inspire and motivate the team.

The Lack of Leadership Cost
Leadership goes beyond simply overseeing tasks. It entails inspiring, motivating and empowering teams to achieve success. Accidental managers, lacking in essential leadership skills, may struggle to direct, coach and support the team. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), poor leadership costs UK businesses £84 billion annually. This is manifested in employee attrition, low customer satisfaction and a lack of innovation.

The Cost of Mental Health
Accidental managers lacking fundamental leadership skills can create a toxic work environment characterised by stress, anxiety and low morale amongst the team. Employees may feel undervalued and unsupported leading to increased unexplained absenteeism, burnout and a mentally unhealthy team. According to Mind, poor mental health can cost UK businesses £1,300 per employee per year. The combination of sickness absence, low productivity and low morale manifests into serious financial implications for a business.

The commercial cost of accidental managers within a business is substantial. Recognising the signs of accidental management and investing in leadership development are essential to mitigating these costs. By spending a little now, you save a lot in the future. Employee engagement, productivity and innovation dictates a business’ success.

If you are conscious of accidental managers within your business, come along to our free one-hour seminar on Thursday 27th June via Zoom where we will discuss the solutions for identifying and overcoming the accidental manager trap. Click here to book your free place.

And, once you have attended the seminar, you will no doubt identify accidental managers within your business, book them on to our ‘First Time Manager’ workshop. This one-day course provides the essential leadership skills including communication and confidence to all accidental managers. Click here to find out more.

Whether it be accidental managers, employment law following the general election or a burning HR question, we are here to help and guide you. Give us a call on 01452 331331 or send an email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The Liberal Democrat Launched their manifesto on Monday this week. Often considered the middle ground of politics, it’s probably fair to say that in terms of employers and business, their manifesto lives up to that same status with what we would consider to be some pluses and some minuses. Whilst they admit they are unlikely to win a General Election, it’s worth paying attention to their manifesto as they will be in a position of influence should they regain the third political party standing as they predict.

We’re pleased to see some suggested reforms to the apprenticeship levy and SSP payments for small businesses but some of the proposed changed around zero hours contracts might be more than some businesses can bear. Below we’ve pulled apart these and other controversial recommendations.

Replacing the apprenticeship levy with a broader and more flexible skills and training levy: A big thumbs up from us for this one. The apprenticeship levy is currently only paid by businesses with an annual payroll of over £3million. It is refunded to employers but only if it is spent on apprenticeships, which is over restrictive and means employees who just need some general training could be missing out. If the underlying aim is to improve employee skills, it makes far more sense to give more freedom on how the money is spent, providing it is in some form of training.

Also note that the way the levy is set up, employers with less than a £3million payroll currently get relief from the levy; so don’t be surprised if the relief threshold is reduced at some stage and employers with payrolls of £2million and eventually less are required to pay it.

Boosting the take-up of apprenticeships, by guaranteeing they are paid at least the National Minimum Wage: Whilst this move would undoubtedly make apprenticeships more attractive to those taking them, meeting the minimum wage will make them less attractive to employers as they would be paying the same as any other worker on minimum wage but would have the restrictions and obligations that apprenticeships bring. The jury is still out on this one.

Creating new Lifelong Skills Grants for adults to spend on education and training throughout their lives: We like the sound of this but there’s pretty much zero details that we could see in the manifesto.

Modernise employment rights to make them fit for the age of the ‘gig economy’: We’ve spoken about the Gig Economy a lot in the past and how it needs some proper attention. Law makers have tended to move too slowly to keep up with the way this type of worker has evolved. Some proper guidelines for employers and workers alike would be welcome.

Setting a 20% higher minimum wage for people on zero-hour contracts: Zero hours contracts are being targeted by both the Lib Dems and Labour, the latter pretty much categorising them as ‘evil’. No-one has looked at them from the employees point of view as for some, people Zero hours is a perfect solution and banning them would cause more problems than they solve. With a 20% uplift on minimum wage, I suspect people would be queueing up to sign a Zero hours contract. Not sure they’ve thought this one through.

Shifting the burden of proof in employment tribunals regarding employment status from individual to employer: We’re not sure what exactly they mean by this but quite frankly we already waste enough time on tribunal applications that don’t stand much chance of being won and only submitted to cause more noise and nuisance. Employers don’t need any more hassle in this department.

Expand parental leave and pay, including making them day-one rights: We understand the sentiment here but this would open leave the system open to abuse as individuals could try to get a job solely to benefit from parental pay.

Align the Statutory Sick Pay rate with the National Minimum Wage: As the burden of SSP is carried by employers rather than the Government, this would be crippling for many employers. And where is the incentive to return to work?

Make SSP payments available from the first day of missing work rather than the fourth: The same as Labour. Again, this would be overly burdensome on employers and getting minimum wage for throwing a sickie might be too tempting for some employees.

Supporting small employers with Statutory Sick Pay costs: Again, this policy lacks any substance or detail in the manifesto but some help for small businesses in reclaiming SSP costs is a winner. It would be much needed too if SSP was paid at minimum wage levels.

A bit of a mixed bag the from the Liberal Democrats from an employer’s point of view. Of course, business and employment is one of many areas of policy upon which voters will be making their decisions this general election. As champions for employers however, we’re wary of the policies that will cause our clients, and ultimately us, more problems and headaches.

Whatever the election outcome, we’re expecting any new Government to want to make an impact within the first 100 days of office, so we’re likely to be busy making sure clients are compliant with any new legislation. Make sure you’ve got our number on speed-dial, ready to call us on 01452 331331 or send an email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The Labour Party has said that their manifesto for Government will be published and available before the election on July 4. In the meantime, we have taken a look at the party’s “Plan to Make Work Pay”, which is a reasonably detailed document outlining Labour’s strategies for economic growth and proposals that will affect workers and employees.

Among the proposals outlined in the document, the ones that grabbed our attention the most are: the abolition of the two-year qualifying period for employment rights, making flexible working a day-one right, and paying statutory sick pay (SSP) from day one of absence. We’ll explore the potential impact of each of these proposals in more details below and their potential impact on UK businesses.

Abolition of the Two-Year Qualifying Period for Employment Rights: Despite best intentions and a desire to maintain best practice whilst employing individuals, we rely quite significantly on the two-year rule when advising clients regarding dismissals. Currently, employees need to have worked for two years before they can claim unfair dismissal. Whilst we would never recommend an inappropriate dismissal, the two-year rule does provide something of a safety net against tribunal claims.

The Labour Party’s plan to abolish this qualifying period will extend immediate protection to all employees from day one. While this change is designed to enhance workers' rights, it poses significant challenges for employers. Potentially, the removal of the two-year qualifying period will mean every dismissed employee would be eligible to make a claim for unfair dismissal, potentially leading to more employment tribunals. This will necessitate more rigorous documentation and justification of employment decisions to defend against potential claims.

Businesses would need to sharpen up their HR practices an particularly during probation periods, probably making six months of probation the default as this might be the only opportunity to dismiss an underperformer. There would be no room to forgo regular meetings on a weekly, bi-weekly or monthly basis for workers on probation. Managers would need to be confident in setting strict goals and objectives and of measuring the new recruits performance against these. A structured plan for benchmarking achievement milestones to measure progress would also be a good idea.

Flexible Working as a Day-One Right: Labour’s proposal to make flexible working a right from the first day of employment reflects changing workplace dynamics and a push for greater work-life balance. Current legislation extends as far as workers being allowed to apply for flexible working from day one, which is already seen as controversial. Labour’s proposal however, could create recruitment challenges, particularly for roles that require full-time, on-site presence.

We fear that workers will be able to apply for, and be offered a full-time role, only to be able to demand a flexible working pattern from day one. Employers may then find it harder to ensure consistent team collaboration and maintain productivity levels, especially in industries where physical presence is critical. This in turn may affect the ability to meet customer demand.

There may be a need for businesses to rethink their approach to job design and employee engagement. Offering hybrid models that balance flexibility with necessary office time could be a solution, but it requires a cultural shift and investment in technology to support remote work effectively. Job roles may need to be made more flexible from the outset and interviews could become more of a negotiation exercise to determine days and hours worked and from which location.

In addition, for smaller employers who are less profitable, the provision of extra equipment and technology for multiple employees may be prohibitive.

Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) from Day One of absence: Labour’s plan to make SSP payable from the first day of absence aims to provide immediate financial support to employees who fall ill. Currently, SSP is only payable after three consecutive days of absence, easing the financial burden on employers for short-term sickness.

Introducing SSP from day one means employers would bear the cost of sick pay for even a single day’s absence. Remember, UK employers cannot reclaim SSP from the government, which could lead to increased financial strain, particularly for small businesses with tight margins. It’s a great attention grabber for voters and one that comes at zero cost to the Government because they’re not footing the bill.

There is also a concern that this policy might encourage higher absenteeism rates, with employees more likely to take short-term sick leave knowing they are financially covered from the outset. Employers would need to implement more stringent sickness monitoring and support systems to manage absenteeism effectively whilst maintaining an adherence to disability discrimination laws and being cautious of not harassing truly ill employees.

With the knowledge that some pay will come, even if it is just SSP, the temptation to “throw a sicky” after a night out or sleeping through the alarm may prove very tempting for some.

Furthermore, those businesses and organisations that offer periods of full pay for sickness absence may find further financial burden through paying for more sick days as there will be less incentive for workers to attend work. Enhanced sick pay schemes would not be able to be simply revoked. A period of consultation would be required, and the benefit is so significant, to remove it would probably need to be bought out. Affected organisations would also include many already cash-strapped councils and the NHS.

Labour’s plan to beat immigration by training UK nationals to do the jobs for which we currently employ foreign nationals deserves some applause. This is likely to be through more specific training and apprenticeships in what are considered key subjects such as the STEM topics of Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths. We hope some provision will be made for managers and leaders.

Unpaid internships are also facing the chop under Labour. Designed to give graduates the opportunity of work experience, employers also benefit from the fresh ideas and energy that interns bring. Labour will insist that interns are remunerated for their time in post, we suspect at least at the National Minimum Wage, which we think is only fair.

In all, the Labour Party’s Work Plan, which we expect to partly form their manifesto, whilst aimed at enhancing worker rights and well-being, presents several challenges for UK employers. A copy of the plan is downloadable at https://labour.org.uk/updates/stories/a-new-deal-for-working-people/

Employers will need to be ready to proactively adapt their HR practices, invest in effective management and support systems, and explore innovative ways to attract and retain talent. While these changes are aimed at creating a fairer and more supportive work environment, they necessitate careful planning and strategic adjustments from businesses to mitigate potential negative impacts.

If you want to get ahead of the curve with your policies and practices we’re here to help. Call us on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

For our audience, the principal question will be what the proposed employment law changes are and how they will affect your business. Labour have announced that it wants to cut reliance on foreign workers in sectors including construction, IT, social care, health and engineering. It states that government departments responsible for these sectors will need to draw up skills improvement plans to upskill British nationals. With all this in mind, who will manage these newly skilled employees in the workplace?

Our popular HR & Employment Law updates are a great place to start to keep up to date with any changes. As connoisseurs of employment law, we have been reflecting on the proposed changes from the three major political parties.

We have toplined the employment law proposals below from the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

Conservatives

Conservatives are set to continue their current agenda. This includes:

• Neonatal care leave and pay,
• Reform of industrial action laws
• Back to Work Plan including proposed reform of fit notes
• Address definition of “sex” in Equality Act 2010
• Re-introduction of employment tribunal fees
• Reform of non-compete clauses
• Proposed reform to TUPE

Labour

Labour have proposed the following:

• Remove qualifying periods for rights like unfair dismissal, sick pay, and parental leave so they become day-one rights
• Remove current distinction between employees and workers so that all workers are afforded same basic rights and protections
• Strengthen existing rights and protections, including for pregnant workers, whistleblowers, workers made redundant, and workers subject to TUPE processes.
• Continue commitment to raise National Living Wage
• Increase Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) and make it available for all workers including those currently excluded because of low wages.
• Act to close gender, ethnicity, and disability pay gaps
• Require employers to create and maintain workplaces and working conditions free from harassment, including by third parties.
• Default right to flexible working from day one with employers being required to accommodate this as far as is reasonable.
• Increase Family Friendly laws including extending statutory maternity and paternity leave, introducing the right to bereavement leave, making it unlawful to dismiss pregnant employees for six months after return from maternity leave except in specific circumstances and reviewing shared parental leave system.
• Strengthen rights of workers to respond to family emergencies
• Reform zero-hours contracts
• Improve information and consultation procedures on fire and re-hire
• Raise awareness of neurodiversity and review provision for stress, mental health, and Long Covid.
• Introduce a new right to disconnect and protect workers from remote surveillance.
• Update trade union laws

Liberal Democrats

The Liberal Democrats have proposed the following:

• Parental leave reform by giving all workers a day-one right to parental leave and pay.
• Increase paternity pay to 90% of earnings, with a cap for high earners.

Not only will the business leaders have to get their head around whatever the changes are, but so will your managers. We have a month to get ahead so why not take a look at some of our training courses which can help your managers know how to lead new teams, understanding their responsibility to employment law and confidence in their role. Send us an email on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or give us a call on 01452 331331 to find out more. 

The stand-out story of the General Election campaign trail so far must be Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s manifesto policy to introduce a form of national service should he regain the keys to No.10. Whether it is a deliberate attempt to polarise opinion or a fantasy policy that he knows he’ll never get over the line because his days in the top job are numbered, it has certainly sparked significant debate.

It is worthy of discussion from an HR perspective because we often hear from our clients how young people transitioning from education to employment often lack the necessary skills, experience, and discipline to be truly "work-ready." A conversation that has become much more prevalent since Covid. Supporters of Mr Sunak’s initiative might argue that it could help to address this issue; but who’s responsibility is it to ensure young people are equipped to join the workforce?

Sunak’s proposal aims to equip young people with valuable life skills, discipline, and a sense of civic duty. The structured environment of national service could provide participants with experiences that foster resilience, teamwork, and a strong work ethic. For employers, recruiting individuals who have completed national service could be particularly attractive, as these candidates may demonstrate enhanced maturity and readiness for a professional environment.

Young people of today are heavily immersed in social media. It shapes their communication styles and influences how they process information. While digital literacy is beneficial, the prevalence of short-form content and constant connectivity can detract from the development of what we would traditionally describe as soft skills, such as sustained attention, effective communication and teamworking.

Furthermore, the expectation of remote or home working, at least to some degree, has become cemented into the psyche of the UK workforce. We have discussed this a number of times in our blog and it will be further reinforced when the right for flexible working requests from day-one become law later this year.

While we see flexible working arrangements in many organisations now, they pose challenges for the onboarding process and for instilling discipline and teamwork in young employees who may have limited experience in traditional workplace settings.

Whilst we can see some potential benefits of a national service type initiative for employers, opinion polls suggest that it not something we should expect to be implemented. Businesses should ensure they are applying their own strategies to better prepare young adults and graduates for the workforce:

• Structured Onboarding Programs: Design a comprehensive induction and onboarding program that cover job-specific training as well as workplace etiquette, communication skills, and time management.
  
  
• Mentorship and Buddy Systems: Pair new employees with experienced mentors who can provide ongoing guidance and support, helping them navigate the company culture and expectations.
  
  
• Soft Skills Training: Provide workshops focused on developing crucial soft skills such as resilience, problem-solving, teamwork, and professional communication. We offer a raft of these and they can be integrated into regular training schedules with more established employees to reinforce their importance.
  
  
• Feedback Mechanisms: Establish regular one-to-one meetings and feedback loops where young employees can receive constructive criticism and praise, and also re-asses and affirm their objectives and your expectations to help them to adjust and continuously improve.
  
  
• Managed Flexible Working Arrangements: While maintaining some degree of flexibility, ensure a structured approach to remote working that includes clear expectations, regular check-ins, and opportunities for in-person collaboration.

In what remains a competitive recruitment marketplace, dealing with new recruits who are not work-ready might be a nice problem for some businesses to have. Implementing the above strategies will not only address the shortfalls but will mean organisations will be seen as a good place to work and so attractive to young talent through:

• Promoting a Positive Culture: Highlight your supportive, inclusive workplace culture that values learning and development.
  
  
• Offering Growth Opportunities: Emphasise opportunities for career advancement and continuous learning.
  
  
• Showcasing Flexibility: Balance the offer of flexible work arrangements with the structure and support needed for young professionals to thrive.

Rishi Sunak's national service proposal could play a significant role in addressing the readiness gap among young people entering the workforce, but we don’t think it’s something to be relied upon. Businesses should be implementing their own robust onboarding programs including mentoring, soft skills training, and a positive workplace culture. These are crucial for ensuring young peoples’ transition from education to employment.

By adopting these strategies, businesses can better prepare young people for the workforce and create a more attractive environment for emerging talent. We can help with the provision of appropriate policies, onboarding and induction programmes and a full suite of business essential and soft skills training. Call us for a conversation on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

We give a lot of advice that concerns supporting employees with their health, including mental health, and longer term illnesses that can be classed as a disabilities. This type of advice regularly includes a recommendation to make reasonable adjustments. With the Government agenda to get more inactive people back into the workforce, we have prepared some clarity over what reasonable adjustments actually means.

Reasonable adjustments are a fundamental aspect of creating an inclusive and supportive workplace. For HR professionals and business owners, understanding the nuances of reasonable adjustments is crucial to ensuring compliance with the Equality Act 2010, but moreover, it enables organisations to foster an environment where all employees can thrive and makes a wider talent pool more accessible.

Reasonable adjustments are changes or adaptations made to eliminate or reduce disadvantages experienced by employees with disabilities, or with an illness that affects them over a long term. These adjustments can relate to physical workspaces, job roles, or employment practices. The goal is to ensure that employees with disabilities have equal opportunities to perform their roles effectively and enjoy the same benefits and conditions of employment as their non-disabled colleagues.

The need to make reasonable adjustments arises when an employee experiences disadvantages in the workplace owing to their condition. Disabilities can be physical, sensory, mental, or cognitive impairments. The requirement to make adjustments can be triggered at various stages of employment:

• Recruitment and Selection: Adjustments could include providing application forms in accessible formats or offering additional time during interviews.
  
  
• Employment and Promotion: Adjustments may be necessary for facilitating job performance, such as modifying equipment, providing assistive technology or facilitating remote-working.
• Training and Development: Ensuring training materials and sessions are accessible to all employees, including those with disabilities.

Reasonable adjustments can take many forms, depending on the specific needs of the employee and the nature of their disability. Common types of adjustments include:

• Physical Adjustments: Modifying the work environment, such as installing ramps, widening doorways, or providing accessible parking spaces.
  
  
• Workplace Adjustments: Altering workstations, providing ergonomic furniture, or supplying assistive devices like screen readers or hearing aids.
  
  
• Work Schedule Adjustments: Allowing flexible working hours, part-time work, or providing additional breaks to accommodate medical needs.
  
  
• Policy Adjustments: Amending workplace policies to ensure they do not disadvantage employees with disabilities, such as adjusting attendance policies to account for medical appointments.
  
  
• Support Services: Providing access to support workers, job coaches, or interpreters for employees with disabilities.

While the Equality Act 2010 mandates making reasonable adjustments, there may be instances where it may be justifiable to refuse to make them without risking allegations of discrimination. Choosing not to make reasonable adjustments must be based on a careful consideration of several factors and we strongly recommend that this is documented:

1. Reasonableness: The adjustment must be practical and feasible. If an adjustment is deemed unreasonable due to excessive cost, significant disruption, or impracticality, it may be refused.
   
   
2. Financial Implications: If making the adjustment would cause significant financial strain or operational difficulties for the business, it may be considered financially inviable. This should also be balanced against the resources available to the employer.
   
   
3. Health and Safety: Adjustments that compromise the health and safety of the employee or others in the workplace, including customers and service providers, can be reasonably refused.
   
   
4. Effectiveness: Any proposed adjustment must alleviate the disadvantages faced by the employee. If it is unlikely to be effective then it may not be required.

As we have discussed, an inclusive working environment and an open-minded attitude, broadens the available talent pool to help give your organisation a competitive edge. However, we cannot dismiss the fact that the requirement to make reasonable adjustment is often to mitigate the risks of potential discrimination claims. Organisations should therefor:

• Engage in open and constructive dialogue with employees to understand their needs and explore potential adjustments.
  
  
• Document all considerations and decisions regarding reasonable adjustments to provide a clear rationale and maintain a record that a proper process was followed and due consideration was given.
  
  
• Regularly review and update policies to ensure compliance with legal requirements and evolving best practices.

Reasonable adjustments are vital for promoting inclusivity and equality in the workplace. By understanding when and how to implement these adjustments, and recognising when it may be reasonable to refuse them, businesses can support a diverse workforce while ensuring legal compliance and fostering a positive work environment.

For help, support and advice with making reasonable adjustments, absence, or any HR or Employment Law related matter, we’re just a phone call, or email, away. Contact us on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

We have just finished this quarter’s HR & Employment Law events. This time, as well as the usual employment law update, we provided insight on managers managing hybrid workers.

Over the past month, we have seen a rise in the number of big organisations reversing their working from home policies to either bring staff back to the office full time or for the majority of the week. Boots, Manchester United, Nationwide and JD sports just to name a few.
But now a ‘tug of war’ exists between the business and employees. The business wants to enhance collaboration and innovation with staff back in the office. Whereas employees feel they have a good work life balance whilst remaining productive at home.

A hybrid model might be a good compromise. This can balance the employees’ needs for flexibility whilst re-establishing a strong office presence. At HR Champions, we often speak to you about the role of the manager and the importance of getting it right to ensure high performing teams. Add managing hybrid workers to that manager’s role and managers have another responsibility within their day job.

If hybrid working is your solution to balance the needs of the business and employees, managers are now responsible for communication across different platforms, performance management when they are not always physically with their employees and collaboration for a dispersed team.

At HR Champions, we suggest focussing on the following areas to create a gold standard of managers managing hybrid workers:

• For business leaders and HR
  It’s a two-way street; seek feedback through employee engagement and pulse surveys about hybrid working. Ensure there are robust policies in place and people are aware of them. Invest in good homeworking kit and technology. Review employees’ job description to ensure everyone is on the same page about responsibilities and they are fair.
• Management Communication
  Establish clear communication channels and agree what is appropriate on which communication channel. Ensure there is a minimum of one day where the team is all together. Encourage open communication across and within the team.
• Performance & Expectations
  Track progress and productivity by still holding the team to account. Be clear about your employees workday and schedule as well as sticking to the business’ performance review procedure. Create an accountability plan that everyone can access regardless of location.
• Mental Health & Wellbeing
  Remind the team about the resources available to them and encourage the team to have a healthy work life balance ensuring they take breaks and don’t work too late. Be present on office days to recognise the signs of burnout and stress. It’s more difficult behind a screen.

This was a whistle stop tour in managers managing hybrid workers.

Balancing business needs and employee expectations is key to building and maintaining high performing teams. But it’s paramount to long term success. Hybrid working might be the solution for some businesses to attract and retain the top talent.
In this case, line managers will play an important role in creating successful outcomes from this model. Don’t put the line managers on the backfoot and ensure they have the resources to perform their role to the highest standard.

At HR Champions, we have a suite of leadership and management training to support your managers as well as HR advice for the technicalities of a hybrid working model. From qualifications accredited to by the leadership and management, one day training courses and bespoke leadership programmes, we have you covered. Get in touch today by calling 01452 331331 or emailing This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to find out more.

No manager sets out to be a bad manager. Despite the idea that some are inherently poor managers, the reality is that bad managers are often created due to their environment. This transformation frequently begins with well-intentioned but misguided promotions. Often, the promotion is based on technical expertise rather than leadership capabilities. Or strong interpersonal relationships with superiors and even as a strategy to retain high-performing employees. These criteria fail to prepare individuals for the responsibilities of people management, leading to a plethora of negative outcomes for the team and organisations alike.

Managers who often find themselves in roles for which they are not prepared often exhibit certain negative behaviours. They may let poor conduct slide, fail to hold team members to account which creates an unproductive work environment. These behaviours stem from a lack of necessary managerial skills and support. Overtime, this can lead to a workplace where underperformance becomes the norm and high achievers become disengaged.

Managers don’t become bad, they are created.

Let’s take a look at the pathway of bad managers:

• The Technical Expert Turned Manager
  In many businesses, outstanding technical performances are rewarded with promotions to managerial positions. The logic is sound; if an individual excels in their technical role, they must be capable of over seeing the team. However, this is a critical oversight - technical skills do not equate to managerial skills.  For example, a brilliant programmer may have an exceptional grasp of coding, IT systems and problem solving within their niche. But place them in a management role, they face a new set of challenges. Do they have an exceptional grasp of delegation, communication, conflict resolution and strategic thinking? Moreover, they are now overseeing a team with which they were once ‘equals’. They may continue to want to be ‘friends’ with everyone. In recent times, we have dealt with numerous cases where ‘banter’, not stopped by managers, led to grievances, disciplinaries and even tribunals.
• The Friend of the Boss
  Another common scenario is the promotion of individuals based on their close relationships with their superiors. Strong interpersonal relationships can be valuable in any workplace. But they should not be the primary criterion for managerial promotions.
  Managers promoted in this way may lack respect from the team who see their promotion as undeserved. This can undermine the manager’s authority and make it difficult to enforce policies, expectations and standards.
• The Retention Strategy
  Organisations often fear losing their best talent and see promotion as a way to reward these individuals. This promotion can often be deserving. But it can backfire if the promoted individual is ill-equipped for the role.
  Transitioning to a managerial role shifts their focus from individual performance to team performance. Without proper training and support, these first-time managers may struggle to adapt. They might continue working on their individual tasks, neglecting the broader needs of the team. At the same time, they may apply their high standards without understanding the diverse capabilities of their team members, leading to frustration and disengagement.

As we know, the effects of bad management extend beyond the team dynamics. Poorly managed teams can drag down overall organisational performance, leading to higher turnover rates and poor company reputation. The stress and dissatisfaction generated by bad managers can have serious implications for employee well-being and mental health.

Bad managers are created by systems and practices within their organisations. By recognising the factors that contribute to poor management and implementing strategies to develop strong leaders, companies can create a more effective and positive work environment.
The bottom line: investing in the development of managers not only benefits the individuals in those roles but also supports team productivity leading to higher business turnover.

At HR Champions, we have a suite of leadership and management training to support your aspiring, first time and untrained managers. From qualifications accredited to by the leadership and management, one day training courses and bespoke leadership programmes, we have you covered. Get in touch today by calling 01452 331331 or emailing This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to find out more.