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.

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.

Some recent decisions made by high profile organisations has brought Working from Home back to the top of discussion topics again. One of the most notable announcements came from Manchester United Football Club who have reversed their work from home Fridays trial after the number of emails dropped by 20%, citing this as an indication that productivity had dropped.

Whether less company emails is a relevant, or indeed a practical metric by which to measure productivity is highly debatable. However it comes on the back of an number of publicly made decisions that might be an indication that organisations are less accepting of a homeworking culture than they were during and immediately following the Covid pandemic.

Other recent decisions include:

• Boots, who announced that all 3,900 of their head office staff would be required to return to work five days per week.
• JD Sports have insisted that their head office staff return to the office for at least four days per week.
• Amazon, who have introduced a policy whereby those who choose to work from home will not be considered for promotion.

Assuming that these other businesses have been a little more discerning in their analysis than Man United, we can reasonably assume the primary reason behind the push to return to the office is a dip in productivity. However, it’s no secret that the UK economy has been struggling over the past 12 months and only just managed to return positive growth figures. So, are we to blame WFH for poor growth, or is the weak economic performance a result of other external factors, and actually, we would have been worse off if it was not for homeworking?

Businesses have no doubt observed that whilst technology has stepped up to facilitate communication and remote interaction, it cannot entirely replace the spontaneous and creative interactions that occur in person. The phrase, “water cooler conversations” has had more than it fair share of use over recent years, but its relevance cannot be denied. A casual discussion between individuals who may otherwise not meet or speak can often bring a new perspective to a problem, potentially leading to a solution.

We’re hearing rumours that the UK Government may also play a role in influencing a shift to encouraging workers back to the office. The transport sector as well as local hospitality and retail businesses, selling and serving food will be suffering from a lack of commuters. Some train operators are continuing with special offers to incentivise a return to rail usage. There is a clear incentive to encourage office attendance as a revitalised commuter workforce would stimulate economic activity in these areas, aiding the overall economic recovery.

It's fairly widely recognised that whilst some employees have thrived in a home environment, others have struggled with distractions, lack of proper workspace, and reduced direct collaboration and interaction. Whilst home working was forced upon us as a side-effect of Covid, many individuals were probably ill-prepared to continue with WFH arrangements for the longer term. Self-leadership is a crucial attribute for someone in an isolated work environment, but even now, it’s not a subject we’re asked to train employees in often enough.

Managing home workers is one of the subjects we’ve been covering in our latest round of breakfast meetings. A number of discussions amongst delegates around the tables in the room at our Worcester meeting revealed that opportunity to work from home, at least partially, was very high up on the agenda for new recruits and was a question asked by candidates at practically every interview.

Businesses then are not only faced with the challenge of encouraging or enforcing a return to the office, but must clearly include some option to work from home if they are to remain attractive to new talent.

A carefully considered approach is clearly required to bring employees back to the office. A blanket requirement to return could be met with resistance, especially where home working has become entrenched as a norm. As the summer holidays approach, some employees may even have already have factored in that they will be working from home to account for childcare. These employees may have already factored in the financial benefits of not travelling into their budgets, and so may be significantly out of pocket.

Some options and strategies to consider are:

1. Flexible Transition: Gradual increases in office days can help ease employees back into the routine. Flexibility can mitigate resistance and allow employees to adjust.
   
   
2. Incentives (Carrot): Offering perks such as subsidised travel, improved office facilities, or wellness programs can make the office more appealing.
   
   
3. Policies and Enforcement (Stick): Clear policies on office attendance and consequences for non-compliance may be necessary, but should be balanced with empathy and understanding. Also, don’t overlook what may have become considered acceptable and the norm which may now require a period of consultation to change.
   
   
4. Hybrid Models: Maintaining some level of remote work can address employees’ needs for flexibility while re-establishing a strong office presence.

For smaller businesses, navigating this transition requires thoughtful strategies to avoid potential discriminatory practices and ensure a smooth process. The return to the office is a complex issue with significant implications for productivity and the wider economy. Businesses must adopt a balanced approach, considering both the immediate benefits of increased productivity and the longer-term economic impacts. By doing so, they can foster a work environment that supports both business goals and employee well-being.

HR Champions can provide expert guidance, helping businesses develop tailored strategies that align with their unique circumstances and workforce needs. Get in touch on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This week, it’s Mental Health Awareness Week. The week is aimed at raising awareness of good mental health within the UK. This year’s theme is ‘No Mind Left Behind’. This is to address the fact that over 2 million people are waiting for NHS mental health services. Mind states that 1 in 4 of us will experience a mental health problem but too many of us aren’t getting the help that we need.

This morning, we ran our final seminar in our Workplace Series called ‘Managers Managing Mental Health’ which provided business leaders and HR professionals with the knowledge on how to people manage a mentally healthy and unhealthy team.

Interestingly, according to the charity Mind, 26% of employees blame line managers for work related stress. 50% of employees feel they are unable to ‘switch off’ during down time and 36% of employees report their stress levels as unmanageable. Although not considered a mental health issue, stress can ultimately lead to a mental health problem.

One week or one seminar will not end poor mental health in the workplace. True change begins with a return to basics, where mental health is openly discussed and there is a framework which prioritises mental health in the workplace. With any culture change, senior leaders play a pivotal role in setting the tone and role modelling a culture where mental health is not just acknowledged but actively supported.

It's imperative for organisations to regularly review their approach to mental health support at the basic level. This isn’t about pledges to support mental health or having wellbeing days. These are simply nice extras of an already existing and strong framework.

This week, it’s worth considering the following:

• How effective is your Employee Assistance Programme?
  2 million people are waiting for NHS treatment. Having an alternative that your employees can access provides valuable action and is a proactive step.
• A reminder to your employees on how to access their EAP. You may have the best programme for your employees, but this is futile if employees are unaware of how to access and utilise it effectively.
• How confident are your managers in conducting wellbeing conversation and return to work interviews?
  Often managers don’t know what to say because they are unsure if they can ask certain questions or feel uncomfortable during these conversations. But they are the frontline between the employee and business so play a crucial role in fostering an open environment.
• Your wellbeing policy.
  What does it say and is everyone aware of their responsibility to it? Establishing a clear framework outlining acceptable practices and managerial responsibilities is essential.

Mental health must be prioritised, openly discussed and actively supported at all levels of the organisation. There should be a clear framework of what is acceptable and what managers can do.

Preventing and protecting a mentally healthy team comes from good leadership behaviours and a resilient workforce. This in turn contributes to a positive work environment. Managing a mentally unwell team is about intervention.
We have a whole suite of mental health support available to you. From bespoke training solutions, mental health first aider training and policies, give us a call today on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to find out more.

We have encountered a few cases recently amongst some of our clients where the behaviour of an employee would have ordinarily been a straight forward dismissal. However, in these particular cases, we have advised to take a different approach because of the long length of service the employees in question has had.

When we are asked to provide support and advice in dealing with the poor behaviour, attitude or performance of an individual, one of the first questions we will ask is what their length of service is. Usually this is to ascertain whether it is more or less than two years, as this is the point at which an employee acquires full employment rights.

Whilst it still isn’t necessarily an entirely straight forward affair, most employers are aware that dismissing someone who has less than two year’s service is usually much less fraught than when they have more than two years.
Long lengths of service add another level of complexity to how disciplinaries might be handled however.

Taking a “worst case scenario” approach when assessing disciplinary and potential dismissal situations is usually good advice. Asking yourself what a tribunal judge might say if a dismissed employee decided to lodge an Employment Tribunal claim can be a good way to highlight flaws or weaknesses in your case. I can be difficult though, when so intrinsically involved in a situation, for employers to be truly objective.

We have noticed a tendency more recently for tribunals to attempt to keep people in their jobs. This may be driven by the ongoing high vacancy rate in the UK and the high proportion of individuals who are classed as economically inactive. There is also the view that long-serving employees have a deeper investment in their jobs, meriting efforts to sustain their employment. Rationally thinking, it’s true that longer serving employees amass considerable experience and, one would hope, loyalty to their companies, which does go against reasons for dismissal.

Ordinarily, employees who accrue a number of years of service with an employer do so because they knuckle down and get on with their job. They’ll also have an acceptable attitude and display good behaviour. Conflict can sometimes arise when there is change. For example, when new rules or working practices are imposed and the employee doesn’t like to break their routine or habits. Equally new employees might bring a disruption in the wider team and there is a period of storming; or a new manager brings a new approach.

Such conflict can create a situation where a long standing employee behaves in an unacceptable way, they become uncooperative or their productivity reduces, perhaps as a form of protest. There is often a danger that this behaviour is not dealt with properly however, because their long service gives them some kind of unwritten immunity.

Whilst we believe that an informal friendly approach can be a good first step in handling disruptive employees, failure to take matters seriously and deal with it formally should the behaviour persist, can lead to bigger issues later on. Without a record that policy and process has been applied in the past, a sudden significant sanction, such as a dismissal, is unlikely to be looked upon favourably by a tribunal judge.

So, where an informal quiet word does not have the desired effect, move promptly to a more formal approach, addressing the issues and documenting any conversations and actions taken. Written warnings will only stay ‘live’ for 12 months, but the fact that they have taken place in the past will demonstrate that a message was sent.

Employers should also look at any training or re-training that a longer serving employee has or has not undertaken. In cases where poor performance or misconduct is a recurring issue, the absence of adequate training or re-training can reflect poorly on the employer, suggesting a lack of commitment to helping employees improve.

What is considered to be acceptable behaviour in the workplace has changed considerably in recent years so it is key that training is effective, relevant, and updated as necessary to meet job requirements and behavioural standards.
As a rule of thumb then, if you find yourself in position where you are seriously looking at dismissing a long standing employee, ask yourself “How did it get to this?” Are they a repeat offender who has never been dealt with properly or you have put up with their behaviour for too long? Have you been remiss at providing suitable training or even a little lazy with it?

We’re not saying not to dismiss; there will be instances when it is the appropriate action. Just be careful that you’re not too quick to pull the trigger and end up in a tribunal. And of course, if you are in any doubt, we’re just a phone call away to provide you with advice on 01452 331331 or by email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Ever wondered why someone’s behaviour within your team annoys you? Perhaps they are decisive, but you like to consider the impact on the team before you make a decision. Maybe they are too spontaneous and don’t consider the finer details like you would. Unfortunately, it’s about working with and considering these differences to be a high performing team. Fortunately, by having an appreciation, recognising and valuing these differences, you can become a high performing team.

It starts with having self-awareness. By understanding yourself, you can recognise how you impact others. Moreover, you can then recognise and value the differences within the team.
Within your team, what behaviour triggers you?

Is it indecisiveness? Lack of flexibility? Unfair treatment? Lack of detail?

These behaviours may trigger you to perform badly. A team member’s indecisiveness may make you overbearing. Someone’s lack of flexibility might make you hasty. Unfair treatment within the team may make you stubborn. And a lack of detail may turn your reserved.

This idea is based on Insights Discovery which is a simple and accessible four colour model from Carl Jung’s theory of preferences that help us understand ourselves and others. Every person has all four colour energies within them (red, yellow, green and blue). But it is the combination of these colours which creates a unique personality and help us to appreciate the world differently.

It’s these differences that create a high performing team. The strong-willed decision maker can meet deadlines, the flexible innovator can stay ahead of the competition, the reasonable one can consider the needs of the team and the precise detail orientated person can bring all the facts.

By appreciating these differences, you create a common language to navigate and reduce conflict in teams. Instead of saying to a team member “you are being overbearing today”, you can say “I can see your red energy today”. This is more palatable and brings awareness to the team member’s behaviour.

Insights Discovery helps the team understand and challenge their perception of others. This in turn allows team members to have more open and positive conversations thanks to the common language. Insights Discovery also provides the team with an in-depth personality profile which supports them to recognise their strengths and weaknesses. Again, bringing self-awareness to the team.

Overall, once you have self-awareness in your behaviour and can recognise other’s behaviour, you can appreciate and value what each individual brings to the team.

Take a look at our Insights Discovery programme today. We are always here to help you manage your people. Give us a call on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.