Women and Equalities Committee
Wednesday 11th November 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 23 hours, 3 minutes ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
14:31
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Welcome to the Women and Equalities Select Committee. Today we are holding a session for our inquiry on Flexible Working and Disability, which forms part of the committee's series of inquiries looking at equality at work. And we're very, very grateful to you all for joining us this afternoon. I should flag at the outset that we're expecting votes at 4:00, so we're going to try, if we can, to try and conclude questions before then so that we're not interrupted, because it's two votes and it will be a lengthy interruption to our discussion. I'm really pleased today to be joined by Julie Dennis, head of Inclusive Workplace strategy and policy at Acas.
Welcome, Julie. John Kirkpatrick, chief executive officer at the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Thank you for joining us. Claire McCartney, senior policy adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. The Cipd and Ruth Wilkinson, head of policy and public affairs at Institution of Occupational Safety and Health. Thank you so much to all of you for for coming this afternoon. Really looking forward to hearing from you.
And I'm going to start off by handing over to Christine.
Welcome, Julie. John Kirkpatrick, chief executive officer at the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Thank you for joining us. Claire McCartney, senior policy adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. The Cipd and Ruth Wilkinson, head of policy and public affairs at Institution of Occupational Safety and Health. Thank you so much to all of you for for coming this afternoon. Really looking forward to hearing from you.
And I'm going to start off by handing over to Christine.
14:33
Christine Jardine
-
-
Christine Jardine
Good afternoon. My name is Christine Jardine. I'm an MP from Edinburgh, and I wonder if I could start off talking about the equality impacts of return to work mandates, and if I could ask Claire and then Ruth, first of all, what steps you believe employers should take to ensure that disabled workers needs are properly considered when changing home and hybrid working policies?
14:34
Kim Leadbeater
-
-
Kim Leadbeater
Thank you. I think really good question. Firstly, I suppose I would say there's no one size fits all approach when it comes to employer approaches to home and hybrid working, so they're going to need to vary depending on the organisation or sector, industry, the employee needs and how that supports performance, productivity and of course, employee participation. I think when thinking about changes to home and hybrid working policies, employers need to ensure that disabled workers needs are properly and thoroughly considered. So this includes ensuring that they meet their legal obligations, such as those under the Equality Act 2010, actively consulting disabled staff to prevent disadvantage, ensuring that line managers have open individual conversations with disabled employees about their preferred working patterns.
Also, I think not making assumptions, but recognising that for some, a remote or hybrid working can be an important, reasonable adjustment to help manage conditions, energy levels, pain commuting barriers, assessing on site versus remote barriers as well. So reviewing the physical office environment, addressing any common challenges for disabled workers such as sensory overload, noise, lack of rest spaces in accessible building locations, facilities and any commuting challenges there, providing accessible equipment and technology. So ensuring remote and hybrid setups are properly resourced, including software, ergonomic desks, chairs, inclusive communication methods. And then I'd also say continuing to review, adapt and improve approaches to make sure that they remain effective and responsive to changing needs.
And I think that certainly includes conducting regular equality impact assessments and reviewing whether policy changes inadvertently disadvantage, isolate or limit disabled employees career progression. Just on a broader point, if I may, around flexible working are good work index data, which is a survey of 4000 employees that we run at the Cipd, also says there's an opportunity to do more broadly around flexible working, particularly in the private sector. So I think that should also be an area of focus and line manager support in the private sector, and particularly in the sample. We look at sectors where there is less support, such as retail and wholesale.
So I think more can be done in those areas as well.
Also, I think not making assumptions, but recognising that for some, a remote or hybrid working can be an important, reasonable adjustment to help manage conditions, energy levels, pain commuting barriers, assessing on site versus remote barriers as well. So reviewing the physical office environment, addressing any common challenges for disabled workers such as sensory overload, noise, lack of rest spaces in accessible building locations, facilities and any commuting challenges there, providing accessible equipment and technology. So ensuring remote and hybrid setups are properly resourced, including software, ergonomic desks, chairs, inclusive communication methods. And then I'd also say continuing to review, adapt and improve approaches to make sure that they remain effective and responsive to changing needs.
And I think that certainly includes conducting regular equality impact assessments and reviewing whether policy changes inadvertently disadvantage, isolate or limit disabled employees career progression. Just on a broader point, if I may, around flexible working are good work index data, which is a survey of 4000 employees that we run at the Cipd, also says there's an opportunity to do more broadly around flexible working, particularly in the private sector. So I think that should also be an area of focus and line manager support in the private sector, and particularly in the sample. We look at sectors where there is less support, such as retail and wholesale.
So I think more can be done in those areas as well.
14:40
14:40
Alex Brewer
-
-
Alex Brewer
I may. I mean, from a health and safety perspective, obviously employers have got duties for health and safety to ensure the health, safety and welfare of employees. So with any change, you need to be considering impacts of, you know, harm, hazards, risks, what could impact all workers. So when you do your assessment, you'll do that organisational wide view. So Claire has touched on some of those things you'll be looking for from location. But a key part of doing those assessments is to consult with workers. So making sure that you're consulting with lots of different cohorts.
So you've got worker representatives, you've got trade unions, employee reps. Have you already got homeworkers, employees with disabilities, ongoing health problems. So you can get a good you can get some good feedback, two way conversation on what what impacts there might be, what opportunities there are. But it's also important to scale that down so that if you are moving that you have do those individual risk assessments as well. So whenever we're doing any risk assessment, it's important to do that, that top level, but also at that individual level. And again, Claire did touch on this and naturally, some people will have reasonable adjustments.
One of those reasonable adjustments might be working from home, flexible working the times they work travel. So so conversations will need to happen with that individual. And we do that assessment at that level as well. And when you think about doing the assessments, we'd obviously advocate for health and safety professionals to be involved, occupational health professionals as well. So you've got your occupational safety and health, occupational health, but also managers that they're trained to have these conversations. You know, there will be confidential conversations, conversations to embark upon some of these challenging situations. So it's making sure that they are equipped to have those conversations.
So it is going through that assessment process essentially, and bringing in the expertise of others that can support that process, but individualizing it, looking at the factors. Yeah. Thank you.
So you've got worker representatives, you've got trade unions, employee reps. Have you already got homeworkers, employees with disabilities, ongoing health problems. So you can get a good you can get some good feedback, two way conversation on what what impacts there might be, what opportunities there are. But it's also important to scale that down so that if you are moving that you have do those individual risk assessments as well. So whenever we're doing any risk assessment, it's important to do that, that top level, but also at that individual level. And again, Claire did touch on this and naturally, some people will have reasonable adjustments.
One of those reasonable adjustments might be working from home, flexible working the times they work travel. So so conversations will need to happen with that individual. And we do that assessment at that level as well. And when you think about doing the assessments, we'd obviously advocate for health and safety professionals to be involved, occupational health professionals as well. So you've got your occupational safety and health, occupational health, but also managers that they're trained to have these conversations. You know, there will be confidential conversations, conversations to embark upon some of these challenging situations. So it's making sure that they are equipped to have those conversations.
So it is going through that assessment process essentially, and bringing in the expertise of others that can support that process, but individualizing it, looking at the factors. Yeah. Thank you.
14:44
14:44
Nia Griffith
-
-
Nia Griffith
Thanks, Christine. So to be honest, we see very few cases related to home or office working. So they make up around 0.1% of our cases the last time we counted. So we can't really draw wider conclusions about how common these policies are in relation to our case volumes. However, what we do know is that some of the difficulties arise when general attendance policies come up against the individual needs of the disabled workers. So a bit like what Claire and Ruth have just been saying. So our advice line advisers tell us that when people phone, our advice line around flexible working and reasonable adjustments, they sometimes come through as the same enquiry.
So we're seeing people getting confusion between the two. So, for example, we hear that employees who are seeking a reasonable adjustment in relation flexible working, they'll be steered towards making a flexible working request rather than using the duty to make reasonable adjustments. Instead, now we you know, we're very clear at Acas, they are two completely separate pieces of legislation. And, you know, it's very clear that we need to make employers and workers aware that there is this separate flexible working request legislation, and then the duty itself. The other thing as well that we're seeing is difficulties come along when disability related needs is simply treated as a flexible working request.
And therefore, if they don't resolve that issue, you then get increased sickness absence issues on the individual's performance or their attendance. And that's where then concerns or conflict within workplaces can start to happen. And there's also a difference of expectations between the individual and the employer as well. So, you know, the individual may want this type of adjustment and the employer might go, well, actually that's not reasonable or we're not able to do that. And I think again, it's like what Claire and Ruth have said, it's about having those ongoing conversations and really finding out what is the barrier, what is preventing this individual performing to their best at work, and what can I do as the employer to remove that for you?
Where is reasonably possible? And that's why, you know, reinforcing what Ruth just said, it's about that individual consideration is, is really important in relation to return to office mandates. Acas doesn't take a position on that. You know, it is up to the organisation what they want to do with their work location policies. But what we will flag up is I think like what Claire's talked about, organisations need to think about how that policy will impact on individuals, especially if they've got a disability. So it's around doing that equality impact assessment to make sure they're removing any barriers or maybe tweaking.
So it may be that, you know, yes, we have this policy, but actually we may do something slightly different for a member of staff because they've got a disability. We have a duty to make reasonable adjustments. So flexible working actually may be something that we can do for that individual. And I think what we are here at Acas is that a lot of managers are really worried about having that conversation because they feel if they like say, for example, Christine, I'm your line manager. And I say, right, Christine, you can have that. And then Kim comes along and says, that's not fair.
Why is Christine got it? I want this adjustment. And it's about being able to justify and actually, you know, not disclose the reason why, but being able to say there are different reasons.
So we're seeing people getting confusion between the two. So, for example, we hear that employees who are seeking a reasonable adjustment in relation flexible working, they'll be steered towards making a flexible working request rather than using the duty to make reasonable adjustments. Instead, now we you know, we're very clear at Acas, they are two completely separate pieces of legislation. And, you know, it's very clear that we need to make employers and workers aware that there is this separate flexible working request legislation, and then the duty itself. The other thing as well that we're seeing is difficulties come along when disability related needs is simply treated as a flexible working request.
And therefore, if they don't resolve that issue, you then get increased sickness absence issues on the individual's performance or their attendance. And that's where then concerns or conflict within workplaces can start to happen. And there's also a difference of expectations between the individual and the employer as well. So, you know, the individual may want this type of adjustment and the employer might go, well, actually that's not reasonable or we're not able to do that. And I think again, it's like what Claire and Ruth have said, it's about having those ongoing conversations and really finding out what is the barrier, what is preventing this individual performing to their best at work, and what can I do as the employer to remove that for you?
Where is reasonably possible? And that's why, you know, reinforcing what Ruth just said, it's about that individual consideration is, is really important in relation to return to office mandates. Acas doesn't take a position on that. You know, it is up to the organisation what they want to do with their work location policies. But what we will flag up is I think like what Claire's talked about, organisations need to think about how that policy will impact on individuals, especially if they've got a disability. So it's around doing that equality impact assessment to make sure they're removing any barriers or maybe tweaking.
So it may be that, you know, yes, we have this policy, but actually we may do something slightly different for a member of staff because they've got a disability. We have a duty to make reasonable adjustments. So flexible working actually may be something that we can do for that individual. And I think what we are here at Acas is that a lot of managers are really worried about having that conversation because they feel if they like say, for example, Christine, I'm your line manager. And I say, right, Christine, you can have that. And then Kim comes along and says, that's not fair.
Why is Christine got it? I want this adjustment. And it's about being able to justify and actually, you know, not disclose the reason why, but being able to say there are different reasons.
14:52
14:53
Nia Griffith
-
-
Nia Griffith
I think there is a very clear role and practical guidance can actually help. As you may be aware, Acas is currently consulting on our revised Code of practice for on flexible working requests. That consultation closes on the 17th of December, and one of the things that we've heard very clearly from stakeholders is that employers and employees alike have said they're struggling with that relationship between statutory, flexible working process and the separate duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act. We've had a very strong message from those stakeholders that we we need to make sure, in our guidance in relation to the code of practice, that we don't blur those two routes, and they've supported us having that very early prompt.
Some people have called it like a speed hump to make sure that employers just pause and consider when they receive those flexible working requests to just go, actually, is this individual wanting a flexible working request under this piece of legislation, or actually are they want a flexible working as a reasonable adjustment under the duty to make reasonable adjustments? So, yes, we do think that Acas is a particular role to play there , where we can help employers and employees understand how these different rights operate in practice and in the workplace. And we're going to make sure that we cover that in our associated guidance.
That will come along with our code. And I can talk more about that later on in some of the other questions, but I thought I'll hand over to John to answer the rest.
Some people have called it like a speed hump to make sure that employers just pause and consider when they receive those flexible working requests to just go, actually, is this individual wanting a flexible working request under this piece of legislation, or actually are they want a flexible working as a reasonable adjustment under the duty to make reasonable adjustments? So, yes, we do think that Acas is a particular role to play there , where we can help employers and employees understand how these different rights operate in practice and in the workplace. And we're going to make sure that we cover that in our associated guidance.
That will come along with our code. And I can talk more about that later on in some of the other questions, but I thought I'll hand over to John to answer the rest.
14:57
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I don't have a huge amount to add to that. Safe to say, one that we have been involved. We engaged with Acas on the preparation of that code of practice and will be so that simpler if there's an authoritative piece of guidance coming from one of those voices which we know, with which we know others are content. I suppose the other thing to say is we have some guidance in in the wild already, we published guidance on supporting disabled workers with hybrid working a couple of years ago, partly because we were concerned about the provision of reasonable adjustments for people when working at home or working in working in hybrid ways, because, of course, the reasonable adjustments duty is in place regardless of the location of where the where the employee is working.
The only thing I'd add to that is, of course, that that's also the the approach we would apply to return to the office mandates or indeed any other changes to working patterns. They don't absolve employers from the reasonable adjustments obligations. The important thing is that when imposing, when introducing any such policies, they do think about the implications and they do make sure that whatever reasonable adjustments are required for employees in whatever work environment they're working, they are in place.
The only thing I'd add to that is, of course, that that's also the the approach we would apply to return to the office mandates or indeed any other changes to working patterns. They don't absolve employers from the reasonable adjustments obligations. The important thing is that when imposing, when introducing any such policies, they do think about the implications and they do make sure that whatever reasonable adjustments are required for employees in whatever work environment they're working, they are in place.
15:00
15:00
15:00
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Public authorities, of course, over and above the the remainder of the Equality Act are bound by the public sector equality duty, and it certainly seems to us that it would be pretty difficult to demonstrate how you are complying with your obligations under the Public Sector Equality duty. If you don't make some assessment of the impact of those policies on those people, whether that means a formal equality impact assessment or not is a different question. We don't necessarily the law doesn't we don't require that of everybody in every circumstances. But as colleagues have already said, knowing what the impact of a proposed policy is going to be on, for example, your disabled employees.
Thinking about that and making a decision in the light of that is exactly what a public body should need, needs to do.
Thinking about that and making a decision in the light of that is exactly what a public body should need, needs to do.
15:02
15:02
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Well, the government is bound by the. Every component part of the government is bound by the CD as well. We haven't. We are not aware that they're not following that. If you see. If you see what I mean, nor do I. I mean, and I think I would argue that it's for the government to decide what approach it wants to take to potentially going beyond its obligations under the public sector equality duty. But it is for us to try and hold the government to account if if we think it is not and we are, we do as a matter of our normal program, work with a variety of parts of government, central and local and other to try and hold them, make sure we hold them to their obligations under the.
Said thank you.
Said thank you.
15:03
15:04
Alex Brewer
-
-
Alex Brewer
Thank you. So I have questions about workplace workplace health provision. So Ruth, the majority of my questions to you. But if anyone else wants to add, please do. Ruth, to start with, you're calling for a national integrated health and work service. What would this include and what would the process look like for a disabled worker? Yeah. Thanks ever so much for this question, because I do go in lots of meetings where they'll talk about health pathways and what's the role of the workplace and even championing that role of the workplace. So, so from an Irish perspective, we really champion whole person approaches because, you know, the Ruth Wilkinson Me at Home is now different to the one entering the workplace.
So we understand that individuals will have their own factors. But when you get to work, there are hazards and risks in the workplace which can cause harm. But there's also things going on at work that can exacerbate ongoing medical conditions or it can impact disabilities. So I think it's really important that we have that whole person holistic view. And then likewise, when you look at that, you have a whole system approach. And when you look at the systems we've got at the moment, they're quite fragmented in the sense of, again, I've been in in other meetings where they've talked about the role of the NHS, but actually the NHS is there to give treatment and a diagnosis.
We're not preventing. We're not necessarily always promoting health. Yes, you've got all the other factors through public health remits, but and having worked in health and safety for over 20 years and I've line managed occupational health contracts, sometimes you'll have people presenting to you as an employer where you can support in a short term manner, but actually they need long term support. So although they'll come to you as an employer, they then might need to go elsewhere for ongoing support. So it is quite fragmented. So really the the suggestion from ourselves is about having that coordinated and integrated approach that there is sort of a clear line, a system where people can, can enter and support them to work.
And obviously, going back to the Dame Carol black report back in 2008, Dame Carol also talked about having an initiative that's business led health and wellbeing consultancy service. I know Sir Charlie. Charlie Mayfield, through Keep Britain Working has said we've never had a workplace health system. And there's also I know Charlie's looking at the whole resilience hub. So when you look at sort of there's been an appetite for the last sort of 20 years. It's about having a system where individuals can self-refer and they can get that access to GPS, to physio, to occupational health, to occupational health and safety.
So it's the preventative side , as well as the health promotion and the reactive support and supports with those return to work and rehabilitation. And I guess part of the problem is not everybody's got occupational health either, either. You're small medium enterprises haven't got occupational health provision. They haven't necessarily got occupational health and safety professionals either that can guide on that prevention. So, so from our perspective, it's bringing in that prevention, but giving a joined up, a joined up approach. And I suppose the last thing I'll just mention is that Iosh last year as part of the Keep Britain working, we did do some polling for a policy report that we did called Fixing Sick Britain, and we surveyed people that said 73% of those surveyed workers supported universal local occupational health services.
So they wanted something universal access, and 75% thought workers should be able to self-refer rather than going through their employer. So there is an appetite for that self-referral opportunity as well. So. So yeah, it's a mixed bag of everything prevention, support, return to work and rehabilitation. Thank you Alex. Thank you. And you've mentioned that some employers do do procure provision. How would this avoid duplication. I think to avoid duplication it's about mapping the system and what's already there, what already exists. And actually it's not about duplication. It's about sort of raising the bar for those who haven't got it at the moment.
So how can we give those provision who haven't got it or they've got inadequate provision? And it comes back to a bit of what I've just said a moment ago that even though some employers offer occupational health provision, access to counselling, for example, access to physio, they're generally short term. So it is about saying actually, what are the standards we expect to sort of a minimum standard we expect to see and how can we get all all workers benefiting from that? But it doesn't eradicate the need still that you still need your NHS, you still need your GPS, but it's probably given a clear definition also of what role different services and professionals can play.
So if you're having this integrated system, what is the role of the GP in that system? What is the role of the physios? Where can occupational safety and health can. Where can occupational health? So it does need clear roles, responsibilities and accountabilities as well. Thank you. Who would bear the cost of this? Like, is there an amount of investment that this would require from government? I think the for us, it doesn't take away employer responsibilities, and those who bear that responsibility should bear the cost. So there's still that requirement for employers to continue to fund their legal duties.
So again, from a health and safety perspective, it is about preventing harm, ensuring health, safety and welfare and how they do that and control strategies. There's the Equality Act, those reasonable adjustments. So that is still in place. But the the government could obviously also help with that national infrastructure of that pathway and also that quality assurance, because there aren't standards out there at the moment thinking of occupational health provision, where employers can go and procure what they know is good. So that's that's where this can help. And I know Sir Charlie Mayfield has been looking at cost for employers and sort of around 60 to £180 per year per employee.
And the sort of thinking of funding models, the whole resilience hub. I know that the city Council's funding it for the first six months, but then after six months, participating employers are expected to contribute. So it is about the employer costing model. But actually there might be things that government or local authorities can support with as well. Thank you. And what's your assessment of the number of disabled people the service could support to either remain in or return to work annually? Yeah, I won't be able to put a figure on that one. So apologies because we haven't got the the evidence yet or the model to support actually what does that look like?
But what we can look at is again, from a health and safety perspective, the Health and Safety Executive give us annual stats. And they tell us that at the moment, 1.9 million people suffer work related ill health in the last year, which equates to 40.1 million working days lost. And that equates to 22.9 billion costs to the economy. So there's big costs there. That's the work related harm. So that's the stuff that we can prevent and help reduce at that employer level. But we also have all the data which says around 300,000 people with health conditions leave employment each year.
And the government also estimates the 2.8 million who are economically inactive. So if we can even touch pockets of those, it will have an impact, I think, to get the evidence that we need again to to mention, keep Britain working. I know the Work Health Intelligence Unit is seeking metrics to actually have a look at how are we supporting return to work disabled workers to enter and remain in the workplace. So that should become that that evidence base. And I am sitting I'm representing Iosh on the Keep Britain Working BSI drafting panel as well at the moment.
So I know that's that's in play. Thank you. Thank you. A comprehensive and integrated health and work service has been proposed since at least 2008 in Dame Carol Black's review. Aside from funding issues, what are the main barriers to achieving it and is the sector ready to deliver it? I think this is this is the one, isn't it? It's the we had some we had a great report in 2008 and it is. It's the implementation side of mobilising some of these recommendations and calls to action. And this, for me, comes back to the fragmented approach that we've got.
So we have got you know, if you think about health and employers, it split across your Department for Health and Social Care, your DWP, your NHS employers play a part. Some have got occupational health provisions, some haven't. Local authorities. It's there is that fragmented system. There's not one single system that brings all of these together. So I think that's the that's a key a key challenge here that we've got, but also that we've got. Health and employment services therefore operate in silos. We've got previous initiatives that have struggled to achieve that consistent engagement. Obviously, occupational health is employer led.
Again, it's not a universal access to it for for everybody. And there's also been impacts in workforce capacity from an occupational health physician and advisory perspective as well. So and obviously, the prevention focus that we've talked about that actually, if we don't lead with prevention, there's a bulk of ill
So we understand that individuals will have their own factors. But when you get to work, there are hazards and risks in the workplace which can cause harm. But there's also things going on at work that can exacerbate ongoing medical conditions or it can impact disabilities. So I think it's really important that we have that whole person holistic view. And then likewise, when you look at that, you have a whole system approach. And when you look at the systems we've got at the moment, they're quite fragmented in the sense of, again, I've been in in other meetings where they've talked about the role of the NHS, but actually the NHS is there to give treatment and a diagnosis.
We're not preventing. We're not necessarily always promoting health. Yes, you've got all the other factors through public health remits, but and having worked in health and safety for over 20 years and I've line managed occupational health contracts, sometimes you'll have people presenting to you as an employer where you can support in a short term manner, but actually they need long term support. So although they'll come to you as an employer, they then might need to go elsewhere for ongoing support. So it is quite fragmented. So really the the suggestion from ourselves is about having that coordinated and integrated approach that there is sort of a clear line, a system where people can, can enter and support them to work.
And obviously, going back to the Dame Carol black report back in 2008, Dame Carol also talked about having an initiative that's business led health and wellbeing consultancy service. I know Sir Charlie. Charlie Mayfield, through Keep Britain Working has said we've never had a workplace health system. And there's also I know Charlie's looking at the whole resilience hub. So when you look at sort of there's been an appetite for the last sort of 20 years. It's about having a system where individuals can self-refer and they can get that access to GPS, to physio, to occupational health, to occupational health and safety.
So it's the preventative side , as well as the health promotion and the reactive support and supports with those return to work and rehabilitation. And I guess part of the problem is not everybody's got occupational health either, either. You're small medium enterprises haven't got occupational health provision. They haven't necessarily got occupational health and safety professionals either that can guide on that prevention. So, so from our perspective, it's bringing in that prevention, but giving a joined up, a joined up approach. And I suppose the last thing I'll just mention is that Iosh last year as part of the Keep Britain working, we did do some polling for a policy report that we did called Fixing Sick Britain, and we surveyed people that said 73% of those surveyed workers supported universal local occupational health services.
So they wanted something universal access, and 75% thought workers should be able to self-refer rather than going through their employer. So there is an appetite for that self-referral opportunity as well. So. So yeah, it's a mixed bag of everything prevention, support, return to work and rehabilitation. Thank you Alex. Thank you. And you've mentioned that some employers do do procure provision. How would this avoid duplication. I think to avoid duplication it's about mapping the system and what's already there, what already exists. And actually it's not about duplication. It's about sort of raising the bar for those who haven't got it at the moment.
So how can we give those provision who haven't got it or they've got inadequate provision? And it comes back to a bit of what I've just said a moment ago that even though some employers offer occupational health provision, access to counselling, for example, access to physio, they're generally short term. So it is about saying actually, what are the standards we expect to sort of a minimum standard we expect to see and how can we get all all workers benefiting from that? But it doesn't eradicate the need still that you still need your NHS, you still need your GPS, but it's probably given a clear definition also of what role different services and professionals can play.
So if you're having this integrated system, what is the role of the GP in that system? What is the role of the physios? Where can occupational safety and health can. Where can occupational health? So it does need clear roles, responsibilities and accountabilities as well. Thank you. Who would bear the cost of this? Like, is there an amount of investment that this would require from government? I think the for us, it doesn't take away employer responsibilities, and those who bear that responsibility should bear the cost. So there's still that requirement for employers to continue to fund their legal duties.
So again, from a health and safety perspective, it is about preventing harm, ensuring health, safety and welfare and how they do that and control strategies. There's the Equality Act, those reasonable adjustments. So that is still in place. But the the government could obviously also help with that national infrastructure of that pathway and also that quality assurance, because there aren't standards out there at the moment thinking of occupational health provision, where employers can go and procure what they know is good. So that's that's where this can help. And I know Sir Charlie Mayfield has been looking at cost for employers and sort of around 60 to £180 per year per employee.
And the sort of thinking of funding models, the whole resilience hub. I know that the city Council's funding it for the first six months, but then after six months, participating employers are expected to contribute. So it is about the employer costing model. But actually there might be things that government or local authorities can support with as well. Thank you. And what's your assessment of the number of disabled people the service could support to either remain in or return to work annually? Yeah, I won't be able to put a figure on that one. So apologies because we haven't got the the evidence yet or the model to support actually what does that look like?
But what we can look at is again, from a health and safety perspective, the Health and Safety Executive give us annual stats. And they tell us that at the moment, 1.9 million people suffer work related ill health in the last year, which equates to 40.1 million working days lost. And that equates to 22.9 billion costs to the economy. So there's big costs there. That's the work related harm. So that's the stuff that we can prevent and help reduce at that employer level. But we also have all the data which says around 300,000 people with health conditions leave employment each year.
And the government also estimates the 2.8 million who are economically inactive. So if we can even touch pockets of those, it will have an impact, I think, to get the evidence that we need again to to mention, keep Britain working. I know the Work Health Intelligence Unit is seeking metrics to actually have a look at how are we supporting return to work disabled workers to enter and remain in the workplace. So that should become that that evidence base. And I am sitting I'm representing Iosh on the Keep Britain Working BSI drafting panel as well at the moment.
So I know that's that's in play. Thank you. Thank you. A comprehensive and integrated health and work service has been proposed since at least 2008 in Dame Carol Black's review. Aside from funding issues, what are the main barriers to achieving it and is the sector ready to deliver it? I think this is this is the one, isn't it? It's the we had some we had a great report in 2008 and it is. It's the implementation side of mobilising some of these recommendations and calls to action. And this, for me, comes back to the fragmented approach that we've got.
So we have got you know, if you think about health and employers, it split across your Department for Health and Social Care, your DWP, your NHS employers play a part. Some have got occupational health provisions, some haven't. Local authorities. It's there is that fragmented system. There's not one single system that brings all of these together. So I think that's the that's a key a key challenge here that we've got, but also that we've got. Health and employment services therefore operate in silos. We've got previous initiatives that have struggled to achieve that consistent engagement. Obviously, occupational health is employer led.
Again, it's not a universal access to it for for everybody. And there's also been impacts in workforce capacity from an occupational health physician and advisory perspective as well. So and obviously, the prevention focus that we've talked about that actually, if we don't lead with prevention, there's a bulk of ill
15:24
15:25
15:25
15:25
15:25
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Approach to this. But I know and from an Irish perspective, we are the professional body for. occupational safety and health professionals. So although we're not clinical. occupational health, we do assist employers. The professions assist employers with meeting health and safety legislation. So the focus is very much on. prevention risk.
15:26
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:28
15:28
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
What we would suggest is that when the outcomes are looked at, that we do model in. preventing work related injury and ill health, is it actually reaching SMEs? That's another test that we'd like to see in there. And is it producing that timely and competent support. So we talk about early intervention. Are we being really clear and. articulating what that what that is. How can employers do that? What support can you get and does it. involve workers and. disabled workers as well and. supporting safe, healthy and good work? I think that's part of the messaging from Dame Carol black.
Good work. It's not just about supporting people to work. It's got to be the good work. And that we do. champion the safe, healthy, sustainable work that accommodates people's needs. So, so yeah, so although I can't talk about the, the outcomes of it at the moment, I think it's got those elements in the, the test case for the outcomes. We're on to an .
Good work. It's not just about supporting people to work. It's got to be the good work. And that we do. champion the safe, healthy, sustainable work that accommodates people's needs. So, so yeah, so although I can't talk about the, the outcomes of it at the moment, I think it's got those elements in the, the test case for the outcomes. We're on to an .
15:30
15:30
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Can support. Thank you. Do you want to comment? Yeah. I was just going to say I think it's encouraging that there are so many employer vanguards. There's over. 250 across different sizes and sectors. So I think that will be really helpful learning going forward. But you know, similarly to the points made, we'll need a proper evaluation of all the.
15:31
15:31
15:31
15:31
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Working with employers just to make sure that those new. approaches adopted are really impactful and well supported. We're also involved in the BSI standard, and I think one of our senior members is also chairing that standard, which is great. And just to. emphasise that investing in good people management. practice up front is needed in terms of. prevention as well. And we've got kind of various research to support that.
So it's important to .
So it's important to .
15:32
15:32
15:32
Kim Leadbeater
-
-
Kim Leadbeater
Thank you. Kim. Thank you. Thank you everybody. I'm going to ask you a few questions about the Access to Work scheme. And I'm going to start with you, Ruth, if I can. And then and then come on to Clare. There's always been a tension between raising awareness of the access to work scheme and keeping it financially sustainable. How would you recommend that the government deals with this tension, and are there any ways of achieving it within .
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I should say people's knowledge about access to work is, is limited for different reasons. If they just don't know or it's not actively promoted or they're just not not aware of it. So I think what, what we need to do , again, if you come back to that system approach is just being clear of actually, what are all the parts of the system? And if. everybody's playing their part that they can. So you've got the employer piece. You're leaning on the.
15:35
15:35
15:35
15:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Health, HR colleagues, where, you know, we can prevent, we can support, we can create enabling environments. Some of those that need support can come in at that point, and then people can get sort of siphoned off to, to that access to work. So there's a bit of use expertise that's there because some of it can be in that place. We can then link to the reasonable adjustments. And I think it's about building the awareness and the knowledge of what people need to do as well.
So again, under those reasonable.
So again, under those reasonable.
15:36
15:36
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Making sure employers are aware of what they need to do and how they can go about it, but also. understanding the, the approach from the, the access to work. And I suppose it's also looking at how we can. prioritise that. prevention and early intervention as part of doing that, and how we can reduce any. duplication across, across the system that's that's in place.
15:37
15:37
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
We're again, through health and safety legislation, we work on sort of as low as reasonably practicable cost versus risk. So although there's an element of cost in there, it's about actually still doing what you need to do that's. proportionate to support people. So yes, it's we do understand the financial envelope that sits there. So let's make sure everything else is working. And then people who need that can get the support that they need in a timely.
fashion through the right routes, and that they've got mechanisms that can support them if .
fashion through the right routes, and that they've got mechanisms that can support them if .
15:38
15:39
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Know that you've experienced? And if that is an issue, how can that be addressed? Yeah. So I suppose I would add to what Ruth said that the substantial value and potential in access to work. But at the moment, I think the figures are that it's only really supporting around 1% of working disabled people according to the. Pathways to Work green paper, which is which is very small indeed. Feedback from our members indicates that many. organisations are unaware of the service, so completely support that there should be greater awareness, and also there's more scope for the service to be more.
effectively supporting people with a disability who are already in in employment to improve retention. And also we think there's potential to reform access to work, to include advice for employers on making effective, reasonable adjustments for disabled employees more generally. In terms of the cost, that's a real that is that is the real difficulty, the real challenge, I suppose from an employers perspective, I would say that employers have had to absorb significant costs over the last two years a mixture of rising employment costs, costs associated with new. legislation and more costs going forward. So at this point, I'm not sure .
effectively supporting people with a disability who are already in in employment to improve retention. And also we think there's potential to reform access to work, to include advice for employers on making effective, reasonable adjustments for disabled employees more generally. In terms of the cost, that's a real that is that is the real difficulty, the real challenge, I suppose from an employers perspective, I would say that employers have had to absorb significant costs over the last two years a mixture of rising employment costs, costs associated with new. legislation and more costs going forward. So at this point, I'm not sure .
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:42
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
What could we do with any ideas about what we could do to raise awareness of it? I think we could use different employment channels, different government channels to get to employees. So perhaps, you know, the gov hubs, you know, employee information, obviously through Acas , who already provide that information. But perhaps we could get that, that out .
15:43
15:44
15:44
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Is that a lot of reasonable adjustments are low or no cost at all. And what we're aware is that when you do go on the government website and you look at access to work, it takes you straight through to apply for access to work rather than. signposting to guidance. And we've got excellent guidance on our website that actually gives. employers examples of where they can make those low cost or free.
15:44
15:44
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
And that hopefully, if we can signpost people that way, then that takes the pressure off access to work, which means that those smaller. businesses that actually do need to be able to use the money from access to work to be able to recruit and. retain disabled workers, it frees it up for that. And, and actually, those free services or those very .
15:45
15:45
15:46
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Say no and low cost. What is the typical cost to a business or a typical cost of an adjustment? Nobody knows that question, Richard. When we when we looked at this a few years ago, there was this magical figure of. £75 and we went down a rabbit hole and we went and asked our colleagues who sit along here and someone went, we don't know where that comes from. And I think actually that is I think that's something that government could probably do, is to actually find out actually what is the cost. Because if we can say that to employers, actually the cost is quite low, then that might even encourage them more.
15:47
Kim Leadbeater
-
-
Kim Leadbeater
But at the minute it's this mythical figure. Okay, I guess that kind of feeds into the next question. So the TUC recommends that the Access to Work scheme gives job seeking disabled people an indication in advance of the support they would be granted to enable them to do the job. So you give them a heads up before before they start. I suppose there's a cost implication of that, isn't there? So do you agree that that would be. beneficial both for disabled job seekers but also for the employers? And would it work in. practice open to anyone?
Claire, do you want to go? Just can you just repeat the question again? Is there a way of having the conversation in advance with somebody who is who is going for a job to say, well, you know, if you do get this job, this is what might be available to you. So you're sort of, you know. pre-empting what might .
Claire, do you want to go? Just can you just repeat the question again? Is there a way of having the conversation in advance with somebody who is who is going for a job to say, well, you know, if you do get this job, this is what might be available to you. So you're sort of, you know. pre-empting what might .
15:49
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Happen, maybe having that conversation in advance. I think, I mean, I think it would be helpful. I think that would be good practice from an employer side of things to say, you know, these are the types of. adaptations that we can do. And also just to, to share examples as well. So I think that is good practice. We have inclusive recruitment guidance, and we would have prompts within that to say, you know, to ask people, regardless of their.
15:50
15:50
15:50
15:50
15:50
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Probably would be would be very helpful. Anybody? Yeah, yeah. And we're we're in the same position as what Claire has just mentioned that actually. And I've interviewed people and they're really open and honest. And actually they just want to know how they can do the role and be supported in that role. And to be honest. employees are more socially aware now as well. And they're looking for employers actually, who will look after my health, safety and wellbeing. What will I get? So they are asking these questions more at a sort of those interview and recruitment stages.
So we would support having that open conversation at that time and that people will know if they're going to be travelling for work or if they need to be doing certain things. What is there to support them as you would if there's, you know, health and safety need, you're doing safety critical roles, what things are expected and what's that employer employee contract and that, that transaction. So I think that does fit part of it. And if you don't mind me just going back and just sort of say that Julie said more eloquently than I, there was a low cost, reasonable adjustments.
That's sort of what I meant by saying, use the expertise that you've got, because actually your health and safety professionals, your occupational health, they can all help come up with what that looks like through that access to work scheme, sorry, sorry, through the reasonable adjustments before needing to, to jump across to the .
So we would support having that open conversation at that time and that people will know if they're going to be travelling for work or if they need to be doing certain things. What is there to support them as you would if there's, you know, health and safety need, you're doing safety critical roles, what things are expected and what's that employer employee contract and that, that transaction. So I think that does fit part of it. And if you don't mind me just going back and just sort of say that Julie said more eloquently than I, there was a low cost, reasonable adjustments.
That's sort of what I meant by saying, use the expertise that you've got, because actually your health and safety professionals, your occupational health, they can all help come up with what that looks like through that access to work scheme, sorry, sorry, through the reasonable adjustments before needing to, to jump across to the .
15:50
15:50
15:50
Nia Griffith
-
-
Nia Griffith
So thank you. Lovely. Thank you. I think it's over to you. Thank you very much indeed. I want to come over to the issue of, you know, things like rheumatic conditions where you can be sort of fine one day and then you have an awful flare up and you're in terrible agony. And that can often lose credibility for people. They think, oh, well, you know, she was walking around fine. And and now she's saying she can't do this or she can't do that. And so really, I wanted to, you know, to, to explore how we deal with those conditions and whether we have sufficient support, sufficient legislation and so forth to, to, to cover and how employers generally deal with that.
So if I could perhaps start with John and say, well, you know, what do you feel? Do you think that we should have to clarify to employers what's actually required for people who have those sorts of conditions, or indeed the conditions like ADHD or autism, which .
So if I could perhaps start with John and say, well, you know, what do you feel? Do you think that we should have to clarify to employers what's actually required for people who have those sorts of conditions, or indeed the conditions like ADHD or autism, which .
15:51
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Again, can manifest in rather different ways. First and foremost, thank you. The we think the law is pretty clear on this, that the sort of conditions you. describe can be covered by the Equality Act. They can constitute. disability if they meet the definition of disability. That is to say, they have a substantial long term adverse effect on people's ability to carry out normal day to day activities. They can constitute. disability even if they don't affect people, people's ability to do their jobs in the same way all the time. And as I look at the various bits of guidance on the law that are already out there, they all say that the government's guidance says that our guidance says that both our old guidance and our newer guidance, which is, you know, on the definition of disability, does cover that.
So we think it does recognise those things. Indeed, the new services code does actually have a specific example related to a.
So we think it does recognise those things. Indeed, the new services code does actually have a specific example related to a.
15:51
15:51
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Interestingly, and it relates a little this relates a little bit to the conversation we were having a moment ago. The implication, of course, is that a reasonable adjustment for these things is probably quite an individually focused thing. What is reasonable for that individual in that in those. circumstances and for that. employer will vary quite a lot. I think that potentially makes it quite. difficult either to say, well, what will this cost in any generic way or to to say, well, this is what will be available to you? Because part of the point of the reasonable.
15:51
15:51
15:51
15:51
15:52
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Done that for the menopause, there's a case to do it for the fluctuating conditions. As of now, I think probably not. We we deliberately issued the additional guidance on the menopause because we felt that that really was wasn't well understood. It's less clear that the existing guidance to us anyway, that the existing guidance is. inadequate in .
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Claims now make. 25% of our early. conciliation claims. That has gone up quite a lot over the last ten years. So we've done two pieces of research around that. Last year we did a conflict prevalence survey, and that actually found that. 68% of disabled employees whose. condition had a substantial impact on their day to day. activities reported. experiencing some form of workplace conflict. And that compared to. 44% of working age people without a disability. So quite stark figures there. And because of that, we actually commissioned further qualitative research to look into that, into more depth.
And we looked at the. experiences of 30 disabled employees who'd already participated in that original survey. And what that research told us is that conflict actually is often less driven by the. disability or the condition .
And we looked at the. experiences of 30 disabled employees who'd already participated in that original survey. And what that research told us is that conflict actually is often less driven by the. disability or the condition .
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Imposed without. consultation or treated as an inconvenience. And that is very common. What we hear from people, again, who phone our advice lines. We also found that routine workplace. processes can become important points of friction. Flexible working requests six sickness, absence. management and performance discussions can provide. opportunities to. identify and address support needs, but if they're not handled well, then actually they can make the problem worse. So what we know at Acas is how do we resolve that? Line managers are actually the key to all of this conflict. What we know at Acas conflict is less likely to.
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Where they engage. appropriately and openly, and work in a. collaborative way, and also when they have an understanding of the disability. And they also have good. interpersonal skills to actually be able to have those conversations. Well, we also know that effective practice, including explaining the support.
15:53
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Having clear processes of how to put them in place and making sure that they agreed and they're supported over. sustained and sustained over time also works. So why we can't say all of these. factors explain why we're seeing this. increase in disability discrimination. EC cases. Our research does tend to say that where disability related. conflict can arise and also what causes it to escalate. And, you know, our main message is. really to make sure that managers are equipped to have those everyday conversations. And I think one of the things that we're aware of at Acas is, like I think I've said earlier on, managers are really nervous.
It came up in the Mayfield review as well. Managers are nervous of saying the wrong thing. And one of the things that Acas we we try and encourage people to say is actually all managers, regardless of who they're.
It came up in the Mayfield review as well. Managers are nervous of saying the wrong thing. And one of the things that Acas we we try and encourage people to say is actually all managers, regardless of who they're.
15:54
15:54
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Should have everyday conversations with their people. And we know that's hard sometimes when they're busy, but the simplest way to do that is to actually sit this individual down and say, is there anything I can do that can enable you to perform to your best? You know, I've recruited you. You were amazing. That's why you work for us. Is this something that may be making it harder? Is there any barriers I can remove? You're not even talking about disability then? And then actually, that might create an environment where that person feels safe to disclose, because that's the other issue we find at Acas, people are not feeling safe in workplaces to disclose they have a.
15:54
15:54
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Especially if it's hidden, especially if it's fluctuating. They feel that if they disclose that, that then they're going to face a detriment. So, you know, the onus is down on these. organizations to equip their line managers with the skills to create that psychological safe. environment where, you know, disabled workers feel that they can perform to their best and, you .
15:54
15:54
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Can you describe what that engagement looks like? We talked to colleagues in the in the Office of Equality, Opportunity and the Disability Unit are on a periodic basis on a range of issues. There isn't a huge amount more to say about that. I mean, they have raised with us the question of the operation of the reasonable adjustments duty. They've probably been talking to colleagues, to the to my right as well, because actually it's often it will often be the case that my three colleagues here might have more. detailed information about individual cases or. illustration of what's going on, of what's going on.
I mean, yes, we know, as others do, that there are sometimes delays in the provision of reasonable adjustments. I think a number of things have come up in this conversation. I suppose the one the only other one I would add that kind of speaks to that is sometimes in order to do this, this process.
I mean, yes, we know, as others do, that there are sometimes delays in the provision of reasonable adjustments. I think a number of things have come up in this conversation. I suppose the one the only other one I would add that kind of speaks to that is sometimes in order to do this, this process.
15:55
15:55
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Sometimes it does take a little while. You. You won't be a reasonable adjustment will not necessarily be either what the employee first asked for, nor necessarily what the employer first thought might be the right answer. And actually having the discussion is part of the way of finding out whether you might have a really good low cost option, whether the option might be a change to a working pattern rather than a physical adjustment to the to the work, whether it might relate to equipment. And if it does relate to equipment, then you've got to work out what equipment, go out and buy it, and so on and so forth.
So I think there are there are a number of understandable delays or. understandable .
So I think there are there are a number of understandable delays or. understandable .
15:55
15:55
15:55
15:55
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Research, and what would your assessment of its. robustness be? The the factual answers to those questions? I know we didn't have a role in the process, but also we don't on the whole spend a lot of our time marking the government's homework on these things. I think I mean, the committee has spent some time thinking about the various bits of research that are out there. And so to have we it it's probably the case that most parts of the picture are somehow reconcilable. I think it's quite clear that there are some. circumstances in which delays appear to be quite long and quite unsatisfactory.
There are others in which in which the system works, works as designed. The kind of relative levels of those are, as you say, a matter for research. But I wouldn't want to .
There are others in which in which the system works, works as designed. The kind of relative levels of those are, as you say, a matter for research. But I wouldn't want to .
15:55
Richard Quigley
-
-
Richard Quigley
I wouldn't want to opine on which research is better at this stage. Anybody? Anything else to add on that? Don't feel I have to declare an. And, Ruth, we've had quite a few witnesses so far. Call for a rollout of workplace adjustment passports, and it seems like a very sensible idea. Do you think that a national scheme for adjustment passports is workable?
15:56
15:56
15:56
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
You know, because they allow workers to record their needs and. preferences as a live document. They can transfer. between managers without having to constantly update people. So I think obviously if employees are happy to have those adjustment passports, then I think that they would make sense in terms of the rollout. It would just be ensuring from an employer side of things that they're properly.
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Support the adjustment process. And obviously, line managers, we've already spoken about the importance of line managers need to be really. educated around them as well. And I did just want to mention, just because I hadn't had a chance before, that we produced some guidance for disability confidence, specifically for line managers in managing disabled employees. So I think with that and also with Acas guidance on reasonable adjustment, if we could do more to get that out to.
organisations and also employees, that would be really helpful. But I .
organisations and also employees, that would be really helpful. But I .
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
The nature of the work and that the context of that work. So I sort of see it as it should help fast track those conversations. So you've got passport, you can take that with you. You can embark upon a. conversation to a degree. You've got an amount of information in there that you're willing to disclose and share and discuss, but the. conversation's still got to happen with another employer.
And those. adjustments need to be considered into, in the new context of the work where the work in the work activity, the.
And those. adjustments need to be considered into, in the new context of the work where the work in the work activity, the.
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It does rely, it comes back to that good work. Again, it replies, it needs an employer who is offering good work. They've got good cultures. There's not the stigma and the discrimination, and people feel they can openly share and bring these passports with them. So, so in principle, I does support it, but there are those other factors around it that just need to be considered for it to be. effective and to .
15:57
15:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Be to be implemented. You'd see it more of an enabler than an answer. Yeah, yeah. Because that, that alone, it's, it's not going to solve, it's not going to answer the question change isn't it? The exam question is different for that other employer because the job's changed where they're working, how they're getting there. So so it just needs to enable kick start the conversation. But then you still need to train line manager to have the.
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
It's a brilliant start to the conversation. Thank you. Thank you chair. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to ask a question, John, to you first of all, and then others may wish to comment. The TUC and others have argued that the commission should be taking a much more proactive enforcement approach in relation to the workplace.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Duty. I'd just like to know your view, please. Of course, we're aware of that view that they that they and others take. Obviously, some of what I'm about to say will be very familiar to the committee from previous interactions we've had, we've had with you, but I'm going to say it anyway. We have a pretty broad remit. Our budget has not moved in nominal terms in a decade. We can do fulfill our statutory obligations, which include some measure of enforcement and other things across our remit. But our discretionary funds for specific enforcement. activity are pretty.
constrained now and have been throughout my term at the commission, which is which is now three years. The way we go about thinking about how to deal with that. challenge is to try and be as strategic as we can in the way we engage in enforcement and litigation. That means, for example. intervening in cases that will set a precedent. So generally at the high in the higher courts rather than rather than in. tribunals intervening where we perceive or can address system wide problems as, for example, we try to we're trying to do at the moment in our work, in sexual harassment, in the uniformed services, for example.
So we try and operate at a system level , broadly and strategically. We are not funded or really. equipped to support individual cases. And therefore, on the whole, we don't. There are ways in which we can do that. For example, we have in the past run legal support funds where we've. identified a kind of broad ranging systemic issue.
constrained now and have been throughout my term at the commission, which is which is now three years. The way we go about thinking about how to deal with that. challenge is to try and be as strategic as we can in the way we engage in enforcement and litigation. That means, for example. intervening in cases that will set a precedent. So generally at the high in the higher courts rather than rather than in. tribunals intervening where we perceive or can address system wide problems as, for example, we try to we're trying to do at the moment in our work, in sexual harassment, in the uniformed services, for example.
So we try and operate at a system level , broadly and strategically. We are not funded or really. equipped to support individual cases. And therefore, on the whole, we don't. There are ways in which we can do that. For example, we have in the past run legal support funds where we've. identified a kind of broad ranging systemic issue.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
The most recent one was related to race discrimination in the workplace, the one before that in relation to access to public transport for disabled people. So themes of that kind, where we've sought to take a portfolio to support a portfolio of cases. And we think in those circumstances, there are occasionally. opportunities to let relatively modest sums of money in the great scheme of. things make a bit of a difference to the to, to enforcement and to to the and to precedent in the law. If we had a bit more money to play with, we probably could and indeed might seek to do a bit more of that.
Along those.
Along those.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
We have been very grateful for the fact that the. The Committee has. recognised our pleas along these lines in the past and has added its voice to ours in trying to persuade government that with a little bit more cash, we think there's quite a lot more we could do. But actually this is really quite a good example of that. I think there are a number of ways in which we might, if we were able to be able to make a bit more difference in this area, we are will shortly start thinking about our next strategic plan.
We're in the middle of a three year strategic plan at the moment. The this precise issue, reasonable adjustments in the. workplace was a kind of close contender when we were putting this strategic plan together. We haven't chosen to focus on it in this current three years. It's certainly conceivable that we might going forward. And obviously, the evidence that this committee's. investigation unearths and.
We're in the middle of a three year strategic plan at the moment. The this precise issue, reasonable adjustments in the. workplace was a kind of close contender when we were putting this strategic plan together. We haven't chosen to focus on it in this current three years. It's certainly conceivable that we might going forward. And obviously, the evidence that this committee's. investigation unearths and.
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Think you would need to make this a priority and in your next strategic plan? Well, if I go back to what I it's a bit sounds a bit cliched, but what I call a strategic approach, evidence of breadth and scale of the. problem is always really important and evident to us. Quite a significant proportion of the incoming intelligence we get about equality issues. Equality act issues more. generally does relate to disability. As it happens, what we have focused on in the current, what we are focusing on at the moment, what we have focused on in our current strategic plan has actually been disability, been, you know, the rights and entitlements of disabled people in slightly different circumstances.
So as I think the committee is aware, we are doing some more work on disabled people's access to public transport. We are doing some more work on trying to make sure or trying to make sure that the Department for Work and. Pensions takes proper account of learning disabilities in the way it assesses people for for benefit entitlement. We've done work with, for example, festival operators on trying to make. festivals accessible to disabled people. These are not workplace issues, but they are. But we are we are tackling those issues. And the reason why we come at we've we've gone after those things is that we have seen those broad ranging.
substantial system wide. patterns or indeed, or similarly, as with the festival operators case, a. particular operator or a particular employer, which is the way we tend to, to operate in our in our enforcement.
So as I think the committee is aware, we are doing some more work on disabled people's access to public transport. We are doing some more work on trying to make sure or trying to make sure that the Department for Work and. Pensions takes proper account of learning disabilities in the way it assesses people for for benefit entitlement. We've done work with, for example, festival operators on trying to make. festivals accessible to disabled people. These are not workplace issues, but they are. But we are we are tackling those issues. And the reason why we come at we've we've gone after those things is that we have seen those broad ranging.
substantial system wide. patterns or indeed, or similarly, as with the festival operators case, a. particular operator or a particular employer, which is the way we tend to, to operate in our in our enforcement.
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
The sort of territory that we might get interested in, as we have in other contexts. Yeah. Thank you. And so I've understood what you've said about the resource challenge very clearly. But I've also understood you saying there that you can choose to strategically prioritise things. So how feasible is it within your existing. envelope to kind of have this more robust enforcement? And what kind of.
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Do if we were to strategically put it in your next strategic plan. If we put it, if we put it in our strategic plan, then the question is, well, what might we do? Which sorry, maybe that's that that might be the better, the better way to answer it. The answer is there might be a variety of things we could do. One of them is what our first action. Whenever we have, we have either new obligations or responsibilities or changes to the law and so on and so forth, is often to make sure that the guidance is right and that the awareness of the obligations of employers is where it should be.
For example, we did quite a lot of work in as a follow up to the passage of the Worker Protection Act recently on what that meant. And you'll have seen some of that in in the press recently, encouraging employers to think about their their forward looking, anticipatory duties in that area. And in that instance, you start with making sure the guidance is there. But there's also a fair amount of work that we and indeed colleagues along the bench here can do to enhance public understanding. That is not that's real work. So one can be out there and promoting and promulgating the guidance and telling the story about what the law requires.
Then alongside that, we can think about legal support. As I say, we can intervene. We can take cases on our own. There's a second one. We can conduct inquiries into, conduct an inquiry into a specific, often quite a narrow one, in order to keep to keep the thing manageable. We could do that. We can also conduct research and evaluation of what actually makes a difference in some of these areas.
For example, we did quite a lot of work in as a follow up to the passage of the Worker Protection Act recently on what that meant. And you'll have seen some of that in in the press recently, encouraging employers to think about their their forward looking, anticipatory duties in that area. And in that instance, you start with making sure the guidance is there. But there's also a fair amount of work that we and indeed colleagues along the bench here can do to enhance public understanding. That is not that's real work. So one can be out there and promoting and promulgating the guidance and telling the story about what the law requires.
Then alongside that, we can think about legal support. As I say, we can intervene. We can take cases on our own. There's a second one. We can conduct inquiries into, conduct an inquiry into a specific, often quite a narrow one, in order to keep to keep the thing manageable. We could do that. We can also conduct research and evaluation of what actually makes a difference in some of these areas.
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
We would just like to see more support to. employers around complying with their legal. obligations and also improving HR and people. management capability, because we know that most. SMEs fall foul of employment regulations, not because they're necessarily bad employers, but because they're very much time poor, resource, poor knowledge poor. So we would like to see more support in the system. And this is why we have called. previously for doubling of Acas budget around this, because actually we need more support provision, particularly to SMEs, rather than sort of naming and shaming. We want that support so that they're able to do that and do the best that they can in supporting .
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
People and particularly disabled people. Yeah, and I'd say, I mean, I think I when I answered Richard's question, we've really shifted our focus around disability over the last 2 to 3 years. especially my team, because we know there's that gap of knowledge, especially with small businesses. We've been doing some amazing work as well, jointly with colleagues at.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Where we did a campaign around reasonable adjustments. We've also been doing some further work, especially focusing on neuro inclusion, so we know it's actually getting that guidance. We've we've we've got a broad range of guidance on the Acas website. We just need to now get people to come and see that. So how can we actually drive that traffic to us? Because what we know is if managers have the skills that reduces that.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
They can deal with that more informally. And fingers crossed, then that. reduces the number of early conciliation claims coming through to acres and employment tribunals going through to the tribunal service, which is also facing a massive increase. So it's that. prevention is is really key. And that's why our Acas. strategy that we're in, our coming up to our second year now .
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Try and be . relatively brief and our answers will be appreciated. So yeah, equality. considerations have been built. into the redrafting of our revised code of practice. It's looking at flexible working from the outset. And they've also informed both the structure and the content of our new code. The key thing we've tried to do is to prevent, like I said earlier, those two legal. frameworks becoming confused. So the statutory flexible working request and reasonable adjustments, as we know, are separate rights with different legal tests. So what are amazing team at Acas have done? Who are right in the code?
We're going to address that in three main ways.
We're going to address that in three main ways.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
We're going to keep the legal. distinction very clear. The new. reasonableness test for. refusing a flexible working request does not reduce or replace the employer's separate duty to make reasonable adjustments, and a flexible working request might be refused under flexible working. But that does not mean that the employer doesn't now need to consider that request under a reasonable adjustment if that individual meets the threshold for disability. So the second thing that we're going to address is by helping employers. recognise where those two rights might interact in practice. So people may not. necessarily use the legal terminology that we all talk about here.
So but that does not. reduce or. replace that that. requirement for the for the employer. So what the code's trying to encourage is that employers remain alert to the needs that they may need to make a reasonable adjustment in requests for flexible working rather than a flexible working request. So when they're going through that.
So but that does not. reduce or. replace that that. requirement for the for the employer. So what the code's trying to encourage is that employers remain alert to the needs that they may need to make a reasonable adjustment in requests for flexible working rather than a flexible working request. So when they're going through that.
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
And they should also revisit the position of the new. information or if new information comes along during that conversation. So the third thing that we've put in is we've built in wider. equality safeguards into the code. And that's really come from the feedback we've had from stakeholders. So that will. include making sure we make it clear that people need to have meaningful.
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
As well. So when people are coming for those. conversations and a clear reason for those decisions, whether the decision is yes or no, those safeguards are relevant across all protected characteristics as well, not just for disability. One important thing as well I've talked about already is this issue around disclosure as well. So we're aware that .
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Updated since 2011. What plans do you have to update it? We recognise it hasn't been updated since 2011. We recognise that inevitably the law has moved in a number of ways since then and elements of it are out of date. I might add that, as I said earlier, the piece on, for example, fluctuating conditions or the references fluctuating conditions in the. 2011 code are still correct in our view and are still clear in our view. That said, updating a statutory code is, as the committee is very well aware from recent experience, quite a substantial. endeavor with some complexities associated with it.
Our work on the services code took us a couple of years, even before the Supreme Court. decision last year. So we are thinking both about how and when best to make some progress on the employment code and what else might be necessary by way of additional or .
Our work on the services code took us a couple of years, even before the Supreme Court. decision last year. So we are thinking both about how and when best to make some progress on the employment code and what else might be necessary by way of additional or .
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
In relation to flexible working as an Equality Act? Reasonable adjustment. We'd absolutely, absolutely. It's good of you to be considerate of that of our thought process as you as you have been. We absolutely would want. If we're updating in any updating of guidance, we'd want to make sure that we properly state the understanding of where flexible working can be a reasonable adjustment. That's where I think everybody around this room is .
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
In terms of whether you are going to update this code quite soon, I hope? Okay. And obviously just conscious of the rollout of the Employment Rights Act provisions next autumn, I'm also conscious of your comments about how long it's taken to to update other codes. So would you expect that it might be possible to have .
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
And trying to make sure that the landscape of guidance and particularly of our guidance is there and is correct for employers. As I say, we've done quite a lot of work. I hope to try and publicise the work we've done on updating guidance in relation to to, as I say, the Worker Protection Act, for example, I know that's a couple of years ago, but that would be the example I would cite as a way of. demonstrating how, how we can keep, we can try and keep government guidance up to .
15:57
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Date without necessarily going through the full palaver of a of a code refresh. That's helpful. Thank you. And I will ask just one last question. The bell might go, in which case you might get curtailed. Claire, I'm going to ask this to you though, but from an HR perspective, how great is the risk that focusing on the next Employment Rights Act, flexible working provisions when they come in next year could overshadow .
15:57
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Compliance with the workplace, reasonable. adjustments duty. So I think there is a there is a risk that that could happen. The other risk that we'd say is that employers could struggle to comply with all of the different pieces of legislation coming through, because there are many we're certainly doing as much as we can at the Cipd to support our members.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Tools, trackers and all of those sorts of things. particularly SMEs. I think I'd just echo what Julie said. I'm actually in the process of responding to the Acas consultation at the moment, and I think it's actually very clear that the difference between the two and actually saying that, you know, it makes it clear that the code does not remove, reduce or replace that duty. So I think that will certainly be helpful. But I do think more, as we've been saying throughout this conversation, more employer awareness. around reasonable adjustments in general would be helpful. So if we could do more to get that great guidance that Acas have around that, then that would be really helpful.
And perhaps I imagine you're thinking .
And perhaps I imagine you're thinking .
15:57
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
That anyway, but it would be good to get that out as well. Okay. Thank you. I think we'll unless any colleagues have got any other follow ups, I'll just thank you all so much for your evidence this afternoon. It's been a really, really interesting session. And two of the things that I'm going to take away most of all are the importance of good work and also that concept of psychological safety.
I think that's really important,
I think that's really important,
15:57
15:57