In a recent survey of 1,000 people in the UK, an intriguing trend has emerged - one that sheds light on how remote work and flexible schedules are reshaping our work-life balance. It appears that many individuals are taking advantage of their newfound freedom to clean their homes while working. A surprising 60 percent of respondents admitted to tidying up between work tasks, sparking conversations about the evolving boundaries between work and personal life.

This study - conducted by an independent research firm - has not only uncovered this emerging trend but has also provided valuable insights into the specific habits and behaviours of those who engage in this practice. Notably, the data highlights the prominence of Monday as the day when most cleaning enthusiasts get to work, with a staggering 81 percent of participants revealing that they embark on their cleaning routines at the start of the week.

What makes this phenomenon even more interesting is the distinction between individuals who primarily work in traditional office settings and those who work from home. Among the latter group, 48 percent confessed to sneaking in some cleaning chores during their lunch breaks. The ability to integrate basic cleaning tasks into their daily schedules is seen as a perk by some remote workers, allowing them to maintain a tidy home environment alongside their professional duties.

However, while this trend may appear harmless, it is not without potential consequences. Employment law experts, like Elissa Thursfield - a Consultant Solicitor in the employment law team at Richard Nelson LLP - emphasize the importance of caution in navigating this new landscape. Flexibility in terms of location, they remind us, does not necessarily equate to flexible working hours.

Thursfield pointed out that deviating from specified working hours to engage in personal tasks, such as cleaning, can potentially be viewed as serious misconduct and may lead to disciplinary actions. This underscores the need for clear boundaries and expectations for remote workers. Employers are encouraged to establish guidelines for remote work practices, especially if they intend to enforce consequences for deviations from these rules.

One of the major concerns raised by employers is the impact of these cleaning breaks on productivity. Some argue that breaking away from work can disrupt productivity, while others believe that short breaks can provide a mental reset and boost overall efficiency. Striking the right balance between work and personal responsibilities is crucial for both employees and employers.

It's essential for employees to review their employment contracts and engage in open discussions with their employers regarding expectations and boundaries. Likewise, employers must adopt a thoughtful approach when addressing concerns about productivity and potential disruptions. Hasty decisions to force employees back into office environments should be avoided and any changes to work arrangements should undergo a thorough review process.

In the United Kingdom, where the importance of financial planning for retirement has never been more pronounced, startling statistics have recently come to light. A report by wealth manager Netwealth has revealed that a staggering 88% of individuals with workplace pensions have at least one unclaimed pension, amounting to an average of £28,000 per person. These dormant pots represent a substantial lost opportunity, particularly in the face of rising inflation and increasing living costs.

For those who have diligently contributed to their pensions throughout their careers, allowing these assets to remain unclaimed can have dire consequences. One of the primary concerns is the risk of eroding the value of these savings over time, especially when they are with providers who charge exorbitant management fees. This issue is not just about forgotten paperwork; it's about the potential financial security of retirees being compromised.

The dynamics of the modern job market mean that individuals will change jobs several times during their professional journey. This leads to the accumulation of multiple pensions over a lifetime, with the responsibility of keeping track of them falling squarely on the shoulders of their owners. Managing multiple pension pots can be overwhelming, with a barrage of paperwork and administrative tasks to contend with. It's no surprise, then, that many people struggle to oversee all their pensions effectively.

Charlotte Ransom, CEO of Netwealth stated: 

“It is very common to have several pools of retirement assets during our lifetime, and it is often difficult to successfully and actively track all of them, especially if they are sitting with multiple providers over a long period of time. The high number of stranded assets is clearly concerning, obstructing consumers from having a holistic view across all of their wealth in aggregate in order to be able to plan forward with confidence and identify the funds needed for key milestones.”

Netwealth's research has provided valuable insights into the extent of the problem. Among workers who have lost track of a pension, a concerning 42% revealed that between two and five of their various pension pots are now stranded. The situation is even more pronounced among female respondents, with a staggering 50% of women who confirmed having unclaimed pensions admitting that they do not have sight of or access to up to five company pensions accrued throughout their careers.

The implications of these findings are profound. In a society where financial stability in retirement is a paramount concern, leaving pension funds unclaimed can lead to a substantial shortfall in one's retirement income. As individuals grapple with the realities of an uncertain economic landscape, taking action to recover these lost assets is becoming increasingly vital.

Charlotte Ransom emphasised the importance of addressing this issue promptly. She added:

"Now more than ever, it is vital that consumers track down any stranded pensions that they have worked hard to earn, and that they act to recover them sooner rather than later to regain control over these important pools of value. Savers need to be protecting and fully maximising the value of their retirement savings, ensuring their assets are working as hard as they could be when it comes to delivering financial returns.”

The problem of unclaimed workplace pensions is not one that can be ignored. It's a financial challenge that requires individuals to take a proactive approach in order to safeguard their retirement income. Whether through regular pension audits, consolidation of pension pots, or seeking professional financial advice, there are steps that can be taken to ensure that these valuable assets do not go to waste - the potential loss of £28,000 per person is too significant to ignore, particularly in a climate of economic uncertainty.

An office worker who took an extended 28-month maternity leave and refused to return to work, lost her unfair dismissal and discrimination lawsuit against her former employer. The case revolved around Jowita Parsons - an import coordinator at International Forest Products Limited - who spent a considerable period away from her job due to maternity leave and personal matters. While Parsons claimed unfair dismissal and discrimination on pregnancy and sex grounds, the employment tribunal ultimately ruled against her.

Jowita Parsons' extended absence from her job spanned two consecutive maternity leaves and additional time off for family-related issues. Her initial maternity leave started four weeks earlier than planned, shortly after she received a disciplinary warning for "aggressive and inappropriate behaviour" towards her line manager, Ben Wallace. This premature departure, coupled with her lack of clarity regarding her return date, caused disruption within the small company of just 21 staff members and significant stress to her colleagues.

Parsons had joined International Forest Products Limited as an import coordinator in March 2019. Within five months, her line manager - Ben Wallace - expressed concerns about her punctuality and work quality. Later that year, Wallace pointed out a mistake in her work via email, which led to a complaint from Parsons, who stated that their working relationship had "not got off to the best of starts." Subsequently, she received a disciplinary warning for her "aggressive and inappropriate behaviour" towards Wallace.

Following this disciplinary action, Parsons requested to commence her maternity leave four weeks ahead of schedule. As a result, Wallace had to arrange cover for her job at short notice, which resulted in poor business performance and additional stress for her colleagues.

In March 2020, two days after the UK went into lockdown, Parsons requested to extend her first maternity leave to 12 months. Although she was due to return to work in October of that year, she fell pregnant again and requested her second maternity leave to be attached to the first. With extensions due to family issues, she was not due to return to the office until the new year, having been on maternity leave for a total of two years, two months and two weeks.

When her line manager subsequently informed her of the need for additional training upon her return and requested a specific date, Parsons refused to provide one. Instead, she insisted that she would only return once her divorce proceedings and house sale had concluded, leaving her return open-ended.

In February 2022, her employment was terminated after she failed to return to work. Parsons attempted to sue the company for unfair dismissal, discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and discrimination on the grounds of sex, but her claims were all dismissed by the tribunal.

Employment Judge Angela Shields stated that Parsons had been repeatedly asked to provide a reasonable timeframe for her return to work but was unable to do so. Shields emphasized that the reason for Parsons' dismissal was her refusal to return to work and the company could not keep her role open indefinitely. The Judge stated:

“The reason that the clamant was dismissed was because she refused to return to work and [the company] could no longer keep her role open indefinitely.”

She added:

“The tribunal was also satisfied that there were real pressures on [the firm] to fulfil the role of import coordinator and to have [Parsons] in her position and completing the work... there was a genuine disruption and overburdening of a small company whilst [she] was not in her role.”

In the realm of personal values and priorities, the United Kingdom has long been regarded as a nation with a strong work ethic. However, recent data from the Policy Institute at King's College London reveals a significant shift in the way the British public views work and its place in their lives. Of 24 nations included in a comprehensive study, the UK ranks among the lowest for the importance placed on work, signalling a changing attitude towards the age-old adage that 'work comes first.'

The study found that only 73% of the UK public believe work is very or rather important in their lives, placing the country at the bottom of the list when compared to the 24 nations surveyed. While this figure may not seem remarkably low, it is noteworthy when compared to countries like Italy, Spain, Sweden, France, and Norway, where over 90% of respondents prioritise work.

Interestingly, the proportion of Britons who consider work important has seen little change since 1990 when 76% felt this way, compared to 73% in 2022. This implies a relative stagnation in the perception of work's importance over the past three decades.

One of the most intriguing aspects of the study is the generational divide in attitudes towards work. While Baby Boomers and those born pre-1945 have seen the importance of work decline significantly as they leave the labour market, younger generations - including Millennials, Gen X and Gen Z - still view work as a crucial part of their lives. This shift indicates that younger individuals remain committed to their careers but are less likely to prioritise work above all else.

When it comes to work-life balance, the study reveals that only 22% of the UK public agrees that work should always come first, even if it means sacrificing leisure time. This percentage is notably lower than countries such as Spain (45%) and France (39%). Furthermore, there is a significant gender gap in these responses, with 28% of men advocating for work as the top priority compared to only 16% of women.

The research also emphasizes the importance of leisure time in the UK, with 93% of respondents stating that leisure time is very or rather important in their lives. While the UK is not alone in valuing leisure, countries like Sweden and Norway top the list with 96% expressing the same sentiment. This suggests that despite changing attitudes towards work, Britons continue to place a high value on their personal time for relaxation and enjoyment.

The study delves into perceptions about the relationship between hard work and a better life. In the UK, 39% of respondents believe that hard work usually leads to a better life, a figure that falls below the United States (55%) but surpasses Germany (28%). These statistics reveal that, while the British public acknowledges the importance of hard work, they may not hold the same level of optimism as their American counterparts.

Over time, the belief that hard work and luck are equally important for success has grown from 40% in 1990 to 49% in 2022. Meanwhile, the percentage of those who consider luck and connections more vital than hard work has decreased from 21% to 12%. This shift demonstrates a nuanced view of success, suggesting that the British public increasingly recognises the multifaceted nature of achievement.

The data from the Policy Institute at King's College London highlights the evolving perspectives of the UK public regarding work and leisure. While the importance of work remains significant, younger generations are less inclined to prioritise it above all else. The study also underscores the enduring value placed on leisure time and the nuanced understanding of success that recognises the roles of both hard work and luck.

A recent survey conducted by Investing Reviews - an investment comparison site -  has shed light on the sentiments and attitudes of over 2,000 UK citizens regarding retirement, pensions and investments. This comprehensive survey comes at a time when debates over retirement ages are intensifying not only in the UK but also in neighbouring countries like France. The findings are both revealing, offering a glimpse into the challenges and aspirations of UK citizens as they plan for their retirement years.

One of the standout findings from the survey is the significant desire among UK workers to lower the retirement age. Currently set at 66, this age threshold has come under scrutiny, with 68.71% of respondents expressing their belief that it should be decreased. This sentiment is noteworthy, given the ongoing protests in France against raising the retirement age from 62 to 64, highlighting a broader European concern about when one should retire.

Despite the desire to retire earlier, UK citizens face numerous challenges when it comes to ensuring a comfortable retirement. A staggering 71.16% of respondents believe that retiring in the UK has become more challenging than ever before. This perception is compounded by the fact that 62.60% of those surveyed do not think their pension alone will be sufficient to retire comfortably, prompting many to consider the need for additional investments.

The survey also underscores the frustration felt by UK workers regarding their pension contributions. Over half (55.82%) feel that they are unable to contribute as much to their pensions as they would like, leaving them with concerns about their financial security in retirement. Interestingly, 42.66% of respondents stated that they would consider switching to an entirely different career sector if it offered greater employer contributions to their pensions.

Delving deeper into sector-specific data, Investing Reviews previously analysed government data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to identify trends in employer pension contributions. The results showed that the 'public administration and defence (including compulsory social security)' sector has the highest percentage of employers contributing 20% or more to employees' pensions. Conversely, the 'wholesale and retail trade (including motor vehicles and motorcycle repair)' sector had the lowest percentage, with only 1.3% of employers making such contributions.

Another concerning finding from the survey is the lack of awareness among UK citizens about their own pension savings. A significant 34.93% of respondents admitted to not knowing exactly how much money is in their pension fund. This knowledge gap could have serious consequences for individuals' retirement planning and financial well-being.

Perhaps the most striking revelation of the survey is the desire among 42.66% of respondents to retire outside of the UK if given the opportunity. This aspiration raises questions about the challenges of keeping up with the increasing rate of inflation and the cost of living, factors that retirees must contend with when remaining in the UK.

The Investing Reviews survey provides a comprehensive snapshot of the UK's sentiment surrounding retirement, pensions and investments. It highlights a strong desire to lower the retirement age, concerns about the ability to retire comfortably, and the need for additional investments. It also underscores the importance of employer contributions and the knowledge gap regarding pension savings. The dream of retiring abroad serves as a poignant reminder of the financial challenges faced by many UK citizens as they plan for their golden years.

In a recent case heard in the Leeds Employment Tribunal, a Direct Line insurance worker - Maxine Lynskey - was awarded £64,645.07 in damages after winning a disability discrimination claim against her employer.

Maxine Lynskey began her career at Direct Line in April 2016 as a telesales consultant. For the first four years, she excelled in her role and was known for her enthusiasm and dedication to her work. However, in March 2020, Maxine started experiencing symptoms of menopause, including "brain fog," concentration difficulties and emotional fluctuations.

After sharing these challenges with her employer, Direct Line transferred her to a lower-paid role in June 2020, believing it would be less demanding. However, as the menopausal symptoms intensified, Mrs. Lynskey struggled to meet the performance requirements in her new position. Managers described her as "constantly trying to keep her head above water."

Her menopausal symptoms became increasingly debilitating, affecting her ability to concentrate, remember information and communicate effectively. Ms Lynskey also had difficulty navigating computer systems she had used for years. She described herself as "cold and unfriendly" during calls, which was noticed as a stark departure from her previous enthusiastic demeanour.

In January 2021, Maxine's boss, Danielle Wilburn, informed her that she would not receive a pay rise due to her performance being rated as "need for improvement." This decision further exacerbated Maxine's distress and by April, formal performance management proceedings were initiated, resulting in a written warning and a performance improvement plan for Ms Lynskey. Despite her openness about her condition, her boss insisted there were "no underlying conditions" and offered no support.

Ms Lynskey made the decision to resign from her position in May 2022. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against Direct Line, alleging constructive unfair dismissal, sex and age-related harassment, failure to make reasonable adjustments and unfavourable treatment related to her menopausal symptoms.

The Employment Tribunal in Leeds heard Ms Lynskey's case and rendered a judgment that upheld her claims of unfavourable treatment and the need for reasonable adjustments due to her menopausal symptoms. The tribunal found that denying her a pay rise was unfair, considering her condition made improvement challenging. However Ms Lynskey’s claims of constructive unfair dismissal, sex and age-related harassment were not successful,

Employment Judge Jennifer Maria Wade emphasized that Direct Line had "reached the limits" of compassion in supporting Maxine. However the judgment underscored that a less discriminatory approach should have been taken, including occupational health referral or considering alternative roles.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become an integral part of the modern workplace, reshaping how we work, collaborate and achieve our goals. Asana, Inc. - a pioneering work management platform - recently unveiled its "State of AI at Work Report," drawing on insights from its Work Innovation Lab. This report not only highlights the increasing role of AI but also underscores the need for comprehensive guidance to navigate this AI-driven landscape.

The report showcases a significant trend: 36% of employees in the United States (U.S.) and the United Kingdom (U.K.) now incorporate AI into their work routines on a weekly basis. This statistic reflects a growing recognition of AI's strategic significance, with 55% of executives expecting their organisations to leverage AI for goal-setting and 61% expressing confidence that AI will outperform traditional methods in driving their companies toward their objectives.

Moreover, employees are not just passively accepting AI; they are eagerly embracing it as a strategic tool. Over half (51%) of executives are willing to invest more in workplace tools enhanced by AI capabilities. AI's applications at work are expanding rapidly, with 30% of employees using it for data analysis and 25% for administrative tasks. However 62% and 57% of employees respectively are eager to leverage AI for data analysis and administrative tasks. Even in creative domains, AI's potential is being recognised, as 45% of U.S. employees express interest in using AI for brainstorming, compared to 32% in the U.K.

Surprisingly, the prospect of AI assessing employee performance garnered interest, particularly in the U.S., where 38% of employees welcomed the idea - compared to 28% in the U.K. An intriguing revelation was that 15% of U.S. workers would entertain the notion of AI serving as their boss, nearly double the proportion in the U.K.

However, amid this eagerness for AI integration, concerns emerge. Approximately 26% of workers fret about being perceived as indolent for utilising AI, while 20% admitted feeling fraudulent for relying on AI support – a sentiment more pronounced among U.K. workers.

The report's findings also illuminate a pressing need for comprehensive guidance and training. A mere 24% of companies currently offer policies or guidelines on AI usage at work - and only 17% of employees received training on incorporating AI into their daily tasks. The gap is particularly evident in the U.K., where a mere 13% of companies offer such training, compared to 23% in the U.S.

The report stresses the urgency of bridging these gaps, as 48% of employees desire more direction from their employers on effective AI utilisation. Additionally, 39% acknowledge that a lack of AI training influences their decision to join a company.

Transparency about AI deployment also ranks high, with 59% of employees considering a company’s openness about AI usage a pivotal factor when evaluating potential employers.

Asana's "State of AI at Work Report" offers a revealing glimpse into the evolving landscape of AI in the workplace. While AI's transformative potential is being embraced with enthusiasm, there is a clear need for organisations to provide guidance, training and transparency to ensure that employees can harness the power of AI effectively and without fear.

Saket Srivastava, Chief Information Officer at Asana, commented:

“Our study shows that more employees are now embracing AI at work. Employees see the potential of AI to save time and help them focus on more strategic tasks. However, there are clear obstacles, with some employees harboring concerns about how their AI use could be perceived by peers and managers. Employees can’t navigate this AI shift alone. They need clear guidelines to understand AI's role in their functions, along with tailored training and accessible technologies to fully harness AI's capabilities. Organizations that get this right will leverage AI in a way that unlocks new levels of human ingenuity.”

In a recent case that raises important questions about the intersection of work and personal life in the digital age, the London Central Tribunal has ruled in favour of Razan Alsnih - an online news editor - who was unfairly dismissed by her employer, Al Quds Al-Arabi Publishing & Advertising (AQAA).

The Tribunal found that Alsnih's dismissal was unjust both procedurally and substantively. The case revolved around Alsnih's refusal to download the Viber app - a communication platform - on her personal mobile phone for work-related purposes.

Alsnih began her employment with AQAA in February 2014 as a Social Media Assistant and was later promoted to an Online News Editor position. In 2017, AQAA adopted the Viber platform as a means of communication for its web team, which Alsnih was required to use to stay connected with her colleagues and supervisors. However, Alsnih's refusal to install the app on her personal phone led to a series of events that culminated in her dismissal in February 2020.

The Tribunal noted that AQAA failed to conduct a proper investigation into the matter before making the decision to dismiss Alsnih. Moreover, no formal disciplinary hearing was held, depriving Alsnih of the opportunity to defend herself or understand the implications of her actions. The Tribunal highlighted that procedural shortcomings were evident throughout the process, rendering the dismissal procedurally unfair.

In addition to procedural failings, the Tribunal questioned the substantive grounds of the dismissal. It stated that no reasonable employer would dismiss an employee for refusing to use a work-related app on their personal mobile phone and no reasonable employer would refuse to provide alternatives such as a separate phone or phone line. While AQAA had valid reasons for requiring its staff - including Alsnih - to use Viber, it was unreasonable to expect her to use her personal phone, which blurred the boundaries between her professional and personal life.

The Tribunal's ruling underscores the importance of maintaining a clear distinction between work and personal life, especially in the era of ubiquitous digital communication. Employers have a responsibility to respect their employees' boundaries and ensure that work-related tools do not infringe upon their private lives. While the convenience of instant communication has its merits, it should not come at the cost of an employee's well-being and personal space.

This ruling should serve as a reminder to employers about the importance of conducting thorough investigations, following proper procedures and respecting employees' boundaries in the digital realm. Failure to do so can lead to legal consequences and undermine both the well-being of employees and the reputation of the organisation.

In the ever-evolving landscape of recruitment and employment, understanding candidate behaviour and preferences is crucial for organisations seeking to attract and retain top talent.

A recent survey conducted by Gartner, Inc. sheds light on the complexities of job acceptance, candidate priorities and the factors that drive their decisions. The survey, which collected responses from nearly 3,500 candidates in May 2023, uncovers a range of insights that offer valuable lessons for employers navigating the competitive talent market.

One of the most striking findings of the Gartner survey is that 50% of respondents accepted a job offer over a 12-month period but ultimately backed out before commencing their new role. This trend highlights a significant level of uncertainty and change of heart among candidates after the initial acceptance.

According to Jamie Kohn - Senior Director in the Gartner HR practice - “We are seeing many candidates uncommitted to their new employer and keeping one foot in the job market.”

The survey also points to the prevalence of multiple job offers during the job search process, with 35% of candidates reporting that they received four or more offers. While multiple offers might seem like a positive outcome for candidates, it leads to a more complex decision-making process. Interestingly, even after accepting an offer, 47% of respondents admitted they were still open to exploring other opportunities, and 42% believed they could find a better job if they continued their search. This reflects the high level of uncertainty in the job market.

When it comes to reasons for accepting a job offer, the survey highlights several key drivers that influence candidates' decisions. Flexibility takes the lead, with 59% of respondents stating that greater flexibility in terms of work timing and location played a significant role in their choice. Work-life balance (45%) and higher compensation (40%) are also strong motivators, emphasising the importance of personal well-being and financial rewards in candidates' career choices.

The concept of Employee Value Proposition (EVP) comes to the forefront in the survey's findings. Nearly 90% of candidates reported that they had withdrawn from a hiring process due to mismatches between their preferences and the EVP offered by the employer. This goes beyond just compensation and benefits, encompassing aspects like flexible working hours, career advancement paths, skills development, diversity within teams and management styles. The results underscore the importance of clearly communicating the organisation's EVP and aligning it with candidate expectations.

Salary transparency also plays a significant role in the recruitment process. The survey indicates that 68% of candidates expect to see salary information in job postings and 64% are more likely to apply for a position that lists compensation details. Strikingly, 44% of candidates decided not to apply for jobs that lacked remuneration information which highlights the need for employers to be transparent about compensation to attract and engage potential candidates.

In the context of the ongoing discussion about remote work, the survey findings are crystal clear. Among candidates who have the option to work remotely, 75% prefer remote work for more than 50% of their work time.

The Gartner survey provides a comprehensive view of the changing dynamics in the world of job acceptance and candidate preferences. To stand out in the crowd, attract the right talent and foster a more engaged and committed workforce, employers must understand the drivers that impact candidate decisions – such as the influence of multiple offers, the emphasis on flexibility and work-life balance, the rising importance of transparent communication and a strong EVP – and align their strategies with these preferences.

 recent study conducted by HR software provider Ciphr has unveiled a concerning trend in the UK workforce: a significant portion of employees is working unpaid overtime. This practice, which has become alarmingly common, not only affects workers' well-being but also raises questions about the work-life balance and fairness in the workplace.

Ciphr's study reveals a stark reality – 49% of UK employees work unpaid overtime, while only 23% receive overtime pay. This means that nearly half of the workforce is giving their time and effort for free, contributing an average of just over three hours per week without compensation. Over a year, this adds up to a staggering 18 additional days, or 139 hours of unpaid labour.

Certain groups within the workforce are more susceptible to this trend. Senior managers, remote workers and those in legal services and education tend to work the longest hours of unpaid overtime, with some averaging 4.1 hours per week. Employees aged 25-34 are also heavily impacted, with 3.5 hours of unpaid work per week on average.

One alarming consequence of this unpaid overtime culture is the impact on individuals' health and well-being. Shortening or skipping lunch breaks is one of the common ways employees overwork, with only 36% of respondents in the survey taking their full lunch break every day. If this pattern continues, it could lead to stress, burnout and negatively affect physical and mental health.

Unchecked overwork can have detrimental effects not only on individuals but also on workplace dynamics. It may lead to employee resentment, particularly if the unpaid overtime is not a voluntary choice but a result of unrealistic workloads, understaffing, or unattainable targets.

The study also highlights a gender gap in unpaid overtime. Women are more likely to skip their lunch breaks, with 27% admitting to not taking their full break most days of the week, compared to 19% of men. This sheds light on an additional layer of disparity in the workforce.

The prevalence of unpaid overtime should not be normalised. It is essential for both employees and employers to recognise the importance of a healthy work-life balance and fair compensation for extra hours worked. Employers must take responsibility for managing workloads, setting realistic expectations, and ensuring that overtime, when necessary, is compensated fairly.

Claire William – Chief People Officer at Ciphr – stated:

“If an individual thinks they are doing too many unpaid hours, then it’s vital that they address this with their employer as soon as possible. Doing a bit of extra work occasionally is one thing – and it is relatively common practice to work additional hours, at times, to fulfil your role  but feeling like you ‘have’ to do that extra work regularly because it is being expected of you is quite another.”

She added:

“This research serves as a good reminder on the importance of keeping track of employees’ working hours – mainly to help ensure that people are not working unreasonable hours, but also, as an organisation, that you’re not breaching Working Time Regulations or the national minimum wage rules.

If regular overworking is a problem, and employees are raising their concerns, don’t ignore the situation -  it’s definitely in an employer’s interest to understand what they can do to help, and make changes where possible, before it impacts an individual’s health and wellbeing, and, ultimately, the wider business.”