Businesses face being tied up in ‘years of litigation’ over Labour’s right to work from home, Lords warn
Peers warned Labour’s workers’ rights reforms risked businesses being dragged into ‘years of litigation’ by employees wanting to work from home.
Employment tribunals could be inundated with claims from people seeking more ‘flexible’ deals unless Labor announces the right to WFH, according to a new report.
Bosses have even been warned that employees could be sued if they trip and fall or scald themselves with hot tea while working from home; because ’employers still have legal responsibilities towards them’.
The House of Lords Home-Based Work Committee concluded that WFH could assist the Government’s plans to help the disabled and long-term ill get back into work.
But it also warns that an increase in home or hybrid working could have unintended consequences, including workers going on strike en masse if they are forced to return to the office.
The Lords report says proposed changes to flexible working under Labour’s Employment Rights Bill could risk ‘years of litigation’ in employment tribunals unless clearly defined.
The controversial bill currently being discussed in Parliament stipulates that all employees will have the right to request flexible working, regardless of their length of service.
If the bill becomes law, bosses will be able to reject such requests only if it is ‘reasonable’ for them. However, Peers cautioned that it is currently unclear how to define “reasonable”.
Colleagues have revealed how ‘unequal’ WFH is enjoyed mostly by university-educated professionals living in London, and that it risks ‘increasing inequalities between different workers’.
House of Lords Home-Based Working Committee’s question “Is working from home the same as working?” The report also raises the possibility of workers suing their bosses for harming them while WFH.
The report says: ‘It is important that the government gets this right: without a clear definition there is a risk of years of litigation at a time when the employment tribunal system is already struggling with problems.’
The committee called on the Government to produce legal guidance defining ‘reasonable’ requirement to ensure employment tribunals are not overwhelmed with cases.
Baroness Rosalind Scott, chair of the committee, said: ‘We do not expect the government to legislate further on an issue best addressed by employers and workers, but it should provide relevant guidance and support the guidance that is already available more widely.
‘In implementing the Employment Rights Bill, it must ensure that changes to flexible working requests do not put undue pressure on the employment tribunal system.’
“Is working from home the same as working?” The report also raises the possibility of workers suing their bosses for harming them while WFH.
“Employers have legal responsibilities towards their employees, including health and safety legislation, even if they work from home,” the report stated.
‘It is vital that employers are aware of their responsibilities to minimize the risk of conflict and litigation.’
His colleagues also revealed how WFH was ‘unequal’ and enjoyed mostly by university-educated professionals living in London, which risked ‘increasing inequalities between different workers’.
And they warn that workers, including civil servants, could go on mass strike if they are forced to return to work from the office.
The report says: ‘Some workers may be prepared to trigger industrial action such as a strike if they do not accept mandatory office attendance.’
Colleagues have recommended the Government review the discrepancy between its 60 per cent mandatory office attendance policy for civil servants and plans to close 11 office buildings in London.
‘These policies may conflict with each other and, if they cannot be reconciled, the Government may have to decide which one it wants to prioritize,’ the report adds.
This makes it even more likely that civil servants will be working from home, from the current 40 per cent, potentially embarrassing ministers.
The report concludes: ‘The long-term social and economic impacts of remote and hybrid working are uncertain and may yet be negative. These have so far been difficult to measure due to the novelty of widespread remote and hybrid working models.
‘There are risks to innovation, collaboration, productivity and skills development. If not adequately addressed, these factors can affect corporate performance in the long term.’
The government said it was grateful to Baroness Scott for the report and would consider the findings before providing a response next year.
A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said: ‘Flexible working, which includes working from home, can help achieve a better work-life balance and remove barriers for carers, parents and people with disabilities.
‘We’re making changes through the Employment Rights Bill to make flexible working requests more likely to be accepted, and we’re fixing the employment tribunal system so more cases are resolved before they get to them.’
