"Almost one in three people have experienced mental health issues while in employment"

This is an important report by the professional body for HR. I think that the background research is absolutely accurate. But - its recommendations - on how to deal with the issue are just pious nonsense. It will never happen in the real world. There is no mention of trade unions.

Without independent trade unions in the workplace, representing and advocating staff individually and collectively, then this important issue will never, ever, be dealt with properly.

If employers do not recognise trade unions then they do not recognise internationally agreed codes on basic human rights. Employers cannot pick and choose which human rights they recognise.

Discrimination in the workplace happens when you have no democracy in the workplace. You cannot have democracy in the workplace without independent trade union recognition. Full stop.

Almost one in three people have experienced mental health issues while in employment

New CIPD research finds employers are taking a reactive approach to employees’ mental health issues, when preventative steps make better business sense

According to new research, the number of people saying that they have experienced mental health issues while in employment has climbed from a quarter to a third over the last five years. Despite this, the majority of employees still don’t feel that people experiencing mental health issues are supported well enough at work.

In response, the CIPD, the professional body for HR and people development, is calling on organisations to take a more preventative approach to employees’ mental wellbeing, encouraging a culture of openness in their workplace, whilst at the same time, training line managers to provide and signpost support for employees, in order to create healthier, more engaged and more productive workplaces.

The new research from the CIPD found that in 2016, almost a third (31%) of the over 2,000 employees surveyed said they have experienced a mental health problem at some point during their working life, compared with a quarter (26%) in 2011. Of those who have had poor mental health at work, more than four in ten (42%) have experienced a problem in the past 12 months specifically, to the extent it has affected their health and wellbeing.

Despite this increase, the number of respondents who say their organisation supports employees with mental health issues either ‘very’ or ‘fairly well’ remains less than half (46%). While this is a significant improvement of nine percentage points since 2011 - when just 37% of respondents said their organisation was able to support employees either fairly or very well - it highlights that there is still a significant way for employers to go to better support staff with mental health issues. Worryingly, just four in ten employees (44%) would currently feel confident disclosing unmanageable stress or mental health problems to their current employer or manager, a similar proportion as reported five years ago (41%).

Rachel Suff, Employment Relations Adviser at the CIPD, comments: "With people’s experiences of mental health problems at work on the increase, it’s disappointing not to see more employers stepping up to address them. Mental health should get just as much attention, awareness and understanding as physical health, and employers have a responsibility to manage stress and mental health at work, making sure employees are aware of, and able to access, the support available to them.

"This agenda needs to be championed from the very top by business leaders and senior staff – either through role-modelling or open conversations about their own experiences. There’s also a clear role for HR professionals and line managers to ensure that employees are getting the support they need and feel they can speak up. It’s crucial that organisations work to promote an open and inclusive culture so that employees feel confident about disclosing mental health issues and discussing the challenges they are experiencing. Promoting good mental health also makes good business sense, as employees are likely to be more engaged and productive if they work for an organisation with a workforce wellbeing strategy that emphasises the importance of both good mental and physical health."

The CIPD’s survey also asked employees what types of support their employer currently provides to manage and help people with mental health problems. The most common provisions were phased return to work (32% of employees), access to flexible working arrangements (30%), access to occupational health services (27%) and access to counselling services (27%). The least common provisions were mental health first aiders* (3%), mental health champions** (5%), and training for line managers in managing and supporting people with mental health problems (10%).

Suff continues: "We’re seeing a distinct trend of reactive measures when it comes to how employers support people with mental health issues. These are very important, but we also need to see more preventative steps to promote good mental wellbeing. Where possible, employees with mental health problems should be able to access support before problems escalate to a point where they struggle to manage work and their illness, and need to take time out of work. Of course, there will be occasions where people experiencing a mental health problem will need to take time off work and then it’s important that the right framework, including occupational health services and phased return to work, is in place to support them in that situation.

"It’s particularly disappointing to see such a low level of training by employers for line managers in how to manage and support people with mental health problems. Line managers play such a crucial role in an employee’s experience of work, and are often the first line of defence in terms of spotting problems and supporting individuals should they ask for help. Therefore, their management style, the relationships they have with staff, and their ability to implement policies are all paramount to how supported people feel at work. A lot of it is simply about employees feeling that their line manager cares and will support them if they say ‘"I need to talk". However, line managers are not counsellors and will need training themselves if they are to feel confident and competent to create this ‘open’ culture and support and manage employees with mental health issues. This should be the starting point for employers."

Emma Mamo, Head of Workplace Wellbeing, at mental health charity Mind, said: "It’s clear that there’s a high prevalence of mental health problems among employees. It’s good to see more people feeling comfortable enough to let their workplace know when they’re struggling with their mental health, which is likely to be an indication that employers are fostering an open culture where staff feel able to disclose their problems. However, it’s vital that employers also have good support in place for all staff, including those experiencing unmanageable stress or poor mental health. Employees need to be reassured that if they do put their hands up, they’ll be met with understanding, and additional support if necessary.

"Creating mentally healthy workplaces needn’t be difficult or expensive, often it’s about putting in place small adjustments, such as regular communication and flexible working hours. Being able to identify and support a colleague struggling with poor mental health can also make a big difference, which is why Mind delivers mental health awareness training to line managers. We’re also launching a Workplace Wellbeing Index – a benchmark of best policy and practice which will enable employers to recognise the good work they’re doing when it comes to promoting good mental health at work, as well as highlighting areas for improvement."

The CIPD recommends three important ways that line managers can make a difference: At the beginning of a new working relationship, be clear that no problem is too big, small or personal for an employee to raise Work to create a culture of openness and encourage staff to discuss their challenges. Make time to have conversations that go beyond a person’s immediate and short-term workload and discuss their role, responsibilities and opportunities more generally Know when and how to direct people to access specialist help either internally through the organisation, such as counselling and/or occupational health services, or externally via mental health groups and charities.

* Mental health first aid training is designed to improve people's understanding of mental health and provide a basic level of training to help these first-aiders to recognise the signs and symptoms of mental health problems so that they can respond in an appropriate way when people need help. ** Mental health champions are trained and supported by their organisation to help reduce stigma and build awareness about mental health issues to encourage an open and inclusive culture around mental health issues.

ends

CIPD Press Enquiries Helen Ablett / Ben Rathe / Katie Flynn Tel: 020 8612 6400 Email: press@cipd.co.uk

World Mental Health Day sees increase in reported mental health problems (such as anxiety and depression) at work

Tomorrow (Saturday 10 October) is "World Mental Health Day" which is supported by the respected United Nations agency the World Health Organisation.

"World Mental Health Day is observed on 10 October every year, with the overall objective of raising awareness of mental health issues around the world and mobilising efforts in support of mental health. 

The Day provides an opportunity for all stakeholders working on mental health issues to talk about their work, and what more needs to be done to make mental health care a reality for people worldwide". 

While mental health issues at work are not at all solely related to work related stress it is clear that many of us are being made ill at work due to long hours and workers being treated inhumanly. This will also impact on the many at work who have pre-existing mental health issues. Often employers and individual managers (not all by any means) have very little or even no understanding of this problem. 

I am obviously horrified at the finding of the CIPD survey below but not surprised.  There is increasing economic and social inequality, low pay, zero hour contracts and reduced employment rights. If you have a workforce that is not unionised or has weak density, there is no one to "push back" and challenge senior management on long hours and uncaring attitudes. So no wonder we have such high and increasing reporting of mental health issues at work.

The CIPD (professional body for HR) is publishing a survey ahead of World Mental Health Day that shows " Over two-fifths (41%) of organisations have seen an increase in reported mental health problems (such as anxiety and depression) over the last twelve months.... In 2009, only 24% of organisations reported seeing an increase in mental health problems during that year; 2015 is now the sixth consecutive year that levels have been over 40%, showing the problem isn’t going away. Reported increases are most likely in large and medium-sized organisations, with 69% and 51% respectively showing rises. They’re also associated with long working hours and the extent to which operational demands take precedence over employee wellbeing.
 

“So what more can employers do? Manager training is crucial, as they are often employees’ first point of call for reporting an issue, but only 30% of organisations currently provide it.  There needs to be a lot more focus on this going forward, as well as tailored support for line managers from HR and signposting employees to appropriate support. Employers also need to look at how well their corporate culture supports good mental health and employee wellbeing.”

The report also found the private sector particularly lacking in managing and supporting employees with mental health problems, with 28% admitting they weren’t taking any action to support employees. Just 32% currently offer a counselling service, compared to 70% of public sector organisations. Similarly, only 21% said they were increasing awareness of mental health issues across the workforce as a whole, compared to over double that (47%) in the public sector"

Stop the Trade Union Bill - Stop the Tories causing industrial mayhem

The Government will on Monday (14 September 2015) publish a Parliamentary bill that will attack trade unions ability to defend and representative their members.

This is probably one of the most pointless and even spiteful pieces of anti-trade union legislation ever.

The exact detail has not been released but according to the official government consultation paper it could :-

1. Stop councils from raising revenue by charging to collect union subs from staff wages.

2. Ban strikes even if a majority of workers vote for it (also  undermining the principle of democratic elections in our country)

3. Result in criminal charges for taking part in social media protests on twitter and Facebook.

4. Allowing employers to use US style agency thugs as scab labour to break strikes.

5. Stopping union health and safety reps from being sufficient given time off to prevent accidents, illness and violence at work

Even the professional body for HR in this country, the Chartered Institute for Personal and Development has attacked the bill:-

"Proposals on strike laws are a response to yesterday’s problems, says CIPD  Plans to raise the bar for strike action divert attention from building better, more engaged workforces. The Government’s proposals on strike laws are an outdated response to industrial relations issues currently facing UK employers and could prove counter-productive" If this proposal goes ahead it will indeed prove "counter-productive". If workers' democratic rights to legally strike are not allowed then there will be an explosion of "unofficial" action and protests. If there is a legal strike and scab agencies are allowed to bus in strike breakers then there will be mayhem in the workplace. I hope the Tory MPs who actually have experience of "real" work as opposed to a life of political bag carrying (like too many Labour MPs I may add) will help kick this rotten stupid bill into touch. UNISON General Secretary, Dave Prentis, makes sense when he notes that   “Democracy won’t be enhanced by vindictively raising thresholds but by modernising balloting and allowing workers to vote from their phones and tablets.” Email your MP now to speak against the Bill on Monday https://secure.unionstogether.org.uk/page/speakout/protect-our-voice-at-work

CBI says Bosses must pay workers more (is it their patriotic duty?)

No, this is not a New Year spoof but has the Spirit of Christmas finally got the better of the Scrooges union boss or is there a more practical reason for such a statement?  

John Cridland, director general of the CBI, said that businesses had to deliver "better pay and more opportunities" for their employees....still far too many people stuck in minimum wage jobs without routes to progression, and that's a serious challenge that businesses and the government must address"  BBC report here

Is this anything to do with this   "2013 will be the fifth calendar year in a row when average earnings increase by less than prices.  This is unprecedented in at least the last seventy to eighty years, and possibly for much longer".  CIPD

Check out TUC "Britain Needs a Payrise" "Depressed wages equal depressed consumer demand, which leads to less investment and productivity falls - a spiral of economic decline. Lower wages also mean reduced tax receipts, leaving less revenue for vital services".

I am by coincidence writing up a draft pay claim for my employer 2014/2015 to union stewards for their agreement. Shall I also include this statement "it is clear from the comments of the CBI and the Chartered Institute of Personal & Development that it your patriotic duty to pay your workers more".

Them and Us: So why don't UK workers trust senior management?

The CIPD (professional body for HR) reports today that the lack of trust between employees and senior management is holding back sustainable economic recovery.

They conclude not unreasonably that employees who don't trust their senior managers are likely to be less productive and and less engaged.

Only 37% of employees trust them apparently which is an appalling figure.

The CIPD think that this is a problem that has been getting worse and may be linked to "hard" decisions due to the recession. I think it is much more basic than this. Some thoughts on why and what to do about it...

Number one is the huge and growing difference in pay between the top and the bottom. How can employees respect senior managers if they are content to fill their own pockets with gold while the people who clean their toilets live in poverty?

Even so called blue chip companies pay their workers so little that the tax payer has to subsidise their pay. 

Not only pay but  why do so executives in top companies often get decent pension contributions when their workers get rubbish?

Why if you need a company car to carry out your business do executives get luxury status cars while ordinary workers get basic models?  Surely everyone just needs a safe, comfortable and reliable car?

Why do some companies pay statutory only compensation to employees they make redundant but make huge payouts for executives they "let go"? 

Finally, a pet hate is the the "happy clappy" company culture guff.  Where everything is so, so wonderful.  Where staff are expected to volunteer to be "change champions" even if it means that their jobs and conditions are under risk by this change. This sort of things is bonkers. Demeaning "Ab Fab" superficiality. People can see through this nonsense.

The solution to this? How about a living wage plus for all; wage councils for sectors that can afford more than a living wage plus; modern rights and freedoms for trade unions; employee representation on boards and remuneration committees; truly progressive taxation of the higher paid, statutory pay ratios of low to highest paid....? Anyone else any other ideas?

Interestingly that only is such inequality bad for society (see "The Spirit Level" et al) but it is is making our economy uncompetitive and inefficient. Perhaps this imperative will mean that things might finally change?

"Managers behaviour are key" to getting sick workers back to work

Remember the BBC comedy sketch when Basil Fawlty suggested Sybil that she should enter “Mastermind” and her specialist subject should be “the bleeding obvious”?

This recent "back to basis" guidance on what Managers should do with long term sick workers is from the CIPD (Chartered Institute of Personal & Development supported by the Health & Safety Executive amongst others)

"Staying in touch regularly with the individual while they are off sick

• Reassuring them that their job is safe

• Preventing them from rushing back to work before they are ready

• Providing a phased return to work

• Helping them adjust to the workplace at a gradual pace

• Asking the individual's permission to keep the team informed on their condition

• Encouraging colleagues to support the individual's rehabilitation

• Holding regular meetings to discuss the individual's condition and the possible impact on their work"

I would add regular consultation with trade union reps as also being key but all of this is a welcome start.

HR admits to discriminating over mental health?

This press release from the professional HR “trade body” is worth a look for all trade unionists. What I found particularly notable is that a fifth of HR respondents admit to unlawful discrimination against those who disclose a mental health condition! I wonder what the CIPD/ Commission for Equality and Human Rights (and unions) are doing about this?

Good news about importance of pensions!

CIPD press release
Top 5 CIPD Poll Results, 2009

Every week the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) conduct a poll on its website asking members a topical question, attracting an average of 1,000 responses. Today the CIPD publishes the top 5 poll results of 2009:

21st September 2009
The ECJ has ruled workers taken ill on holiday can claim back sick leave. Will you:
Welcome ruling - 14%
Trust staff not to take advantage - 30%
Consider tightening sick pay policies - 56%

5th October 2009
Does your organisation hire applicants who have disclosed a mental health condition?
Yes - 79%
No - 21%

19th October 2009
Is there still a business case for offering a pension to your employees?
Yes - 88%
No - 6%
Sometimes - 6%

16th November 2009
What do you think of the Government's proposal to phase out tax relief on childcare vouchers from 2011?
Agree - 15%
Disagree - 85%

14th December 2009
How much 'absenteeism' happened/do you expect the day after workplace Christmas parties?
None, they are held on Fridays - 49%
A little - 31%
A lot - 5%
We don't have parties - 15%

Notes to Editors
• The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) is Europe's largest HR and development professional body with over 135,000 members, supporting and developing those responsible for the management and development of people within organisations

...a fundamental lack of trust in senior management...

“Our research highlights a fundamental lack of trust in senior management among many employees, largely due to the lack of meaningful consultation and effective communication during major change such as redundancy programmes and restructuring”.

I’ll guess now some folk would have ignored this quote by assuming it is from some "dinosaur" producer interest trade union having a dig at the CBI or IOD.

But there is more -

“The impact of redundancies on the dole queue is well documented. But there could be a nasty hangover for employers too. Survivors of redundancy programmes left 'punch drunk' by the process may not have the levels of motivation and commitment needed for their employers to capitalise on any recovery. Many disillusioned employees will vote with their feet and leave as soon as the labour market picks up”

And finally...
“The survey also highlights the dissatisfaction people feel with the rewarding of failing senior executives. Failing chief executives and directors should not be financially rewarded when they leave organisations when their leadership has contributed to poor business performance. 'Rewards for failure' are contributing to a deep-seated sense of unfairness amongst employees who feel they've been less well treated. This needs to be addressed if trust in senior leadership teams is to be rebuilt”.

To my surprise this is actually from a press release sent out by “The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD)”, which was based on a recent YouGov Survey of 3,500 people.

I think that the analysis is spot on and there is massive mistrust between many senior management teams and the wider workforce. Interestingly the relationship between line managers and workers is usually (not always of course) pretty good which also reflects my experience.

I would occur with the solution proposed that there must be meaningful consultation and effective communication. What too often happens is so-called “consultation” only takes place after the decision has already been taken and on a “like it or lump it” basis. To me by definition real consultation can only take place via the trade unions. This should take the form, first and foremost, by meetings between trained and supported local trade union reps and managers/HR that have the actual clout to agree things.

As suggested “Rewards for failure” is not the only thing currently wrong. The pay gap between the highest paid and the lowest paid generally is far, far too high. Workers deeply resent this and may feel that there is caste system in their organisation which results in them feeling that they do not belong.

This has to change.

I have not been overly impressed with the CIPD in the past due to their views on the “rights” of agency workers however I think with regard to this issue we are singing from the same song sheet.

Of course locally as a trade union rep - things have always been sweetness and light between me and HR CIPD members over the years. Long may it remain so.

“Dealing with trade unions when the gloves are off: trade secrets”

Is this what HR really think of us? Top trade union web portal unionreps had a very interesting post this week about a link to an article (here) first published in “Personnel Today” last year. This is the trade paper of the Chartered Institute of Personal and Development (CIPD).

The article was written by an Andy Cook who is ironically a former trade union official turned HR/employment law advisor. Some of the things he discusses aren’t that controversial and are fairly obvious such as the difficulty that unions have being attractive to “Thatcher’s Children” or employers actually communicating with their workforce. But is clear that he advocates using the law to block and frustrate any industrial action.

He advises “Retain a lawyer experienced in employee relations and industrial action law. Most employment lawyers have no relevant experience, even in the big firms”...Allow the union to use "check-off" (ie. members pay their subs through payroll), which gives you information on its membership- invaluable when challenging industrial action. ...Challenge robustly any industrial action - even if you don't go to court, a challenge may help to stop future action if the mistakes are repeated. ..Don’t be afraid to take technical points when challenging industrial action a misplaced word, or a missing number may be enough to get an injunction.

Some trade unionists nostalgically reminisce about a so-called "golden time" when HR (then called “Personnel”) were truly independent and saw their role as to advise management and unions without “fear or favour” to help bring about agreement. Now, while I am not personally convinced that this time ever really existed. I am surprised that there is such an article in the leading HR publication. Why is there no real mention of any alternative conflict resolution except the “courts”! What about arbitration, what about ACAS? Why does it perpetuate the myth that unions in pay negotiations will be fighting a “wider political agenda”? Why is there no recognition that it is actually perfectly legitimate for unions to try and prevent the pay of their members being cut? Unions are also perfectly aware that excessive pay awards can result in job losses and are prepared if necessary to make compromises in order to save jobs and good HR professionals know all this.

The only positive thing that I take away from this is that the author does accept that if the unions are organised and have the support of their members then they are in a strong bargaining position and the only way that employers can oppose them is by a “misplaced word or a missing number”. Also this article is more evidence that we need further reform of the trade union legislation to rebalance the relationship between employers and unions. It is clear that the balance is too far in favour of the employers. As is also entirely self-evident from this article the law is being “misused” in industrial disputes. This may be perfectly legal and I may be naive but I always thought that British law should be about Justice and Fairness for All not just the employers?

This is not just important for the unions but also for UK Plc.

We will never get a culture in place of constructive and positive industrial relations if employers believe that they can always just use the law instead to hammer the workforce into submission. I actually think that the overwhelming majority of HR would agree.

“Oversacking” Redundancy a false economy say CIPD

Shock horror! I am in agreement with the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development! (CIPD - the HR professional body). I heard their Chief Economist, John Philpot, being interviewed on PM while driving home. The terminology, like nearly all modern day HR jargon is awful but John warned companies against what he called “Oversacking” of staff during the present crisis.

Not only is redundancy expensive (average of at least £16,300 per worker) but research has shown that in past recessions companies have panicked and unnecessarily made staff redundant then had to incur pointless costs to reemploy when the upturn comes along. Research has also found that redundancies increase staff turnover and reduce the productivity of the staff who are left.

“It is urging employers to plan for recovery by retaining their people, rather than downsizing and risking long-term damage to their business... Employers should hold their nerve and focus on retaining talent and investing in the skills of their people. It is these people with their commitment, productivity and ability to add value who will ultimately keep individual businesses and the whole of the UK competitive, and put us in a strong position to recover from the downturn quickly.”

I hope that those Housing associations which are laying off skilled development workers take note!

Check out the press release here (which does not include the “Oversacking” term for some strange reason).