Working From Home (Home-based Working Committee Report)

Baroness Fraser of Craigmaddie Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Fraser of Craigmaddie (Con)]

My Lords, it is always a pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Lane-Fox, and I add my thanks to the noble Baroness, Lady Scott of Needham Market, and the members of the committee for this timely report. As noble Lords have said, it comes at a very prescient time, not only because of challenges around AI but because employers around the country are grappling with this fundamental question: what is best for their organisations and the people who work for them?

I come to this debate from three perspectives. First, I am an employer and manager as chief executive of Cerebral Palsy Scotland. Secondly, I am someone who could not easily get through the week without flexible working, balancing as I have to my responsibilities in Glasgow with my duties in your Lordships’ House. Thirdly, I am a parent of those grown-up children whom Alan Milburn has been talking about, facing challenges finding employment.

As the report acknowledges, the world of Teams and Zoom has undoubtedly opened up employment opportunities for many disabled people, but I sometimes wonder whether part of that success stems from the fact that, on a Teams call, we are all simply head and shoulders on a screen. Visible differences are less obvious, and perhaps discrimination becomes less likely when somebody’s wheelchair is not the first thing that you see. The noble Baroness, Lady Scott, rightly highlighted the challenges around Access to Work, not only the stresses and strains that the scheme is under but the whole understanding by those who administer the scheme of what is needed to support disabled people to get into and stay in work.

Home working can indeed save significant time, money and stress but, as the report acknowledges, it is not without its challenges. Not everyone has an ideal home environment; people may be sharing limited space or struggling with unreliable broadband. For others, a local coffee shop or a co-working space might seem a practical alternative, but that raises questions around confidentiality and data protection when sensitive information is handled in public spaces. As a manager, I have experienced the issue of sick leave, as the noble Baroness, Lady Watkins, mentioned. When people say to me, “Can I work from home today because I’m not feeling too well?”, I need to know, “Can you work or are you too sick to work?” It is really hard if they are just choosing to work from home, and I struggle with the idea that you can look after small children and work at the same time.

The committee rightly highlighted concerns about isolation and the difficulties of mentoring remote workers. These issues apply to all employees, including disabled people. Disabled employees deserve not only to secure employment but to be fully integrated members of the team, with the same access to mentorship, development and informal learning opportunities as anybody else. Getting the job and proving you can do it is only the beginning. As the noble Baroness, Lady Lane-Fox, described much better than me, all people benefit from social interaction, workplace creativity and a sense of belonging, regardless of whether they are disabled or non-disabled.

My own experience is that people can often be more productive at home, particularly when they are undertaking tasks they understand well: work that is routine, clearly defined or familiar. However, when an organisation is seeking to challenge or change its culture, redesign services or develop new ways of working, those subtleties are much harder to absorb remotely. Some things are simply easier to understand when people are together, and Parliament is a wonderful example of that.

As many noble Lords have acknowledged, some roles cannot be fully home-based. The noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, referred to the NHS. I want to give a shout-out for NHS Scotland. In remote areas such as Orkney and Shetland, it trailblazed hybrid working long before the pandemic forced the rest of the NHS to catch up. At Cerebral Palsy Scotland, while our clinical therapists do deliver virtual sessions, in-person, hands-on, multidisciplinary working has a greater clinical impact and, so they tell me, provides greater professional satisfaction.

I have also seen situations where some teams can work flexibly while others, particularly those in customer-facing or manual roles, have no option but to be present every day. If that disparity is not managed carefully and sensitively, resentment can develop. I believe it goes far deeper than just the chief people officer. It can be damaging for morale, well-being and organisational culture.

The report seeks to articulate what the Government should do. Apart from the call for more data, and I would love an answer to what constitutes “reasonable” in some of these things, I am with my noble friend Lady Manzoor: the Government should do very little. Employment law, regulations and policies are already substantial, and a top-down approach is unlikely to succeed. The last thing many businesses need is additional prescription.

The report recognises that one size does not fit all. The key is flexibility. I know how much I value having control over my working time, but employers have to be supported to determine what works best for their organisation, while employees have to understand their organisation’s goals and agree how best they contribute to achieving them. This is a matter for employers and employees together. It is not, in my view, something with which government should overly concern itself. I thank the committee once again for its report and for bringing this important debate to the House.