Working From Home (Home-based Working Committee Report)

Baroness Watkins of Tavistock Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Watkins of Tavistock (CB)]

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate, and thank the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, for so ably chairing the committee, and for her excellent introductory speech covering the findings that most of us will probably repeat in part.

I intend to concentrate on health and disability issues. I welcome the Government’s response to the potential health benefits and risks associated with remote and hybrid working. For many, working has significant health benefits, particularly at home, but for others—those who live alone—it can induce loneliness and isolation, leading to withdrawal, anxiety and depression. The committee found that some opt to work from home and concurrently manage caring responsibilities at home in the same environment. Although findings were not definitive, this may disproportionately affect women who work from home. Constantly juggling work and caring roles is difficult and may result in stress. However, it may provide significant cost and time savings in terms of travel, thus reducing employees’ resulting financial worry.

Some companies report monitoring people’s activity at home during working hours, which may be entirely reasonable, but some home workers find that intrusive and anxiety-provoking. The Government’s response states that the Health and Safety Executive will promote its home working guidance, which should address such concerns and make recommendations for employment best practice to support people working from home while monitoring work output. Though I know little about cyber security, there are definite risks if people do not stick to the rules of their employer when working from home, which may in turn lead to loss of employment.

How many companies actually visit the working environments of home workers to ensure that their employees have the correct equipment and sufficient physical room to work safely all day? Or is this to be solely the responsibility of the worker to decide? During Covid, as the noble Lord, Lord Monks, said, working from home was a huge bonus, but post pandemic many found that they had to work from home for at least part of their hours of employment, as so many companies reduced the amount of office space they provided. For some, this is an advantage: from evidence given to the committee on health, hybrid working has widely been seen as positive. However, others continue to work with inadequate desk and chair space, and are not provided with suitable ergonomically designed equipment, potentially leading to significant musculoskeletal problems.

I acknowledge that the Keep Britain Working programme is considering how employers and government will build healthier, more inclusive workplaces and refine best practice, with the aim of reducing sickness and absence and promoting employment for disabled people. Workplace adjustments and flexible working may well support those with health conditions to enter and stay in work, which is welcomed.

Conversely, it is possible that employers may encourage disabled employees to work only from home, leading to loneliness and a lack of opportunity for promotion. That may be more cost-effective for employers and reduce the cost of the Access to Work government grant scheme. However, I do not believe that this should lead to a reduction in benefits that fund individual workers’ transport to work, which support disabled people to get to work and stay in work. Can the Minister assure the House that His Majesty’s Government will continue to fund specialist equipment, through grants for ergonomic furniture, assisted software and other adapted equipment for disabled people working on company premises and at home? Similarly, is it intended to legislate to ensure that everyone working from home should be provided with the right equipment by their employer to conduct their work safely and effectively?

We did not take evidence relating to piecework at home, but we did learn about its history. Are further regulations needed to protect home workers to ensure that output numbers expected for pieceworkers by employers can be produced within the contracted hours that they are paid for at home? How will the Government ensure that all pieceworkers earn at least the minimum wage for the hours they work?

Some employees reported unreasonable expectations by employers who expected availability out of contracted hours, and associated stress as a result. People working from home report less sick leave. Are they working while unwell or are they healthier due to being able to work at home? Many home-based workers reported working much longer hours than those contracted and feeling unable to log off. Do they feel less able or less reluctant to take sick leave? No one wants home working to lead to the equivalent of sweatshop employment, with no boundaries between home and work and a lack of real human interactions. Some workers live alone in small homes, others in shared houses with multiple occupants. What are the long-term health effects associated with these challenges?

It is clear that we need further guidance on home-based working and close monitoring to ensure that the advantages of increased productivity—or decreased productivity—are known. How can the Government ensure that we develop and promote safe, healthy home-based working policies across our community?