Employers should face regulatory action if they fail to support employees with their health, such as by providing subsidised nutritious food, a representative of the IPPR think tank has claimed.
According to a report in The Guardian (16 October), the IPPR also said that sending people back to work after medical treatment would be ineffective if the workplace was detrimental to their health.
The IPPR's comments followed an opinion article by the health secretary, Wes Streeting, that was published in The Telegraph (14 October). This claimed unemployed people with obesity should be given weight loss injections, such as Ozempic, to help them return to work.
Obesity is costing the UK government £11 billion, Streeting wrote, which is creating a “significant burden” on the NHS.
“While I understand the intention behind fines, I don't believe they're the most effective approach,” said Livia Martini, chief people officer at corporate wellbeing provider Wellhub, speaking to HR magazine.
“Instead, I'd advocate for positive enforcement: incentives, and education that highlight the health and business benefits of investing in employee wellness.
“Companies will be more successful when they genuinely believe in the benefits and create a culture of investing in employees’ wellbeing.”
Read more: New disability guidance for managers
Fines could place pressure on smaller HR teams, according to Alan Price, CEO of HR software BrightHR.
Speaking to HR magazine, he said: “It could be difficult to penalise an organisation that is not providing subsidised nutritious food. A lot will depend on the business itself and what they are able to provide.
“It may place undue pressure on HR teams, especially in smaller businesses with limited resources. The feasibility of such measures will be unique to each and every business.”
Employers should do their best, however, to support employees with a healthy lifestyle, said Signe Svanfeldt, lead nutritionist at wellbeing platform Lifesum.
Svanfeldt told HR magazine: “Employers have a responsibility to support a healthy work environment, as it directly impacts employee wellbeing and productivity. Poor health, including issues like gut disorders and unhealthy eating habits, can lead to absenteeism, disengagement and higher turnover.”
Employers should do their best to provide personalised support, Svanfeldt added.
She continued: “To cultivate a healthy workplace, employers should implement comprehensive wellness programmes that provide access to nutritious food, stress management resources and personalised health support.
”A more effective strategy [than weight-loss injections] involves offering solutions such as subsidised healthy meals, health tracking tools, and comprehensive and holistic wellness programmes."
Read more: Number of long-term sick set to surge, commission warns
Although employers can support employees with a healthy lifestyle, they cannot always influence employees’ health, Price added.
He continued: “It’s important to recognise that, while employers are obliged to look out for the welfare of their staff, they are not ultimately responsible for how ‘healthy’ or ‘unhealthy’ the choices individual staff members make are.
“Similarly, while providing healthy food and opportunities for exercise are good ways to improve staff wellbeing, health and morale, there is no guarantee that these offerings will necessarily improve the health outcomes of staff with long-term health conditions, particularly those with pre-existing or genetic conditions.”
Additionally, HR leaders should be aware of the legal considerations around trying to change someone’s weight. Price said: “There are also legal considerations to consider, given that an employee’s weight could be linked to a disability in some instances.
“Employers should do their best to create a healthy work environment while recognising that ‘healthy’ looks different on everyone, and making provisions to support staff with their specific health needs, rather than taking a blanket approach.”
