The Debate: Should there be a legal maximum temperature for offices?
As London summers heat up, is it time the UK mandates a maximum working temperature for the office? Two writers go head to head in this week’s Debate
Yes: Heat is a workplace hazard. Workplaces must evolve as we face changing climates
Legislation on maximum workplace temperatures are non-existent, yet we will only start to experience more intense heat waves as global temperatures continue to increase. Employees are ensured a ‘reasonable’ temperature, but there is no legal upper limit, leaving thousands of employees working in uncomfortable, and potentially unsafe working conditions. High temperatures can lead to poor focus and dehydration, as well as exacerbate health conditions like asthma, heart disease and menopause. And for neurodivergent people or those with sensory sensitivities, extreme heat can be especially overwhelming. During intense heat, productivity plummets and morale takes a hit – so why would employers want their employees to work from the office?
Working from home and remote work should be part of company wellbeing policy, and is a simple, cost-effective solution when it comes to managing extreme weather conditions. Commuting in this heat is dangerous, and leaves employees feeling unmotivated before they even step foot at their desk. Most office roles nowadays can be done remotely. Allowing employees to work flexibly means productivity levels can be maintained, while also allowing employees to feel cared for.
Introducing a maximum workplace temperature – such as 30°C, as recommended by some unions – would make employers legally responsible for adapting working conditions when things get too hot. It’s important that workplaces evolve as we face changing climates and recognise heat as a workplace hazard. Giving people the right to work from home during heatwaves is a necessary step towards a more humane and climate-resilient working culture.
Hayley Knight is the founder of Be Yellow
No: It may not feel like it, but the UK does actually have bigger problems than the heat
It’s hot… well hot… might be too hot” are the seminal words spoken in the first Inbetweeners movie as our heroes step out of the airport in Spain. It is also how everyone will be feeling in London this week as we pull ourselves from our oppressively warm flats and ride an unbearably hot Tube to work. Shouldn’t we at least be protected from having to sit in an uncomfortably hot office all day as well? Well, no. At least, not at the behest of a new legal maximum temperature for offices.
Although it may not feel like it when it is quite this warm, the UK does actually have bigger problems than the heat. At the top of the pile is economic growth. If we want to achieve the sort of growth rates that will allow people to buy all the ice lollies they will ever need, we must reduce the burden on business so they can spend less on compliance and more on creating jobs and wealth. With the tax and regulatory burdens already too high and getting higher, businesses need fewer hoops to jump through, not more.
Companies already have to adhere to legal safety standards that protect their employees from a range of dangers, including a reasonable working temperature.
In addition, office workers are living in an age of unprecedented flexibility. Many could choose to work from home, or from a cooler public space, if their offices really are too hot. Failing that? Fans and cold water are cheap.
If the government wanted to help with the temperatures, they would do well to first make it easier to install air conditioning. Last time I checked, that was a far better way of cooling a building down than new legislation.
Callum Price is director of communications at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA)
The Verdict
Over the whirring soundscape of fan-filled offices, there’s been one other sound cutting through the workplace this week: moans about the weather. Cue googling about what temperature it has to reach before our employers are legally obliged to send us home. Tough cookies, there is none – only the vague stipulation that temperatures during working hours must be “reasonable”. Is it time that changed? Ms Knight certainly makes a sympathetic case so. That sweaty commutes are leaving workers grumbling before they even get to work won’t be hard for many to believe this week, and, as hashed out in last week’s Debate, there can be extra horrors to forcing workers to come into the office (read: men in shorts).
But, as Mr Price saliently points out, economic stagnancy is but a bigger horror, and employers are certainly not in need of more burdensome regulation. With not even schools governed by upper temperature limits, mandating them for the office would be an example of yet further infantilisation of UK workers.