Scottish Government core – position on hybrid working Equality Impact Assessment – Results

Stage 2: Data and evidence gathering, involvement and consultation

Include here the results of your evidence gathering (including framing exercise), including qualitative and quantitative data and the source of that information, whether national statistics, surveys or consultations with relevant equality groups.

Characteristic¹ 1 - Age

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Age

Some younger colleagues, especially those newer to the SG, indicated that they felt isolated and lonely without regular office contact; and that their home environments were less conducive to home working. (anecdotal)

This chimed with the research: Younger employees are naturally more vulnerable to experiencing loneliness, and as such may be at a risk of experiencing loneliness when working from home

Research has also been limited around the impact of hybrid and home working on employees of different ages, however one study focusing on how hybrid working influences employees experiences found that employees of all ages had experienced hybrid working in a similar way (ONS, 2021).

Evidence from the Hybrid Working Survey 2022 found that overall experiences of hybrid working were similar across different age groups, though some notable differences did exist. Firstly, employees over the age of 50 were more likely to indicate that working from home had affected their physical health (previous research has indicated that this finding reflects employees feeling as though they are exercising less, due to not having to commute to work), and that employees under the age of 29 were more likely to experience loneliness. It should be noted that research generally indicates that younger individuals experience higher levels of loneliness in life compared to other age groups, regardless of where and how they work (e.g. Nguyen et al., 2020). Nevertheless, it should be considered that younger employees may be at a greater risk of experiencing loneliness while working from home.

Source - Age

One to one discussions

Research sources as cited

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Age

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 2 – Disability

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Disability

Risks:

• That hybrid working policy and practices moves disabled staff away from a working experience which has enhanced their wellbeing and broadened their opportunities to develop, network and engage with the organisation.
• A hybrid working policy which disabled staff do not feel supported by, may encourage disabled staff to explore the increasing job opportunities open to them in other organisations.
• A hybrid policy which is too strict may risk excluding employees who would like to work, but who in the short-term would be unwilling to commute as a result of health condition or as part of their recovery from a health condition.
• An increase in home working, may reduce the focus on office facilities. In turn, offices may become less well set-up for disabled staff (e.g. efforts to make offices more accessible may decline and the maintenance of facilities/provisions currently in place for disabled staff may be overlooked as offices are less regularly used).
• That a hybrid working policy treats all individuals with disabilities the same, overlooking the different ways in which work and working conditions can affect those with different conditions, and even affect individuals with the same conditions in different ways.
• Individuals with mental health conditions, or conditions which make it difficult to socially interact on a regular basis, may be particularly affected by loneliness while working from home, though equally hybrid teams mean that similar experiences may also occur in the office. As such, efforts should be made to bring teams together regularly, in ways which are not only focused on work.
• The SG overlooks the changes in the needs of staff with physical and mental health conditions caused by the transition to hybrid and home working and does not adequately address these by pro-actively changing the way in which employees can work

Any discussion around the impact of home, hybrid and office working on disability must firstly acknowledge that disabilities vary greatly in terms of their symptoms, how they impact life and how they impact work. Even individuals with the same condition may work better in different environments and in different ways, depending on the severity of their symptoms and the way in which their symptoms affect them (e.g. some individuals with anxiety or depression may prefer to work from home, as it allows them to work in a quieter calmer environment which benefits their mental health, while others experiencing the same symptoms may prefer to work in an office as being around others may reduce the intensity of their symptoms). These differences have been highlighted in previous SG research. With this caveat in mind, there are a number of significant findings in the literature which relate to the impact of home and hybrid working on the lives of employees with disabilities.

Research conducted during the pandemic, both by the SG and other organisations, has highlighted that for a large portion of employees with disabilities, the shift to home working during the pandemic was ‘life-changing’ (Hybrid Working Survey, Schur et al., 2020). The Hybrid Working Survey 2022 found that SG employees with disabilities believed that the opportunity to work from home and meet through videocall had actually opened up more opportunities to network, learn and develop than were previously been available. Furthermore, findings from the survey showed that not only had working from home in many cases helped alleviate symptoms or made life less stressful (due to reductions in commute, improved work-life balance or the ability to better control the working environment), but it had also been vitally important as it helped those more vulnerable to contracting Covid-19, or who would suffer more than average from the symptoms of Covid-19, to shield from the virus. Research has also found that working from home can greatly benefit those in recovery from serious health conditions such as cancer, and can mean that individuals who would like to return to work but have concerns about adding too much stress to their lives too soon, can potentially return to work earlier in a way that allows them to manage their health better.

While evidence overwhelmingly suggests that overall those with disabilities have benefited from home working, there is also evidence that this isn’t the case for all with disabilities. In particular, it has been highlighted that those with mental health conditions may benefit from working in a different environment. It is also important to acknowledge that for some with a disability, working primarily from home can also exacerbate symptoms. For example, research has highlighted that working from home can be associated with higher levels of loneliness (Bollestad et al., 2022, Hybrid Working Survey 2022), which may affect those with poor mental health in particular. However, evidence from the Hybrid Working Survey 2022 highlighted that because offices have been quieter since re-opening after the pandemic, even those visiting the office regularly have experienced loneliness while working. This indicates that when working in a hybrid way, teams may need to do more to bring together employees socially, in ways which are not only focused on work but which also allow time for more informal social connections to develop (either online or in person). Lastly, homeworking may also have a greater impact on those with conditions which mean they require additional support from others (e.g. employees with learning difficulties), as in some cases it may be more difficult to receive this support through videocall rather than in person. This may mean that there is a need to reconsider the ways in which this kind of support is provided and also check-in more regularly with those who need support to ensure that the method of delivering support is appropriate.

An additional area of risk in the transition to hybrid working relates to the provision of workplace adjustments, which can include making equipment such as standing desks, particular types of monitors and specialised lighting available to employees who require this to work. Many individuals with disabilities may benefit from working from home because it allows them to create an environment and workstation which perfectly fits their needs. However, this opportunity may not be available to all employees for a variety of reasons and so it is possible than an office can be the best place for individuals with disabilities to find a workspace that suits their needs. It is important that as overall employees gradually spend time less regularly in offices, a variety of workspaces continue to be available to those with different needs, and that the maintenance of these is not overlooked simply because offices are less busy overall. Anecdotal evidence has recently indicated that this may already be an issue in SG evidence, and even that important facilities such as disabled toilets, have not been maintained in the same way as they were prior to the pandemic.

A final area of risk relating to disability, is that given the broadening of employment opportunities available to disabled employees since remote working became normalised, it is possible that if SG does not present an attractive offer to disabled staff, some will leave to work in organisations with a better offer. SG Research has already shown that disabled staff feel less engaged in the organisation compared to other staff, feel they are less fairly treated than non-disabled staff, and more disabled staff are leaving the SG than are joining the SG (SG Diversity & Inclusion Report).

Some research carried out during the pandemic has highlighted that some of the potential risks of hybrid working to this with disabilities may be mitigated by forward planning. For example, Das et al. (2021) reported on the hybrid working experiences of neurodivergent individuals with conditions including Autism Spectrum Disorders and ADHD, a group of individuals who can struggle with some aspects of social interaction and communication, can either struggle with planning or else require highly specific plans, and who can struggle with sudden changes in routine. Given this, the sudden switch to home and hybrid working was initially a challenge for some in the neurodivergent population, it was found that by implementing simple measures and processes (which could equally benefit all employees, not just those with neurodivergent conditions), the impact of the transition was dampened. Changes included providing meeting agendas and materials in advance, encouraging open discussions around mental health and stress, encouraging different methods of communicating in meetings (e.g. through typing in the chat bar during videocalls), and ensuring that presentations and materials were provided in an accessible format which was easy for those with different needs to read and process (this could be simply a case of increasing font size or adjusting line spacing in a document). This approach of pro-actively responding to risks could potentially benefit not only the neurodivergent population, but also the broader population of employees with disabilities, and potentially (as indicated above) the entire workforce.

Engagement with the Disabled Staff Network raised similar issues, and a recognition that a “one size fits all” policy, and any policy which did not recognise the need for reasonable adjustments, could lead to unintentional discrimination. As well as the need for reasonable adjustments, there was concern that significant further work on estates/IT/health & Safety aspects would be necessary to ensure that there was a safe and appropriate environment for staff with a disability coming into the office.

Through the conversations with the DSN and other networks, mental health impacts were a recurring theme. As per the research, for some staff it was important to be able to spend as much time as required in the office, and to have the assurance that other colleagues would also be around. For others the ability to work from home, sometimes with a camera switched off during calls, had greatly enhanced their working experience when faced with mental health challenges.

Staff also suggested that some adjustments to the estate could help significantly with the ability to combine in office working with mental health challenges such as anxiety – for example the provision of “safe spaces” across buildings.

Source – Disability

Engagement with DSN

Research sources as cited.

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken – Disability

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 3 - Sex

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Sex

Risks:

• Strongly encouraging female employees to come into offices or stay at home, when it may expose them to difficult/uncomfortable interactions with others, could have an adverse affect on employee wellbeing as well as productivity
• Discouraging female parents from attending the office, which in turn may result in greater childcare responsibilities (regardless of whether children are at school for large periods of the day), could affect employee wellbeing and productivity
• Overlooking female parents for promotion and other work opportunities available as a result of proximity bias.

Several research studies have explored to what extent the increase in working from home could amplify pre-existing sex and gender inequalities in the work-place. One strand of this research has focused on evidence that females often bear more responsibility for childcare as well as other care responsibilities, which was evidenced throughout the Covid-19 pandemic (Alon et al., 2020, Hjálmsdóttir & Bjarnadóttir, 2020).

Research focusing on this issue has highlighted that in situations where employees are prevented or discouraged from using offices (e.g. through not having an appropriate/allocated space to work in the office), female parents could be more disadvantaged than the rest of the workforce, as they would be more likely have care responsibilities to manage, and so could be at greater risk of being stressed and overworked, as well as being exposed to greater distractions while working. Even in situations where staff are encouraged to use offices, female parents who require workplace adjustments (e.g. those who have a need for a particular type of desk/screen or access to particular facilities in the workplace) could experience similar difficulties, as if they are unable to secure a permanent workstation which meets their needs, then they may feel forced to work at home, and as such also be faced with the same situation described above.

These issues can also be tied to additional concerns surrounding ‘proximity bias’, wherein employees who more regularly work in the office are expected to be treated more favourably. It has been proposed that as women may be more likely to take on childcare responsibilities and in turn more likely to work from home (or stay at home to focus on care responsibilities), they are also more likely to lose out as a result of proximity bias (Global Women, Harvard Business Review). While it is important to acknowledge this as a potential risk, current evidence suggests that in the last year, females within the Scottish Government have been promoted more than males.

However, it has also been proposed that in many cases, working from home could benefit females, in some instances for reasons which mirror those above. For example, while it is true that females report having more care responsibilities, hybrid working can mean that many females who prior to the transition to home working may have been forced to take time off work, now have more of an opportunity to balance childcare and work commitments (Sherman, 2020). There is also evidence to suggest that some women may prefer to work from home because it allows them to avoid difficult and uncomfortable experiences in the workplace (Agovino, 2022). Research in general shows that females experience higher levels of bullying and harassment compared to men, and this is reflected in the Scottish Government’s own research (Salin, 2021; Scottish Government Statistics Publication, 2021). In many cases, it may therefore be extremely important for some women to take advantage of the opportunity to work from home, and this should not be overlooked in discussions surrounding the amount of time that employees are asked to spend in offices.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that there are some employees who live in homes which for a variety of reasons are unsafe or have a serious impact on wellbeing. Research has shown that rates of domestic violence increased during the pandemic (Piquero et al., 2021), and this was linked to people spending more time at home. Women were consistently highlighted as the most frequent victims of this violence, and though the proportion of people spending all of their time at home will have subsided since the pandemic, it is still possible that there will be cases when all members of a household are still working primarily from home. With this in mind, any hybrid working approach which discouraged employees from attending the office (including not providing staff with a suitable space to work), could be putting some members of staff at risk for the reasons mentioned above.

Lived experience also suggested that women found benefits in flexible hybrid working in order for them to fit unpaid labour into their day. This was seen as being particularly acute for minority ethnic women, who may shoulder more of the domestic burden. On the other hand, there was perceived to be a risk to women’s mental health in not being able to “switch off” from domestic responsibilities if spending too much time working from home.

Source - Sex

Engagement with Women’s Development Network

Research sources as cited

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Sex

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 4 – Pregnancy and Maternity

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Pregnancy and Maternity

Lived experience suggests that for women flexible hybrid working can allow an easier combination of work with childcaring responsibilities and a simpler transition from maternity leave to return to work.

Working from home also facilitates breastfeeding and expressing of breast milk, supporting longer breast feeding.

Concerns were expressed that For pregnant women carrying all the work equipment when going into the office could be an additional risk. Using chairs and desks that are not set up appropriately during 'hot-desking', whilst pregnant, could also increase discomforts that could be easier mitigated at home

In terms of cost of living issues, additional childcare costs to cover commuting time will impact those with younger children and put them at a disadvantage financially, as well as emotionally and physically

Source - Pregnancy and Maternity

Engagement with Women’s Development Network

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Pregnancy and Maternity

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 5 – Gender Reassignment

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Gender Reassignment

The LGBT network raised specific concerns that if teams did not have set spaces in the office, it may be harder for trans or non binary staff to feel comfortable in “unknown” work areas. There was also a concern raised that sufficient safe spaces were not provided across the estate.

Source - Gender Reassignment

Engagement with LGBT Network (no research data available)

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Gender Reassignment

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 6 – Sexual Orientation

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Sexual Orientation

Discussion of lived experience raised concerns on bullying and harassment akin to those described by those in other networks; ie that bullying and harassment may be less evident while working from home, but on the other hand such behaviour is harder to call out. There was also a worry that working from home could lead to reduced visibility of LGBTI staff

Source - Sexual Orientation

Engagement with LGBT network (no research data available)

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Sexual Orientation

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 7 – Race

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence – Race

Individuals from different ethnic backgrounds may be more likely to encounter hurtful or difficult interactions in the workplace, and so may prefer to work from home for this reason. Any hybrid working policy which required staff to attend the office on a more regular basis, may increase the risk of employees from ethnic minority backgrounds from encountering this kind of interaction

Research has less frequently focused on the impact of hybrid and home working on individuals from different ethnic backgrounds, however some have proposed that hybrid working could intensify pre-existing differences in the experiences of those from different ethnic groups. However, closer inspection of these findings reveals that if these inequalities increase, it would most likely be because employees from an ethnic minority background are less likely to occupy roles which are less suited to home working – notably there is no evidence of this within the Scottish Government.

Some commentators have indicated that in the US, non-white workers may prefer to work from home as it allows them to avoid microaggressions (i.e. hurtful or difficult race-related interactions with colleagues) in the office. SG evidence indicates that black employees report higher levels of bullying and discrimination compared to white employees (though rates of bullying and discrimination are more mixed across other ethnic groups). While there is currently no evidence from SG research to suggest that black employees work from home more than employees of any other ethnic group, this remains an issue that it is important to keep in mind.

The REN raised similar issues about the possibility of working from home as a way to avoid bullying and micro aggressions; but there was a corollary that of course it is the fundamental issue that we should be addressing. Similarly, when bullying happens on teams it can be less visible and therefore harder to address.

Source – Race

Engagement with Race Equality Network

Research sources as cited.

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken – Race

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 8 – Religion or Belief

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Religion or Belief

Again, the Faith & Belief Network raised similar issues around Islamophobia and Anti Semitism being more hidden in a hybrid working environment. They also noted that flexible hybrid policies very much facilitated the combination of work with faith and community based activity – for example fasting during Ramadan is much easier from home, as is finishing work early on a Friday to observe the Sabbath.

Source - Religion or Belief

Engagement with Faith & Belief Network (no research data available)

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Religion or Belief

n/a – recognition that there will be data limitations in relation to all protected characteristics as post Covid hybrid working is new. Policy will therefore be kept under rolling review

Characteristic¹ 9 – Marriage and Civil Partnership

The Scottish Government does not require assessment against this protected characteristic unless the policy or practice relates to work, for example HR policies and practices - refer to Definitions of Protected Characteristics document for details

Evidence Gathered and Strength/Quality of Evidence - Marriage and Civil Partnership

While the policy is an people oriented one and therefore marriage and civil partnership are in scope, there was no evidence of impact.

Source - Marriage and Civil Partnership

N/A

Data Gaps Identified and Action Taken - Marriage and Civil Partnership

N/A

The EU nationals network was also consulted for us to understand more fully the impact of hybrid working policies on staff of other nationalities. The key issues that emerged were that – similar to women – nationals from other countries who may have less of a local support network may benefit proportionally more from a policy which offers more flexibility; and there was specific concern around the working from abroad policy which needs to be further considered by HR.

And again the considerations around childcare responsibilities, which are explored here under “sex”, could equally apply to those with caring responsibilities for others.

All the discussions and research have also been looked at through the intersectionality lens, which amplifies and which does not contradict any of the experience above. For example, female ethnic minority staff may find that the benefits and disadvantages of hybrid working around the balance between work and non paid responsibilities are particularly acute.

It is also worth mentioning that there was a general consensus that the operation of the staff networks has been facilitated by a hybrid working style and allowed staff not based in the central belt to take a greater role in the running of, and participation in, staff networks.