January 24, 2018
Business in the community aims to improve the quality of work for lowest-paid staff

Financial concerns are increasingly affecting the performance of workers across the UK, with one in eight UK workers (3.7 million) now living in poverty. According to the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute, a quarter of the UK workforce are, to some extent, experiencing financial insecurity. One in five employees (21 percent) report that they are just about managing financially, while a further 5 percent say they are finding things difficult. Aside from the undue stress this causes families, this can also have significant repercussions for employers, in terms of recruitment, retention and productivity. This has prompted Business in the Community, (BITC) with support from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, to make the case for all employers to improve the quality of work for their lowest-paid staff. Its new campaign, Good Work for All draws on best practice from forward-thinking organisations including Starbucks, Royal Mail and Sodexo, and over a third of BITC members have reported taking company-wide action on low-paid work with successful outcomes.











Over half (52 percent) of people who work remotely feel their colleagues don’t treat them equally, claims a new study. Working remotely has become a highly sought-after job perk and having the flexibility to live and work where you please, regardless of corporate headquarters, often draws people to take one job over another. But a survey from VitalSmarts produced by David Maxfield and Joseph Grenny, authors of the bestsellers Crucial conversations and Crucial Accountability, found that remote employees have a significantly harder time with a number of workplace challenges than their onsite colleagues. 67 percent of remote employees complained that colleagues didn’t fight for their priorities compared 59 percent of onsite employees. 41 percent of remote employees believed colleagues say bad things about them behind their back compared to 31 percent of onsite employees and 64 percent of remote employees had changes made to a project without warning vs. 58 percent of onsite employees. Over a third (35 percent) of remote employees thought colleagues were lobbying against them vs. 26 percent of onsite employees.

