Research and analysis

DWP Employer Survey 2024

Published 16 May 2025

1. Introduction and methodology

1.1. Background and aims

The DWP Employer Survey 2024 is the second wave of a cross-sectional representative survey of employers in Great Britain. Wave 1 of this survey was conducted in 2022 and published in 2023.

The survey is designed to gather evidence from employers on their policies, awareness and attitudes in relation to key topics of interest to DWP. The topics covered by the survey include:

• health and disability in the workplace
• recruitment, retention and progression of staff
• engagement with government employment schemes and wider engagement with DWP
• pension provision
• groups who may be disadvantaged in the labour market.

The survey in its current form was commissioned in 2021. It consolidated three different cross-cutting employer surveys that were taking place across the department into one, biennial, modularised survey. This new survey format was intended to streamline DWP’s ask of employers, and therefore to reduce the burden on employers in terms of DWP research participation.

This survey allows DWP to understand how employer attitudes and behaviours have changed since 2022, as well as providing information on new topics of interest to DWP such as menopause and flexible working.

1.2. Methodology

Wave 2 of this survey was conducted between the 28 February and 25 April 2024. It used a mixed mode design (conducted online and via telephone) and reached a total of 8,006 employers in Great Britain.

The survey questionnaire was modularised so the sample size for individual questions differs from the total number of responses achieved across the survey.

The data collected has been weighted to make it representative of the underlying population of employers in Great Britain in terms of business sector, size and country. The weighting approach was consistent with wave 1 and used counts from the Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR), a comprehensive list of UK businesses. More information on the survey methodology is detailed in the technical report.

The mode split for this wave differed slightly to wave 1. Wave 2 consisted of 3,059 telephone interviews and 4,947 online surveys whereas, wave 1 consisted of 4,794 telephone interviews and 3,208 online surveys. The effect of this change in mode on the data collected and comparisons between waves has not been fully explored.

The definitions used to categorise employers according to organisation size are detailed below.

• Large employer: an organisation with 250 or more employees
• Medium employer: an organisation with 50 to 249 employees
• Small employer: an organisation with 2 to 49 employees^{[footnote 1]}
• Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): organisations with 2 to 249 employees

1.3. Approach to reporting

The findings are based on employers’ direct experiences of DWP services and policies, and their experiences of a variety of workplace management topics. The survey included a small number of perception and attitudinal-based questions which ask employers about their views of DWP services and policies, and some of these were asked whether or not employers had experienced these services and policies directly. These perceptions and attitudes are important in better understanding how employers view what the department delivers and to help the department understand and address any concerns from this stakeholder group.

Where comparisons are made between different population groups or variables, only those differences found to be statistically significant at the 5% level (p<0.05) are reported.

In some cases, it was not possible to include the data from all respondent sub-groups, however this analysis is available in the accompanying published data tables.

Key information is provided for each reported question. The number of respondents presented with each question (unweighted) and description of these respondents (Base=N) is provided under each graph. The chart titles contain the corresponding question number.

2. Health and disability in the workplace

2.1. Executive summary

This summary presents the key findings from a survey of 8,006 employers (each of which had at least two employees). The research looked at employer attitudes, behaviours and provisions around employee health, sickness and disability in the workplace:

Employer attitudes towards employee health and wellbeing were generally positive. Most employers agreed they have a responsibility to encourage and support employees to be physically and mentally healthy (87%), and that they know what to do to improve employees’ health and wellbeing at work (72%). Confidence in recruiting disabled people and people with long-term health conditions (LTHCs) was, however, low with a quarter of employers (25%) reporting that in their organisation they were not confident in doing so.

In terms of employer behaviour, there has been a slight decrease since 2022 in the proportion of employers who identify as adopting a proactive approach to addressing employee health and wellbeing (68% in 2024 compared to 72% in 2022); however, this proportion remains higher than in 2018 (45%). There have also been small decreases since 2022 in the proportion of employers who say they offer the different types of support that they were prompted with, to prevent employee ill-health or improve the general health and wellbeing of their workforce. Reflecting previous surveys, organisation size appeared to be linked to the extent of employer health and wellbeing provision. Large employers were more likely than small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to say they had a range of support in place to prevent ill-health and improve health and wellbeing, as well as support disabled employees and employees with LTHCs.

In managing sickness absence, most employers offer some form of support to employees who cannot carry out their usual activities due to ill health. Over six in ten (63%) employers provide access to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP), and over three in ten (37%) provide sick pay above SSP. Almost all large employers reported providing access to SSP (95%), and three quarters (76%) provided sick pay above SSP.

Provision of Occupational Health (OH) services has remained broadly consistent since the 2022 survey, with just under one in three employers (31%) saying they provide OH or Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services for their employees. As in 2022, provision was more common among large employers compared to SMEs. Only a small proportion of employers (14%) reported receiving recommendations from an OH adviser following an assessment conducted for an employee in the previous 12 months; the majority of these employers (72%) reported that they fully implemented the recommended actions.

2.2. Employer attitudes towards health and wellbeing

More employers are seeking to tackle health and wellbeing issues than not; of those experiencing issues, the most common are seasonal illnesses.

Chart 2.1: Types of health and wellbeing issues employers are seeking to tackle in their organisation, by organisation size, A2b, 2024

Health and wellbeing issue	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
We are not currently experiencing any health or wellbeing issues	44%	44%	10%
Seasonal illnesses such as colds and flu	24%	24%	25%
Mental health-related issues	11%	11%	42%
Work-related stress/burnout	8%	8%	6%
Musculoskeletal-related issues	8%	8%	6%
Other health or wellbeing issues	3%	3%	3%
Don’t know	1%	1%	8%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); SMEs (2,571); Large employers (99)

Over half of employers (55%) said they were seeking to tackle some kind of health and wellbeing issue in their organisation. The most common health and wellbeing issue reported by employers were seasonal illnesses such as colds and flu (24%). This was followed by mental health-related issues (11%) and work-related stress/burnout (8%). Around 2 in 5 employers (44%) reported that they are not currently experiencing any health or wellbeing issues.

Small and medium-sized organisations (SMEs) were more likely than large employers to report that they were not currently experiencing any health or wellbeing issues (44% vs 10%). This difference may reflect large employers’ greater workforce size and diversity. Large employers were more likely than SMEs to cite mental health-related issues (42% vs 11%).

Most employers know what to do to improve their employees’ health and wellbeing and agree that they have a responsibility to encourage and support employees to be physically and mentally healthy.

Chart 2.2: Employer attitudes towards supporting employee health and wellbeing, A25, 2024

Employer attitude	Agree %	Neither agree nor disagree %	Diagree %	Don’t know/prefer not to say %
Employers have a responsibility to encourage and support employees to be physically and mentally healthy	87%	9%	3%	1%
We know what to do to improve our employees’ health and wellbeing at work	72%	21%	5%	2%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

Most employers (87%) agreed that they have a responsibility to encourage and support employees to be physically and mentally healthy.

Just under 3 in 4 employers (72%) said they know what to do to improve their employees’ health and wellbeing at work; although a sizeable minority (21%) neither agreed nor disagreed with this statement. Large employers were more likely to agree with this statement compared to SMEs (90% of large employers agreed compared to 72% of SMEs).

Employer views on the financial benefits of spending money on employee health and wellbeing are more varied; and confidence in recruitment is low.

Chart 2.3: Employer attitudes towards supporting employee health and wellbeing, A25, 2024

Employer attitude	Agree %	Neither agree nor disagree %	Diagree %	Don’t know/prefer not to say %
The financial benefits of spending money on employee health and wellbeing outweigh the costs	59%	26%	10%	5%
We are confident in recruiting disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to our organisation	35%	28%	25%	11%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

Just under 3 in 5 employers (59%) agreed that the financial benefits of spending money on employee health and wellbeing outweigh the costs. Around a quarter of employers (26%) neither agreed nor disagreed with this statement.

Around a third of employers (35%) are confident in recruiting disabled people and people with long-term health conditions (LTHCs) to their organisation; although 1 in 4 employers (25%) said they do not feel confident. SMEs were more likely than large employers to say they did not feel confident in recruiting disabled people or people with LTHCs (25% of SMEs said this vs. 3% of large employers).

Almost two thirds of employers think that workplaces should provide mental health support for their employees.

Chart 2.4: Employer attitudes on whether mental health support should be provided to employees, by organisation size, D4, 2024

Response	All employers	SME	Large employer
Yes	65%	64%	92%
No	17%	18%	1%
Don’t know	18%	18%	7%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); SMEs (2,571); Large employers (99)

Most employers (65%) think that workplaces should provide mental health support for their employees, whereas just over 1 in 6 (17%) do not. A similar proportion (18%) were not sure whether workplaces should provide mental health support or not.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say that workplaces should provide this support (92% vs 64%).

In 2024, employers were less likely than in 2022 to say that they think workplaces should provide mental health support for their employees (65% said this in 2024, compared to 73% who agreed with this statement in 2022).

Most employers also say they are confident in applying their legal responsibilities in relation to health and safety, disability and sick leave.

Chart 2.5: Confidence in applying legal responsibilities in relation to health and safety, disability and sick leave, A3, 2024

Level of confidence	Percentage
Very confident	50%
Fairly confident	39%
Neither confident nor unconfident	7%
Not very confident	1%
Not confident at all	less than 1%
Don’t know	2%
Prefer not to say	1%
Unsure what the legal responsibilities are for my business	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

The majority of employers (88%^{[footnote 2]}) are confident in applying their legal responsibilities in relation to health and safety, disability and sick leave. Large employers were more likely than SMEs to be confident in applying their legal responsibilities (98% vs 88%).

Between 2022 and 2024, there were no statistically significant differences in how confident employers felt in applying their legal responsibilities.

For those who did not say they were confident in applying their legal responsibilities, a range of reasons were provided, the most common was a lack of time or having other priorities.

Chart 2.6: Reasons why employers aren’t confident in applying their legal responsibilities in relation to health and safety, disability and sick leave, A5, 2024

Reasons	Percentage
A lack of time/other priorities	23%
Have not yet had to fulfil the legal responsibilities	17%
A lack of expertise or practical support	14%
Don’t know where to find the right information	12%
The available information is not very helpful	10%
It is difficult to apply the legal responsibilities in this business	5%
Something else	12%
Don’t know	6%

Unweighted base: Employers who were neither confident nor unconfident or not confident in applying their legal responsibilities (185)

Employers who did not say they were confident in applying their legal responsibilities were asked why this was the case. Almost all respondents to this question (99%) were small employers (2 to 49 staff).

Almost a quarter of employers (23%) said a lack of time/other priorities, this was followed by not yet having had to fulfil the legal responsibilities (17%), and a lack of expertise or practical support (14%).

In 2024, more employers cited a lack of time/other priorities as the main reason why they were not confident in applying their legal responsibilities (an increase of 21 percentage points (pp) from 2% in 2022). This increase is likely due to this response option being an unprompted response in wave 1, which was then added as a response option at wave 2.

In 2024, fewer employers cited not yet having to fulfil their legal responsibilities as the main reason for their lack of confidence compared to 2022 (a decrease of 14pp from 31% in 2022).

Practical support and advice in applying legal responsibilities was thought to be helpful for increasing employer confidence.

Chart 2.7: Elements that would increase the confidence of employers in applying their legal responsibilities in relation to health and safety, disability and sick leave, A4, 2024

Element	Percentage
Practical support and advice in applying legal responsiblities	53%
Better signposting to information	36%
Better quality of information provided	34%
Training for managers	27%
Something else	6%
Don’t know	22%

Unweighted base: Employers who were neither confident nor unconfident or not confident in applying their legal responsibilities (185)^{[footnote 3]}

Around half of employers who answered this question cited that practical support and advice in applying legal responsibilities (53%) would increase their confidence in applying their legal responsibilities in relation to health and safety, disability and sick leave. Other elements mentioned included better signposting to information (36%) and better quality of information provided (34%).

In 2024, more employers were uncertain about what would increase their confidence in applying their legal responsibilities, compared to 2022 (an increase of 12pp from 10% reported in 2022).

Over half of employers said they would look on Gov.uk for information on how to support an employee with a disability or long-term health condition

Chart 2.8: Sources of information and advice employers would use to support an employee with a disability or LTHC, A8a, 2024

Source of information	Percentage
GOV.UK	54%
Information from professional bodies	30%
External HR consultant	20%
HSE website	18%
ACAS website	16%
Personal networks or contacts	15%
Internet search (unspecified)	11%
Occupational health/vocational rehabilitation professional or provider	8%
Information from charities	8%
In-house HR team	5%
Other	4%
Nowhere	3%
Don’t know	8%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

Employers would most commonly go to Gov.uk if they were looking for information on how to support an employee with a disability or LTHC (54%); this is consistent across all employer size bands. This was followed by seeking information from professional bodies (30%) or an external HR consultant (20%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they would seek information from the ACAS website (36% of large employers said this vs 15% of SMEs), an Occupational Health or Vocational Rehabilitation adviser (39% vs 8%) or an in-house HR team (34% vs 5%).

The wording of this question and the response options changed between 2022 and 2024 and therefore comparisons between survey waves are not possible.

2.3. Employer behaviours in relation to health and wellbeing

Over two thirds of employers say they are proactive in addressing employee health and wellbeing.

Chart 2.9: Approaches to managing employee health and wellbeing, by organisation size, A1, 2024

Size of organisation	We take steps to identify and address employee health and wellbeing issues at the earliest possible opportunity %	We take action as and when employee health and wellbeing becomes a problem %	Don’t know
All	68%	29%	3%
2 to 4 staff	64%	31%	5%
5 to 9 staff	70%	28%	2%
10 to 24 staff	76%	23%	1%
25 to 49 staff	83%	17%	1%
50 to 99 staff	82%	17%	1%
100 to 249 staff	83%	15%	2%
250+ staff	87%	13%	0%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); 2 to 4 staff (797); 5 to 9 staff (548); 10 to 24 staff (503); 25 to 49 staff (321); 50 to 99 staff (243); 100 to 249 staff (159); 250+ staff (99)

Employers were asked to identify which, of two descriptions, best fit their organisation. Just over two thirds of employers (68%) said they take action to identify and address employee health and wellbeing issues at the earliest possible opportunity. In other words, they are proactive towards employee health and wellbeing rather than reactive.

Almost 3 in 10 employers (29%) said they take action as and when employee health and wellbeing becomes a problem. Large employers were more likely than SMEs to identify as adopting a proactive approach (87% vs 68% respectively).

The proportion of employers who adopt a proactive approach to addressing employee health and wellbeing has decreased since 2022; however, rates are still higher than in 2018

Chart 2.10: Proportion of employers who identify as taking a proactive approach to addressing health and wellbeing issues, by organisation size, A1, 2018 to 2024

Size of employer	2018 %	2022 %	2024 %
All	45%	72%	68%
Small	44%	72%	68%
Medium	56%	85%	83%
Large	72%	88%	87%

Unweighted base: All employers. 2024 (2,670); 2022 (4,003); 2018 (2,564)

In 2024, employers were less likely to say they take steps to identify and address employee health and wellbeing issues at the earliest possible opportunity compared to 2022 (a decrease of 4.0pp). Specifically, there was a 4.1pp decrease in small employers (2 to 49 employees) reporting a proactive approach in 2024 compared to 2022. Although the proportion of employers adopting a proactive approach has decreased since 2022, this is still higher than in 2018 (68% vs 45% respectively).

There were no significant differences between 2022 and 2024 in the proportion of employers who adopted a reactive approach, or who were not sure which approach best described their organisation.

Most employers provide some form of support to prevent employee ill-health or improve the general health and wellbeing of their workplace.

Chart 2.11: Employer provision to prevent employee ill-health or improve the general health and wellbeing of their workplace, A2, 2024

Response	All employers %
Health and safety training or guidance	70%
Interventions to prevent common health conditions becoming a problem	45%
Activities to encourage a supportive culture	38%
Training for line managers on ways to improve employee health and well-being	21%
Health and wellbeing promotion programmes to improve employees’ physical activity or lifestyle	18%
An employee assistance programme (EAP) or staff welfare / counselling programmes provided by an external organisation	13%
Health insurance	1%
Other activities to prevent ill-health/improve wellbeing	4%
We currently don’t provide anything	14%
Don’t know	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

The majority of employers provide some form of support to prevent employee ill-health or improve health and wellbeing (85%). The most prevalent form of support employers offered was health and safety training or guidance (70%) – this is consistent across all employer sizes.

The larger the employer, the less likely they were to say they did not have some kind of provision in place to prevent employee ill-health or improve the general health and wellbeing of their workplace. For example, 18 per cent of employers with 2 to 4 employees said they did not provide support, compared to 6 per cent of employers with 10 to 24 employees. Less than 1 per cent of employers with at least 100 employees said they did not provide any of the provision they were asked about.

Between 2022 and 2024, there were small decreases across the board in the types of support offered by employers to prevent employee ill-health

Chart 2.12: Employer provision to prevent employee ill-health or improve the general health and wellbeing of the workplace, A2, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Health and safety training or guidance	70%	75%
Interventions to prevent common health conditions becoming a problem	45%	51%
Activities to encourage a supportive culture	38%	44%
Training for line managers on ways to improve employee health and well-being	21%	29%
Health and wellbeing promotion programmes to improve employees’ physical activity or lifestyle	18%	21%
An employee assistance programme (EAP) or staff welfare / counselling programmes provided by an external organisation	13%	13%
Health insurance	1%	1%

Unweighted base: All employers. 2024 (2,670); 2022 (4,003)

In 2024, employers were less likely to say they provide to their employees: health and safety training or guidance (a decrease of 4.7pp), interventions to prevent common health conditions becoming a problem (a decrease of 5.9pp), activities to encourage a supportive culture (a decrease of 5.8pp) and training for line managers (a decrease of 7.6pp), compared to 2022.

Most employers who provided support measures agreed that these were effective at preventing employee ill-health

Chart 2.13: The extent to which each of the support measures are considered effective at preventing employee ill-health, A2aa, 2024

Response	Agree %	Disagree %
Health and safety training or guidance	68%	9%
Interventions to prevent common health conditions becoming a problem	76%	8%
Training for line managers on ways to improve employee health and well-being	79%	5%
Health and wellbeing promotion programmes to improve employees’ physical activity or lifestyle	80%	4%
An employee assistance programme (EAP) or staff welfare / counselling programmes provided by an external organisation	74%	6%
Activities to encourage a supportive culture	86%	4%

Unweighted base: Employers who provide measures. H&S training (2,113); Preventative interventions (1,283); Line manager training (932); H&W promotion programmes (664); EAPs (681); Activities (1,174).

For each measure, most employers agreed that they were effective at preventing employee ill-health. Activities to encourage a supportive culture had the highest proportion of employers who agreed this measure had been effective at preventing employee ill-health for their company (86%).

Around 1 in 3 employers have systems in place for assessing and monitoring the mental wellbeing of employees

Chart 2.14: Proportion of employers who have systems in place for assessing and monitoring the mental wellbeing of employees, by organisation size, D1, 2024

Response	All employers	2 to 4 staff	5 to 9 staff	10 to 24 staff	25 to 49 staff	50 to 99 staff	100 to 249 staff	250+ staff
Yes	31%	27%	31%	39%	46%	55%	54%	68%
No	65%	70%	64%	55%	48%	41%	37%	29%
Don’t know	4%	3%	5%	6%	6%	4%	9%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); 2 to 4 staff (797); 5 to 9 staff (548); 10 to 24 staff (503); 25 to 49 staff (321); 50 to 99 staff (243); 100 to 249 staff (159); 250+ staff (99)

Just under one in three employers (31%) said they have systems in place for assessing and monitoring the mental wellbeing of employees, and almost two thirds of employers (65%) said they do not have these systems in place.

Large employers were the most likely to say they had these systems in place compared to other size bands (68% of large employers said this). Employers with 2 to 4 staff were the most likely to say they do not have these systems in place (70% said this).

There were no significant differences observed for this question when compared to the 2022 data.

Most employers are not a member of any diversity and inclusion schemes; but 1 in 4 organisations currently employ someone with a disability or LTHC.

Chart 2.15: Proportion of organisations who employ someone with a disability or LTHC, by organisation size, E1b, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 49 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes	26%	20%	27%	38%	53%	64%	79%	89%
No	71%	78%	70%	59%	43%	32%	14%	9%
Don’t know	3%	2%	3%	3%	4%	5%	7%	3%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); 2 to 4 staff (797); 5 to 9 staff (548); 10 to 24 staff (503); 25 to 49 staff (321); 50 to 99 staff (243); 100 to 249 staff (159); 250+ staff (99)

Employers were asked if they are members of any diversity and inclusion schemes. Most employers (91%) said they were not members of any schemes of this type, with 2 per cent of employers saying they were a member.

Employers were also asked whether they currently employ anyone with a disability or LTHC. Around 1 in 4 organisations (26%) said they currently employ someone with a disability or LTHC, with 7 in 10 (71%) employers saying they do not.

Likelihood of employing someone with a disability or LTHC was positively correlated with organisation size. For example, 20 per cent of employers with 2 to 4 staff said they employ someone with a disability or LTHC compared to 38 per cent of employers with 10 to 24 staff.

Many employers are taking action to support disabled staff and/or staff with LTHCs; this is most often in the form of offering workplace adjustments

Chart 2.16: Employer approaches to supporting disabled employees and employees with long-term health conditions, E6, 2024

Response	All employers %
Offering workplace adjustments	68%
Providing accessible communications	36%
Offering mentoring, coaching or buddying for these employees	26%
Providing occupational health service or Employee Assistance lines for disability concerns or issues	22%
Promoting and engaging in diversity and inclusion networks	13%
Other things to support disabled employees/staff who have long-term health conditions in the workplace	8%
None of these	18%
Don’t know	1%
Prefer not to say	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who currently employ someone with a disability or LTHC (1,029)

Employers who said they employ disabled staff and/or employ staff with LTHCs (26%) were asked to select from a list which, if any, support they have in place for these employees.

Most employers (80%) said they offer at least one of the forms of support they were prompted with, with the most common being workplace adjustments (68%). This was followed by providing accessible communications (36%) and offering mentoring, coaching or buddying (26%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they offer each form of support to disabled employees and people with LTHCs.

A significant minority (18%) said they offer none of the forms of support they were prompted with. Employers with 2 to 4 staff were more likely than all other organisation size bands to select this response option (28%).

The most common barriers faced by employers in supporting disabled employees or employees with LTHCs in work are a lack of capital to invest in support and lack of time / staff resource.

Chart 2.17: Perceived barriers to supporting disabled employees or employees with long-term health conditions at work, A20, 2024

Response	All employers %
A lack of capital to invest in support	6%
Lack of time or staff resource	5%
A lack of expertise or specialist support	4%
Lack of flexibility in the way work is organised	3%
Employee engagement in the process	2%
The benefits of investing in retaining an employee don’t warrant the investment	1%
Accessibility of building/business premises	less than 1%
A lack of support from senior leaders	less than 1%
Nature of job roles within the business / organisation	less than 1%
Other	less than 1%
We do not face any barriers	11%
My organisation does not have disabled employees or employees with long-term health conditions	75%
Don’t know	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

All employers were asked which, if any, barriers their organisation face in supporting disabled employees or employees with LTHCs at work. Three quarters of employers (75%) said they do not have any disabled employees or employees with LTHCs. A further 1 in 10 employers (11%) said they do not face any barriers. Variations were observed by size band with large employers more likely than SMEs to state that their organisation does not experience barriers (38% of large employers said this vs 11% of SMEs).

The most common barrier employers said they experience in supporting disabled employees or employees with LTHCs at work is a lack of capital to invest in support (6%).

No detailed comparisons to the 2022 dataset have been made due to amendments to this question between 2022 and 2024, however, the overall pattern of response to this question is similar across survey years.

Almost half of employers who faced barriers in supporting disabled employees or employees with LTHCs cited a lack of capital to invest in support as a barrier.

Chart 2.18: Perceived barriers to supporting disabled employees or employees with long-term health conditions at work, among those reporting barriers, A20, 2024

Response	All employers %
A lack of capital to invest in support	46%
Lack of time or staff resource	39%
A lack of expertise or specialist support	34%
Lack of flexibility in the way work is organised	22%
Employee engagement in the process	18%
The benefits of investing in retaining an employee don’t warrant the investment	8%
Accessibility of building/business premises	3%
A lack of support from senior leaders	3%
Nature of job roles within the business/organisation	3%
Other	4%

Unweighted base: Employers who have experienced barriers in supporting disabled employees or employees with LTHCs at work (523)

When looking specifically at employers who reported that they have experienced barriers in supporting disabled employees or employees with LTHCs (13% of all employers), almost half of these (46%) cited a lack of capital to invest in support as a barrier they face.

Just under 4 in 10 (39%) employers who have experienced barriers cited a lack of time or staff resource; this was followed by a lack of expertise or specialist support (34%).

No detailed comparisons to the 2022 data have been made due to amendments to this question between 2022 and 2024, however, the overall pattern of response is similar across the survey years.

Around 1 in 5 employers have heard of the Access to Work scheme; awareness was lower than in 2022.

Chart 2.19: Employer awareness of the Access to Work scheme, F1, 2022 and 2024

Response	All employers (2022) %	All employers (2024) %	SMEs (2022) %	SMEs (2024)	Large employers (2022) %	Large employers (2024) %
Yes	26%	21%	26%	20%	64%	62%
No	71%	76%	71%	76%	35%	38%
Don’t know	2%	4%	2%	4%	1%	less than 1%

Unweighted base: All employers 2022 (2,669); 2024 (2,670). SMEs 2022 (2,551); 2024 (2,571). Large employers 2022 (118); 2024 (99)

In 2024, 1 in 5 employers (21%) were aware of the Access to Work scheme. Most employers (76%) said they were not aware of the scheme, and a small proportion (4%) were uncertain whether they had heard of the scheme or not.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they have heard of the Access to Work scheme (62% of large employers were aware compared to 20% of SMEs). Organisations with 100 to 249 staff were also more likely than smaller employers (less than 100 staff) to say they were aware of the scheme (50%).

In 2024, employers were less likely to say they had heard of the Access to Work scheme, compared to 2022 (a decrease of 5.8pp). This decrease was only seen among SMEs, and not large employers. In 2024 a short description of the Access to Work scheme was added to the question. This change may have influenced how employers chose to respond.

Of those aware of the Access to Work scheme, most employers say they have not received support from it.

Chart 2.20: Proportion of employers who have received support through the Access to Work scheme, by organisation size, F2, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	11%	10%	63%
No	85%	87%	16%
Don’t know	3%	3%	21%

Unweighted base: All employers who have heard of the Access to Work scheme (662); SMEs (601); Large employers (61)^{[footnote 4]}

Most employers who have heard of the Access to Work scheme, said they or their employees have not received support through the scheme (85%). Around 1 in 10 employers (11%) had received support through the scheme, and a small proportion of employers (3%) were unsure.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say that they had received support through the scheme (63% vs 10% respectively). Large employers were also more likely than SMEs to be uncertain of whether or not they had received support through the scheme (21% vs 3% respectively).

There were no significant differences observed in the responses to this question when comparing data collected in 2022 and 2024.

Most employers who have not received support through Access to Work say they do not have any disabled employees or employees with health conditions who need the support.

Chart 2.21: Reasons employers and their employees have not received support from the Access to Work scheme, F3, 2024

Response	All employers %
We don’t have any disabled employees or employees with health conditions who need support to do their job	87%
I don’t know enough about the support on offer	19%
We don’t have the resources to part-fund the support on offer	11%
The support needed was below the financial threshold to be met by Access to Work	8%
Not required (unspecified)	3%
Provided in-house support	1%
Other	3%
Don’t know	2%

Unweighted base: All employers who have heard of Access to Work, but not received support through the scheme (470)

Employers who were aware of the Access to Work scheme, but who had not received support through it, were asked the reasons for this.

The most common response, mentioned by almost 9 in 10 employers (87%), was that they did not have any disabled employees or employees with health conditions who need support to do their job. Almost 1 in 5 employers (19%) said they did not know enough about the support on offer. A further 1 in 10 (11%) said they did not have the resources to part-fund the support on offer.

No comparisons have been made to the data collected for this question in 2022 due to substantial amendments to the question response options since then.

Few employers collect information on whether employees are disabled or have a LTHC; large employers are the most likely to do so.

Chart 2.22: Proportion of employers who collect information on whether employees are disabled or have a LTHC, by organisation size, G1, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 9 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes	29%	21%	31%	45%	62%	70%	75%	80%
No	66%	74%	64%	51%	33%	24%	17%	9%
Don’t know	5%	6%	4%	4%	5%	6%	8%	11%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); 2 to 4 staff (797); 5 to 9 staff (548); 10 to 24 staff (503); 25 to 49 staff (321); 50 to 99 staff (243); 100 to 249 staff (159); 250+ staff (99)

Just under 3 in 10 (29%) employers said they collect information on whether their employees are disabled or have LTHCs. Two thirds of employers (66%) said they do not collect this information, and 1 in 20 employers (5%) did not know.

Generally, the larger the employer, the more likely they were to say they collect information on whether employees are disabled or have LTHCs. For example, 21 per cent of employers with 2 to 4 staff said they collect this information compared to 45 per cent of employers with 10 to 24 staff. Employers with over 250 staff were more likely to collect this information than all small employer size bands (80% of large employers said they do so).

The most common form of information collected by employers is the type of disabilities or health conditions employees have.

Chart 2.23: Information collected by employers on disability, mental health and wellbeing, G1a, 2024

Response	Yes %	No %	Don’t know %	Not applicable %
The type of disabilities or health conditions employees have	62%	14%	3%	21%
The number of workplace adjustments in place for employees	28%	28%	4%	39%
The satisfaction levels of disabled employees in the workplace	21%	28%	4%	47%
The progression of disabled employees in your organisation (e.g., number of promotions, reappointments)	14%	34%	4%	49%
The number of disabled employees by grade	12%	39%	5%	44%

Unweighted base: Employers who collect information on whether or not employees have a disability or LTHC (1,164)

Employers who collect information on whether employees have a disability or LTHC (29% of all employers) were asked what type of information they collect. The most commonly collected information was the type of disabilities or health conditions employees have (reported by 62% of employers). This was followed by the number of workplace adjustments (28%) and the satisfaction levels of disabled employees in the workplace (21%).

Of those that collected information, over 1 in 10 employers said they collect information on the progression of disabled employees (14%) and the number of disabled employees by grade (12%).

For each form of information collected, organisations who do not employ any disabled people or people with LTHCs were more likely than organisations who have disabled staff and/or staff with health conditions to say the question was ‘not applicable’.

The most common reason that employers do not collect information on disability, mental health and wellbeing was that their organisation did not have enough employees.

Chart 2.24: Reasons employers do not collect information on disability, mental health and wellbeing in the workplace, G3, 2024

Response	All employers
My organisation does not have enough employees	76%
This information is collected informally (e.g., through discussions with managers)	43%
Not thought about doing so	23%
A lack of time or staff resource	15%
Respect our employees’ privacy/GDPR	1%
Not aware we had to	less than 1%
Other reasons	2%
No staff with disabilities or mental health conditions	4%
Don’t know	1%
Prefer not to say	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who do not collect information on disability, mental health and wellbeing (1,367)

The most common reason employers gave for not collecting information on disability, mental health and wellbeing was that their organisation does not have enough employees (76%). Over 2 in 5 employers (43%) cited that the information is collected informally, and over 1 in 5 (23%) said that they had not thought about doing so. A small proportion of employers (4%) said they had no staff with disabilities or mental health conditions as a reason for not collecting this information.

The response options ‘no staff with disabilities or mental health conditions’, ‘respect our employees’ privacy’ and ‘not aware we had to’ were unprompted responses that were mentioned by a sufficient proportion of employers to be generated as a separate response code.

Most employers do not publicly report and publish information on disability, mental health and wellbeing; again, the most common reason employers gave for this was their organisation does not have enough employees.

Chart 2.25: Reasons employers do not publicly report and publish information on disability, mental health and wellbeing, G4, 2024

Response	All employers %
My organisation does not have enough employees	67%
This information is collected informally (e.g., through discussions with managers)	47%
Not thought about doing so	28%
A lack of time or staff resource	10%
Respect our employees’ privacy/GDPR	4%
Other reasons	2%
No staff with disabilities or mental health conditions	7%
Don’t know	2%
Prefer not to say	less than 1%

Unweighted base: Employers who record information on disability, mental health and wellbeing but do not report this information (1,013)

Most employers who collect information on disability, mental health and wellbeing in their organisation do not publicly report or publish this information (93%). Very small proportions said they did publicly report this information (3%) or did not know if they did so (4%).

The most common reason for not publishing this information, mentioned by over a third of employers, was that their organisation does not have enough employees (67%).

Just under half of employers (47%) said that the information is collected informally, and almost 3 in 10 employers (28%) said they had not thought about doing so.

The response options ‘no staff with disabilities or mental health conditions’ and ‘we respect our employees’ privacy’ were unprompted responses given by employers answering this question.

2.4. Managing sickness absence and return to work

Large employers were more likely than most other organisation sizes to collect and keep sickness absence data.

Chart 2.26: Collection of sickness absence data, by organisation size, A21, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 49 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes	61%	49%	73%	87%	95%	97%	95%	100%
No	36%	49%	24%	11%	4%	1%	3%	0%
Don’t know	2%	2%	3%	2%	1%	1%	2%	0%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); 2 to 4 staff (797); 5 to 9 staff (548); 10 to 24 staff (503); 25 to 49 staff (321); 50 to 99 staff (243); 100 to 249 staff (159); 250+ staff (99)

Around 6 in 10 employers (61%) collect and keep sickness absence data, whereas around 1 in 3 (36%) do not. A very small proportion (2%) were unsure whether or not they collect this data.

Generally, larger employers were more likely than smaller employers to say they collect and keep sickness absence data. For example, almost half (49%) of employers with 2 to 4 staff said they collect and keep sickness absence data compared to almost 9 in 10 (87%) employers with 10 to 24 staff. Employers with over 250 staff were the most likely to collect and keep sickness absence data (100%).

In 2024, employers were slightly less likely to say they collect and keep sickness absence data, compared to 2022 (a decrease of 5.2pp).

Just over half of employers recorded sickness absences caused or made worse by work.

Over half of employers (53%) usually record whether an employee’s sickness absence is caused or made worse by work. Over 2 in 5 (42%) do not usually record this information, with 5 per cent of employers unsure on whether they capture this or not.

Chart 2.27: Proportion of employers who record whether a sickness absence is caused or made worse by work, by organisation size, A21a, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 49 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes	53%	50%	49%	54%	60%	73%	75%	90%
No	42%	45%	45%	39%	34%	20%	18%	7%
Don’t know	5%	4%	6%	7%	5%	7%	7%	3%

Unweighted base: All employers who collect sickness absence data (2,037); 2 to 4 staff (393); 5 to 9 staff (409); 10 to 24 staff (443); 25 to 49 staff (305); 50 to 99 staff (237); 100 to 249 staff (151); 250+ staff (99)

Most employers who recorded sickness absences caused or made worse by work, were confident that their records reflect all absences of this type.

Chart 2.28: Confidence that sickness absence recording accurately reflects all absences caused or made worse by work, A21b, 2024

Response	All employers %
Very confident	46%
Fairly confident	39%
Neither confident nor unconfident	10%
Not very confident	2%
Not confident at all	1%
Don’t know	2%

Unweighted base: Employers who record whether a sickness absence is caused or made worse by work (1,212)

Employers who said they record whether a sickness absence is caused or made worse by work were asked how confident they were that these records accurately reflect all absences of this type.

Over 4 in 5 employers (85%) were confident that their records reflect all absences caused or made worse by work in their organisation. Only a small proportion of employers said they were not confident on this (2%).

Over 9 in 10 employers say they offer some form of support to employees who are unable to perform their usual tasks due to ill health.

Chart 2.29: Support provided by employers to employees when they are unable to perform their usual tasks due to ill health, A6, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Flexible hours	70%	70%	85%
Access to Statutory Sick Pay	63%	63%	95%
Reduced hours	60%	60%	89%
Changed duties	53%	53%	86%
The ability to work remotely	44%	44%	79%
Pay above Statutory Sick Pay	37%	37%	76%
Access to occupational health advice	23%	23%	90%
Private health insurance	1%	1%	4%
Something else	3%	3%	8%
None of these	4%	4%	0%
Don’t know	less than 1%	1%	0%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); SMEs (2,571); Large employers (99) The majority of employers (96%) said they offer some form of support to employees in this situation.

The most common form of support cited by employers (from a list of prompts) was flexible hours (70%); but this varied by size band. While flexible hours was the most common form of support offered by SMEs (70%), the most common answer among large employers was access to Statutory Sick Pay (95%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to offer all the different types of support they were prompted with.

However, in 2024, employers were less likely to offer various forms of this support to employees than in 2022.

Chart 2.30: Support provided by employers to employees when they are unable to perform usual tasks due to ill health, A6, 2022 and 2024

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Reduced hours	60%	70%
Access to Statutory Sick Pay	63%	70%
Changed duties	53%	63%
The ability to work remotely	44%	51%
Pay above Statutory Sick Pay	37%	41%
Access to occupational health advice	23%	31%
Private health insurance	1%	1%
Flexible hours (2024)/Flexible working (2022)	70%	less than 1%

Unweighted base: All employers: 2024 (2,670); 2022 (4,003)

In 2024, employers were less likely to say they provide reduced hours for employees unable to perform their usual tasks due to ill health, compared to 2022 (a decrease of 10.5pp).

Other decreases included the proportion of employers saying they offer changed duties (a decrease of 9.4pp), access to Occupational Health advice (a decrease of 7.7pp), the ability to work remotely (a decrease of 7.1pp) and access to Statutory Sick Pay (a decrease of 6.5pp).

In 2024, the questionnaire was changed to prompt employers with ‘flexible hours’ instead of ‘flexible working’. These responses are not directly comparable although have been added to the graph to show the full extent of the data collected across both survey years.

Most employers had never had employees on LTSA; of those who had, employers use a range of approaches to manage returns to work.

Chart 2.31: Approaches used by employers to manage the return to work after an employee’s long-term sickness absence, A7, 2024

Response	All employers %
Phased return to work	21%
Regular meetings to discuss how the employee is coping	18%
Altered hours	18%
Amended duties	17%
Develop return to work plans	12%
Workplace adaptations	11%
Referral to specialist treatment (e.g. physiotherapy, counselling)	7%
External, specialist support to manage the employees’ return	5%
Something else	2%
My organisation has never had employees who are on long-term sickness absence	70%
Don’t know	1%
None of these	2%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

Most employers (70%) have never had employees who are, or have been, on long-term sickness absence (LTSA). Of those who have, the most common approach employers said they use to manage the return to work is a phased return to work (21%); this was consistent across all organisation size bands.

Other approaches used by employers include regular meetings to discuss how the employee is coping (18%) and altered hours (18%).

Across all approaches, large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they put these in place.

Due to changes to the response options between 2022 and 2024, comparisons between survey years are not possible.

The most common response to a sickness absence of more than one week is to allocate tasks to other employees.

Chart 2.32: Employer responses to a sickness absence of more than one week, A24, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Allocate tasks to other employees	76%	76%	92%
Delay delivery of tasks associated with the absent employee	41%	41%	49%
Hire temporary staff	15%	15%	26%
Something else	2%	2%	5%
None of these	7%	7%	0%
Don’t know	1%	1%	2%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); SMEs (2,571); Large employers (99)

When asked what their typical response would be to a sickness absence of more than one week, most employers said they would allocate tasks to other employees (76%). This was consistent across all organisation size bands.

Just over 2 in 5 employers (41%) said they would delay the delivery of tasks associated with the absent employee. Fewer staff mentioned hiring temporary staff (15%) or using a different approach (2%).

Larger employers (100+ staff) were more likely than very small employers (2 to 4 staff) to say they would hire temporary staff, likely because they have the resource to be able to do so.

Most employers felt business productivity had not been negatively impacted by people working whilst ill.

Chart 2.33: Employers’ responses to whether business productivity has been negatively impacted by people working whilst ill in the last year, A22, 2024

Response	All employers %
Yes	13%
No	82%
Don’t know	6%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670)

Just over 4 in 5 employers (82%) said that business productivity had not been negatively impacted by people working whilst ill in the last year.

Over 1 in 10 employers (13%) felt business productivity had been negatively impacted by this, and a small proportion of employers (6%) did not know whether business productivity had been negatively impacted or not.

Employers with 2 to 4 staff were the most likely to say that business productivity had not been impacted by people working whilst ill in the last year (85%).

In 2024, employers were less likely to say that business productivity had been negatively impacted by people working whilst ill in the last year compared to 2022 (a decrease of 6.3pp).

Around 1 in 3 employers have or plan to implement measures, to prevent or reduce people working while ill.

Chart 2.34: The proportion of employers who have measures, or plan to implement measures, to prevent or reduce working while ill, by organisation size, A23, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 49 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes	35%	34%	35%	40%	41%	36%	42%	52%
No	56%	60%	53%	52%	46%	50%	40%	40%
Don’t know	8%	6%	12%	9%	13%	14%	19%	8%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,670); 2 to 4 staff (797); 5 to 9 staff (548); 10 to 24 staff (503); 25 to 49 staff (321); 50 to 99 staff (243); 100 to 249 staff (159); 250+ staff (99)

Around 1 in 3 employers (35%) have measures, or plan to implement measures, to prevent or reduce working while ill. Over half of employers (56%) do not have or plan to implement any measures, and a further 8 per cent were uncertain on this.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they have measures or have plans to implement these measures (52% vs 35% respectively).

Employers with 2 to 4 employees were more likely than all other organisation sizes to say they did not have measures or plans to implement these measures (60%).

Over half of employers say they face at least one barrier in supporting employees on long-term sickness absence return to work.

Chart 2.35: Barriers in supporting employees on long-term sickness absence return to work, A19, 2024

Response	All employers %
Lack of time or staff resource	29%
A lack of capital to invest in support	28%
A lack of expertise or specialist support	17%
Employee engagement in the process	16%
Lack of flexibility in the way work is organised	16%
The benefits of investing in retaining an employee don’t warrant the investment	7%
A lack of support from senior leaders	2%
Other barriers	1%
We do not face any barriers	34%
Don’t know	6%

Unweighted base: All employers who have had an employee on long term sickness absence (1,319)

Just over a third of employers (34%) who have had an employee on LTSA said they face no barriers in supporting these employees to return to work once they are well enough to do so. Around 6 in 10 employers (61%) said they face at least one barrier, with a lack of time or staff resource (29%) being the most commonly cited barrier overall.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to cite employee engagement in the process as a barrier to supporting employees (33% vs 15% respectively). This was the most common barrier reported by large employers. Large employers were also more likely than SMEs to cite a lack of flexibility in the way work is organised as a barrier to supporting employees (27% vs 15% respectively).

No comparisons to the 2022 data have been made due to question routing amendments made between 2022 and 2024.

Most employers had heard of the fit note; larger employers were more likely to be aware of the fit note than smaller employers.

Chart 2.36: Awareness of the fit note, by organisation size, C1, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 49 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes	70%	63%	75%	80%	91%	96%	98%	94%
No	29%	36%	24%	18%	7%	4%	2%	3%
Don’t know	1%	1%	1%	1%	2%	0%	0%	3%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669); 2 to 4 staff (836); 5 to 9 staff (477); 10 to 24 staff (512); 25 to 49 staff (334); 50 to 99 staff (206); 100 to 249 staff (188); 250+ staff (116)

Awareness of the fit note was reasonably high, with 7 in 10 employers (70%) saying they had heard of it. Just under 3 in 10 employers (29%) had not heard of the fit note, with a small proportion of employers (1%) uncertain.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to have heard of the fit note (94% of large employers were aware vs 70% of SMEs). Employers with 2 to 4 staff were the most likely to say they had not heard of the fit note compared to all other organisation size bands (36%).

The proportions of employers aware or not aware of the fit note in 2024 were consistent with the data collected in 2022.

Four in ten employers require a fit note after day 7 of a sickness absence; large employers are more likely than SMEs to require this.

Chart 2.37: Evidence employers require from employees during a period of sickness absence, C2, 2024

Response	All employers %
Fit note required after day 7 of sickness absence	40%
Fit note required on day 7 of sickness absence or earlier	13%
No fit note required and no other medical evidence required	30%
Medical note (unspecified)	2%
Other evidence	1%
None of these	10%
Don’t know	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669)

Employers were asked what evidence of sickness, if any, they require their employees to provide during a period of sickness absence. The most common response was a fit note from their employee after day 7 of a sickness absence (said by 40% of employers).

A small proportion of employers said they require a fit note on day 7 of a sickness absence or earlier (13%). Around 3 in 10 employers (30%) do not require a fit note or other medical evidence from their employees during a sickness absence.

Across all size bands, employers with 2 to 4 staff were the most likely to require no fit note or other medical evidence (40%).

A small proportion of employers (2%) said they require a medical note from their employees. This was an unprompted response mentioned by employers who felt the other options did not fit the evidence that their organisation requires from their employees during sickness absence.

Overall, few employers had been presented with a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note in the previous 12 months, although this varied by size.

Chart 2.38: The proportion of employers who had received a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note in the previous 12 months, by organisation size, C3, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	7%	6%	72%
No	91%	91%	19%
Don’t know	2%	2%	9%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669); SMEs (2,553); Large employers (116)

Overall, fewer than 1 in 10 employers (7%) said they had been presented with a fit note in the previous 12 months where a Healthcare Professional had stated that an employee ‘may be fit for work’.

Over 9 in 10 employers (91%) had not received a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note, and 2 per cent were uncertain.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they had been presented with this form of fit note (72% of large employers said this compared to 6% of SMEs). The proportion of employers who said they did not know if they had received a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note in the previous 12 months increased very slightly between 2022 and 2024 (an increase of 1.3pp from 1%). There were no other statistically significant differences observed.

Of employers who had received a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note, around half found the adjustments suggested helpful.

Chart 2.39: Perceived usefulness of adjustments suggested on ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes, C4, 2024

Response	All employers %
Very/Quite helpful	51%
Neither helpful nor unhelpful	17%
Not very/not at all helpful	23%
Not given any suggested adjustments	8%
Don’t know	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who have received a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note (472)

Just over half of employers (51%) who received a ‘may be fit for work’ fit note, found the adjustments suggested helpful. Around a third (34%) of employers found the adjustments ‘quite helpful’, and 17 per cent said they were ‘very helpful’.

Just under 1 in 4 employers (23%) said the adjustments suggested were unhelpful, with 13 per cent saying these were not very helpful, and 9 per cent saying they were not at all helpful.

There were no significant differences observed by employer characteristics. Similarly, no differences were observed between the 2022 and 2024 data.

A range of reasons were provided as to why employers found the adjustments suggested helpful, the most common was that they enable returns to work.

Chart 2.40: Reasons adjustments on ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes were considered helpful, C5a, 2024

Response	All employers %
Enables employee(s) to return to work	27%
Clear what employee(s) can / can’t do	23%
Adjustments were clear	20%
Specific to employee(s)	12%
Assessment is independent/trustworthy	7%
Adjustments have been easy to implement	3%
Additional guidance was required/didn’t have in-house expertise	1%
Other	13%
Don’t know	12%
Prefer not to say	7%

Unweighted base: Employers who have found the adjustments suggested on ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes helpful (226)

Employers who said they found the adjustments suggested on the ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes helpful (51%) were asked the reasons for this. This question was unprompted, meaning employers were not guided in their response.

A range of reasons were provided – the most mentioned included that the adjustments enabled employee(s) to return to work (27%), that it is clear what employees can or can’t do (23%), and the adjustments were clear (20%).

No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2022 and 2024 data.

Some employers who found ‘may be fit for work’ adjustments unhelpful thought medical professionals lack full understanding of the job role/industry.

Chart 2.41: Reasons adjustments on ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes were considered unhelpful, C5b, 2024

Response	All employers %
Medical professionals lack full understanding of job role/industry	43%
Adjustments lack clarity/specificity	32%
Fit Notes given out too easily	8%
Employee(s) not engaging with the process	2%
Other	16%
Don’t know	2%
Prefer not to say	7%

Unweighted base: Employers who have found the adjustments suggested on ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes unhelpful (123)

Employers who said they found the adjustments suggested on ‘may be fit for work’ fit notes unhelpful (23%) were asked to explain the reasoning behind this. Again, employers were not prompted with any suggested response options.

Employers’ reasoning was less varied in response to this question compared to employers who found these adjustments helpful. Over 2 in 5 employers (43%) said that medical professionals lacked full understanding of an employee’s job role or industry (43%). This was followed by adjustments lacking clarity or specificity (32%) and fit notes being given out too easily (8%).

No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2022 and 2024 data.

2.5. Occupational Health services

Around 1 in 3 employers provide access to OH/VR services; overall provision is broadly consistent with the rate reported in 2022.

Chart 2.42: Access to OH/VR services, A12, 2024

Response	All employers %
Not currently utilising occupational health or vocational rehabilitation resources	65%
Access support from an external provider on an ‘as required’ basis	19%
Have in-house resource	9%
Use public sector bodies (e.g. NHS Health at Work Service)	8%
Have a long-term contract with an external provider	6%
Don’t know	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669)

Around 1 in 3 employers (31%) provide access to Occupational Health (OH) or Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services for their employees. Almost 2 in 3 employers (65%) do not provide these services and 4 per cent were uncertain.

Generally, larger employers were more likely to say they provide access to OH/VR services than smaller employers.

Employers most commonly access OH/VR through an external provider on an ‘as required’ basis (19%). This is followed by having in-house resource (9%), using public sector bodies (8%) and having a long-term contract with an external provider (6%).

This question changed between 2022 and 2024, with employers responding to the survey able to select more than one type of OH provision. This likely explains the reason why, in 2024, employers were more likely than in 2022 to report that they access support from an external provider on an ‘as required basis’ (an increase of 5.4pp from 13%). Employers in 2024 were also more likely to report that they provide access to in-house support than in 2022 (an increase of 5.6pp from 3%). The proportion who do not provide OH/VR services was consistent between survey years.

The most common form of OH accessed or provided by employers is workplace or risk assessments; but this varies by organisation size.

Chart 2.43: Provision of OH support in the previous 12 months, A12a, 2024

Response	All employers %
Workplace or risk assessments	58%
General advice to management about organisational policies or procedures	38%
Health assessment to ensure fitness for role/task	24%
Employee assistance programmes	22%
Health promotion or healthy lifestyle schemes	18%
Management referrals, assessments, or case management to support sick or disabled employees	18%
Health surveillance	15%
Rehabilitative health services for sick or disabled employees	12%
Other	2%
None of these	21%
Don’t know	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who provide access to OH/VR services (1,242)

Employers who provide access to OH/VR services (31% of all employers) were asked what types of OH support or interventions they have accessed or provided for their employees in the previous 12 months.

The most common form of OH accessed or provided by employers was workplace or risk assessments (58%), but this varied by size band. These assessments were the most common form of OH provision reported by SMEs (58%). The most common OH provision reported by large employers, however, were health assessments to ensure fitness for a role or task (88%).

Large employers were more likely to report that they had accessed or provided each measure in the previous 12 months, compared to SMEs.

Most employers had spent up to £10,000 on OH/VR services in the previous 12 months.

Chart 2.44: Amount employers spent on OH/VR services in the previous 12 months, A15a, 2024

Response	All employers %
Up to £500	39%
£501 to £1000	14%
£1,001 to £10,000	19%
£10,001 to £50,000	2%
£50,001 to £100,000	less than 1%
£100,001 To £500,000	less than 1%
£500,001 or more	less than 1%
Don’t know	21%
Prefer not to say	6%

Unweighted base: Employers who provide access to OH/VR services (1,242)

Employers who provide access to OH/VR services (31%) were asked how much their organisation spent on these services in the previous 12 months. The most common response was up to £500, reported by almost 2 in 5 (39%) employers. This was followed by £1,001 to £10,000 (19%) and £501 to £1,000 (14%).

A small proportion of employers (2%) spent more than £10,000 on OH/VR services in the previous year. Over 1 in 5 (21%) employers were not aware of how much they had spent in the previous year, indicating this may have been a difficult question for employers to answer without prior warning.

Generally, large employers were more likely than SMEs to spend more on OH/VR services. SMEs were more likely than large employers to spend up to £500 (39% of SMEs reported this compared to 3% of large employers).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they spent between £1,001-£10,000 (41% of large employers reported this vs 18% of SMEs).

Employers most commonly cite meeting employee’s expectations as the reason for providing OH or VR services to their employees.

Chart 2.45: Reasons for providing OH or VR services, A14, 2024

Response	All employers %
Meeting employee’s expectations	41%
Helping to satisfy legal obligations	38%
Maintaining or increasing productivity	35%
Helping recruitment or retention	25%
Maintaining reputation	18%
To provide for staff with long-term illnesses	18%
Duty of care/importance of staff wellbeing	15%
Helping to minimise cost	9%
Other	4%
Don’t know	8%

Unweighted base: Employers who provide access to OH/VR services (1,242)

Of those that reported providing OH/VR services (31%), the most common reason given for providing these was to meet employee’s expectations (41%). Reasons did, however, vary by size band. Employee expectations was the most common reason provided by SMEs (41%) but not large employers (36%).

Large employers reported maintaining or increasing productivity as the most common reason for providing OH/VR services (reported by 48% of employers in this size band).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to cite providing for staff with long-term illnesses (47% vs 17%) or helping to minimise cost (25% vs 9%) as reasons for providing OH/VR services.

In 2024, employers were more likely to say that helping to satisfy legal obligations was a reason for providing OH or VR services than in 2022 (an increase of 9.2pp from 29%). However, employers in 2024 were less likely than in 2022 to say that providing for staff with long-term illnesses was a reason for providing OH or VR services (a decrease of 10.1pp from 28%).

Of employers who do not provide access to OH / VR services, many said there was limited or no perceived demand in their organisation.

Chart 2.46: Reasons for not providing OH or VR services, A15, 2024

Response	All employers %
There is limited/no demand for these services within my organisation	62%
Cannot afford cost of providing services	17%
Prefer informal approach	8%
No need – organisation is too small	5%
Lack of understanding of Occupational Health	4%
Hard to determine value for money	4%
It is beyond my remit as an employer	3%
Other	2%
Don’t know	5%
Prefer not to say	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who do not provide access to OH/VR (1,330)

Employers who said they do not provide access to OH or VR services within their organisation (65%) were asked what has prevented them from doing so. This question was therefore mostly asked of small employers (2 to 49 staff) who made up 97 per cent of the question sample.

Limited / no demand within their organisations was the most common reason these employers reported for not providing these services to their employees (62%). This was followed by not being able to afford the cost of providing these services (17%) and preferring an informal approach (8%).

In 2024, employers were more likely to cite limited/no demand for OH or VR services (an increase of 8.7pp) and cannot afford cost of providing services (an increase of 6.1pp) as reasons for not providing these services to their employees. Note: the response options were changed slightly between 2022 and 2024 (‘lack of cases’ was removed) and so these differences should be treated with caution.

Around 1 in 7 employers had received recommendations from an OH adviser in the previous 12 months.

Chart 2.47: Receipt of recommendations from an OH adviser in the previous 12 months, by organisation size, A15b, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	14%	13%	86%
No	83%	84%	9%
Don’t know	3%	3%	4%

Unweighted base: Employers who provide access to OH/VR services (1,242); SMEs (1,136); Large employers (106)

Around 1 in 7 (14%) employers who provided access to OH/VR services had received recommendations from an OH adviser following an assessment conducted for an employee. Over 4 in 5 (83%) employers who provided access to OH/VR services had not received any recommendations in the previous 12 months.

Large employers (86%) were more likely than all other organisation sizes to say that they had received recommendations from an OH adviser. Collectively, only 13 per cent of SMEs reported receiving recommendations in the previous 12 months.

Note: this question was asked of employers who said they provide access to OH/VR services generally. They had not necessarily accessed these within the last 12 months.

Of those who received recommendations, around half said these related to amended duties or a phased return to work.

Chart 2.48: Actions recommended by OH advisers in recent feedback about an individual employee, A15c, 2024

Response	All employers %
Amended duties or alternative work	52%
A phased return to work	50%
Workplace adaptations	44%
Altered hours	40%
Referral to NHS or private healthcare services	24%
Referral to other specialist support services (e.g. debt management, financial advice)	6%
Employee no longer fit to work	2%
Other	4%
Don’t know	less than 1%
Prefer not to say	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who received recommendations from an OH adviser in the previous 12 months (383)

Employers who had received recommendations from an OH adviser following an assessment they conducted in the previous 12 months (14%) were asked what actions the adviser recommended should be taken.

The most commonly reported action recommended by an OH adviser was amended duties or alternative work (52%). This was followed by a phased return to work (50%) and workplace adaptations (44%).

Most employers who received recommendations from an OH adviser fully implemented these; 1 in 5 employers said actions were partially implemented.

Chart 2.49: The extent to which recommendations received from an OH adviser were implemented by employers, A15d, 2024

Response	All employers %
Fully	72%
Partially	22%
Not at all	3%
Don’t know	2%
Prefer not to say	less than 1%

Unweighted base: Employers who received recommendations from an OH adviser in the previous 12 months (383)

Over 7 in 10 employers (72%) said they fully implemented the actions recommended by an OH adviser about an employee. Around 1 in 5 employers (22%) partially implemented these recommendations. A very small proportion (3%) said they did not implement the recommendations at all.

No differences in reporting were observed by employer characteristics due to low subgroup sample sizes for this question.

The employee not wanting action to be taken was the most common reason given by employers for not fully implementing adviser recommendations.

Chart 2.50: Reasons employers cited for not fully implementing actions recommended by an OH adviser following a recent assessment, A15e, 2024

Response	All employers %
Employee did not want action taken	44%
Implementation not practicable	42%
Recommendation(s) still under consideration / not had the time to implement everything yet	17%
Support no longer required (e.g. employee already fully recovered and working, or left the organisation	10%
Recommendation(s) would not benefit the employee	10%
Not enough detail or guidance was provided	8%
Recommendation(s) cost too much	6%
Other	4%
No specific reason	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who received recommendations from an OH adviser in the previous 12 months and implemented those actions partially or not at all (89)^{[footnote 5]}

Employers who did not fully implement the actions recommended by an OH adviser (25%) were asked about the reasoning for this.

A range of responses were provided, the most common of these being that the employee did not want the action taken (44%), closely followed by the implementation not being practicable (42%).

Just under 1 in 5 employers (17%) said that the recommendation was still under consideration / they’ve not had the time to implement everything yet.

Few employers were aware of the tax exemption available on medical treatments to help employees return to work.

Chart 2.51: Usage of the tax exemption on medical treatments in the previous 12 months, by organisation size, A15f, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Have used the tax exemption	less than 1%	less than 1%	0%
Not at all and I was not aware of this tax exemption before now	88%	88%	71%
Not at all and I was previously aware of this tax exemption	8%	8%	5%
Don’t know/prefer not to say	3%	3%	24%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669); SMEs (2,553); Large employers (116)

All employers were asked if, in the previous 12 months, they had used a tax exemption on medical treatments recommended to help their employees return to work.

The majority of employers (97%) said they had not used the tax exemption. Of these, most employers (88%) were not aware of the exemption, with only 8 per cent saying they were previously aware of it.

Fewer than 1 per cent of employers had used the tax exemption and 3 per cent did not know or preferred not to answer.

3. Labour market

3.1. Executive summary

This summary presents the key findings from a survey of 8,006 employers (each of which had at least two employees). The research looked at employer attitudes and behaviours towards the recruitment, retention and progression of staff within their organisations, as well as engagement with government employment schemes and wider engagement with DWP.

Employer recruitment has decreased slightly since 2022, and over half of employers (53%) who have recruited in the previous 12 months were unable to find a suitable candidate. Low numbers of applicants with the required skills (58%), or with the required attitude, motivation or personality (45%) were cited by employers as the main challenges to recruitment.

Most employers have not experienced issues with employee retention in the past year. Where employers had experienced problems with retaining staff (13%), poor terms and conditions (e.g. pay) was the most commonly cited factor (31%).

Overall, engagement with government employment schemes was low. The most utilised was the Apprenticeship Scheme (25% of employers who had heard of apprenticeships said they have recruited through this scheme), however, almost two thirds of these employers (64%) believed that candidates recruited through this scheme were not job-ready when they joined their organisation. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were more likely to report issues with candidate suitability compared to large employers.

Employer provision of support to encourage employee progression has remained broadly consistent since the 2022 survey. The most utilised measure employers reported undertaking was encouraging employees to upskill or undertake learning activities (75%).

Employment of older workers (aged 50 or over) has increased since the 2022 survey (84% said this in 2024 compared to 73% in 2022); with employers also more likely to agree with many of the perceived benefits of having these workers in their organisation.

In terms of menopause, over 6 in 10 employers (64%) agreed that workplaces should provide support for employees who are experiencing menopause. However, only a small proportion of employers have a menopause policy in place (18%) or provide menopause-related training (5%).

3.2. Recruitment and retention

Fewer than half of employers had recruited or tried to recruit staff in the previous 12 months.

Chart 3.1: The proportion of employers who had recruited or tried to recruit staff in the previous 12 months, by organisation size, H1, 2024

Response	All employers %	2 to 4 staff %	5 to 9 staff %	10 to 24 staff %	25 to 49 staff %	50 to 99 staff %	100 to 249 staff %	250+ staff %
Yes – we have recruited	37%	19%	53%	73%	90%	95%	99%	99%
Yes – we have tried to recruit but have not managed to take on new staff	9%	9%	11%	11%	5%	2%	0%	1%
No	53%	72%	35%	16%	4%	3%	less than 1%	0%
Don’t know	less than 1%	less than 1%	1%	0%	1%	0%	1%	less than 1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); 2 to 4 staff (835); 5 to 9 staff (495); 10 to 24 staff (517); 25 to 49 staff (303); 50 to 99 staff (214); 100 to 249 staff (192); 250+ staff (111)

Over 4 in 10 (46%) employers said they had recruited or tried to recruit staff in the previous 12 months. This consisted of over 3 in 10 (37%) employers who had recruited staff, and a further 1 in 10 (9%) who had tried to recruit but not managed to take on new staff.

Over half of employers (53%) said they had not recruited or tried to recruit in the previous 12 months, and fewer than 1 per cent did not know.

Employers with 2 to 4 staff were more likely than every other employer size band to say they had not recruited or tried to recruit in the last year (72% of these employers said this).

Employers were less likely to say they had recruited in the previous 12 months compared to the 2022 survey (a decrease of 4.5pp from 42%).

Over half of employers who had recruited said there were instances when they had been unable to find suitable candidates.

Chart 3.2: The proportion of employers who had tried to recruit staff but were unable to find a suitable candidate, by organisation size, H8, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	53%	53%	66%
No	46%	46%	32%
Don’t know	1%	1%	3%

Unweighted base: All employers who have recruited in the last 12 months (1,566); SMEs (1,457); Large employers (109)

Employers who had recruited in the previous 12 months (37%), were asked if there had been any instances in the last year where they had tried to recruit but were unable to find a suitable candidate.

Over half of employers who were asked this question said there had been instances where they were unable to find a suitable candidate (53%). Slightly fewer employers (46%) said there had not been instances where they had been unable to find a suitable candidate, and 1 per cent did not know.

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say they had not had any instances where they had been unable to find suitable candidates (46% of SMEs said this compared to 32% of large employers).

Responses to this question had not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

The main perceived barriers to recruitment among employers who had recruited or tried to recruit in the last 12 months were low numbers of applicants with the required skills or attitude.

Chart 3.3: Employer views on the barriers to recruitment for their organisation, H11, 2024

Response	All employers %
Low number of applicants with the required skills	58%
Low number of applicants with the required attitude, motivation or personality	45%
Not enough people interested in doing this kind of job	38%
Lack of work experience the company demands	34%
Low number of applicants generally	33%
Lack of qualifications the company demands	20%
Too much competition from other employers	16%
Rising costs of recruitment / cannot afford to recruit new staff	15%
Remote location / poor public transport	14%
Poor terms and conditions (e.g. pay) offered	11%
Other	2%
We are not looking to recruit new staff	6%
There are no barriers recruitment	6%
Don’t know	less than 1%

Unweighted base: Employers who had recruited or tried to recruit in the last 12 months (1,760)

Employers who had recruited or tried to recruit in the previous 12 months (46%) were asked what the main barriers to recruitment were for their organisation.

The most common response, reported by over half of employers, was a low number of applicants with the required skills (58%). This was consistent across all organisation size bands. This was followed by a low number of applicants with the required attitude, motivation or personality (45%) and not enough people interested in doing this kind of job (38%).

It is not possible to make comparisons to 2022 data for this question due to changes in the survey question and approach to collecting responses.

Where a lack of skills was mentioned as a barrier to recruitment, this was mostly in relation to technical, job-specific skills or competencies.

Chart 3.4: Employer views on the type of skills that are lacking, and which present a recruitment challenge for their business, H10, 2024

Response	All employers %
Lack required technical skills or competencies (e.g. technical or job specific skills, etc)	78%
Lack required soft / personal skills or competencies (e.g. problem solving, communication […])	41%
Poor literacy/numeracy skills	14%
Lack required digital or IT skills	9%
Other skills	1%
Don’t know	2%

Unweighted base: Employers who selected lack of skills as a barrier to recruitment (1,093)

Employers who mentioned a low number of applicants with the required skills as a barrier to recruitment for their organisation (58% of employers who had recruited or tried to recruit) were asked what specific skillsets, from a pre-defined list, were lacking.

The most common response by far was a lack of required technical skills or competencies, mentioned by over three quarters (78%) of these employers. This was followed by a lack of soft or personal skills (41%) and poor literacy or numeracy skills (14%).

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say a lack of soft or personal skills (41% of SMEs vs 18% of large employers said this), and poor literacy or numeracy skills (14% vs 2%). These comparisons by organisation size should be used with some caution due to the low base size for large employers (n=71) for this question.

It is not possible to make comparisons to 2022 data for this question due to changes in the survey response options and routing.

Most employers have not had any problems with retaining staff over the last year; large employers were more likely than SMEs to face issues with employee retention.

Chart 3.5: The proportion of employers who have had problems with retaining staff over the previous year, by organisation size, H12, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	13%	12%	31%
No	87%	87%	64%
Don’t know	1%	1%	5%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Most employers (87%) have not had any problems with retaining staff over the last year; a small proportion of employers (13%) have had problems with this.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to report that they have had problems with retaining staff over the last year (31% vs 12%).

The proportion of employers who have had problems with retaining staff over the last year had not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

Employers most commonly cited poor terms and conditions (e.g. pay) as a barrier to retention for their organisation.

Chart 3.6: Barriers to retaining staff reported by employers, H13, 2024

Response	All employers %
Poor terms and conditions (e.g. pay)	31%
Poor career progression / lack of prospects	20%
Staff not suitable (inc. lack of motivation, rather claim benefits)	18%
Job entails shift work / unsociable hours	15%
Jobs do not cater for flexible working	11%
Competition from other businesses / organisations	8%
Remote location / poor public transport	7%
Jobs offer limited or uncertain hours (e.g. zero hour contracts)	6%
Nature of job role	5%
Jobs are temporary or seasonal	4%
Lack of training	4%
Something else	8%
None of these	less than 1%
Don’t know	9%
Prefer not to say	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who have had problems with retaining staff (453)

Employers who reported that they have had problems with retaining staff over the last year (13%) were asked what the main barriers to retention are for their organisation. The most common barrier reported by employers was poor terms and conditions (e.g. pay) (31%). This was followed by poor career progression/lack of prospects (20%) and staff not being suitable (18%).

In 2024, employers were more likely to report ‘Staff not suitable’ as a barrier to retention compared to the 2022 survey (an increase of 10.3pp). Additionally, employers were less likely to report ‘Competition from other businesses/organisations’ as a barrier to retention in 2024, compared to the 2022 survey (a decrease of 8.6pp).

3.3. Engagement with government employment schemes and wider engagement with DWP

The majority of employers had not carried out recruitment activities through DWP/JCPs in the previous 12 months.

Chart 3.7: Proportion of employers who, in the past 12 months, have carried out the following actions through the DWP or a JCP, I1, 2024

Response	All employers %
Provided a period of work experience to an individual who was unemployed?	4%
‘Tested’ how well an individual would fit into your workplace through a Work Trial?	2%
Worked with DWP or JCP on designing pre-employment training for individuals who are unemployed but looking to enter work in your sector?	1%
Received a payment or subsidy for recruiting a young disabled person with complex support needs	less than 1%
None of these	93%
Don’t know	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

Employers were asked whether they had engaged with a selection of Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) or Jobcentre Plus (JCP) recruitment activities in the previous 12 months. Most employers had not engaged with any of these activities (93%).

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say they had not engaged with the activities they were prompted with (93% vs 74%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to say they had offered work experience or a work trial. Instead, they were more likely to select none of these (an increase of 8.7pp).

Note, the response option ‘received a payment or subsidy for recruiting an 18-24 year old who had previously been unemployed’ was removed for the 2024 survey.

Most employers do not currently employ anybody through government recruitment schemes.

Chart 3.8: Proportion of employers who say they employ someone through a government scheme, by organisation size, I2, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	9%	9%	40%
No	91%	91%	53%
Don’t know	1%	1%	8%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Just under 1 in 10 (9%) employers reported that they currently employ someone through a government scheme; the majority of employers (91%) do not currently employ anybody through a government scheme.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they employ someone through a government scheme (40% vs 9%).

Employers in 2024, were slightly less likely to say they employ someone through a government scheme, compared to 2022 (a decrease of 3.2pp).

The most common reason employers gave for not employing anybody through a government scheme was no need / not currently looking for new staff.

Chart 3.9: Reasons employers provided for not employing anybody through any government schemes, I3, 2024

Response	All employers %
No need / we’re not currently looking for new staff	36%
I am not aware of any Government schemes	19%
I do not know enough about the Government schemes	11%
Not suitable for business/job roles	7%
Increase in admin costs	5%
Increased poor quality job applications	5%
Prefer to recruit experienced staff through other routes	3%
They are not suitable due to the size of the business	3%
Increase in token job applications	2%
Bad experience in the past	2%
Don’t have time / resource to train anyone	2%
Low number of applicants	1%
Increase in extra hours requests	1%
Increase in the volume of payslip queries	less than 1%
Don’t qualify for Government schemes	less than 1%
Other	2%
Don’t know	8%
Prefer not to say	3%

Unweighted base: Employers who do not employ anybody through Government schemes (2,221)

Employers who said they do not currently employ anybody through a government scheme (91%) were asked what their reasoning was for this.

The most common reason given was that there was no need/they are not currently looking for new staff (36%). This was followed by a lack of awareness of any government schemes (19%) and not knowing enough about the government schemes (11%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were more likely to say that they were not aware of any government schemes (an increase of 6.6pp), and the schemes were not suitable for their business/job roles (an increase of 2.3pp). Employers in 2024 were slightly less likely to say they prefer to recruit experienced staff through other routes (a decrease of 3.2pp) and that they don’t qualify for government schemes (a decrease of 1.8pp).

To note, a lot of the responses displayed on the slide were unprompted using the ‘other (please specify)’ option.

Most employers have heard of apprenticeships; very few employers have heard of the remaining government schemes.

Chart 3.10: Proportion of employers who have heard of the following government schemes, I4, 2024

Response	Sector-based Work Academy Programmes (SWAPs) %	JCP/DWP Work trial programme %	Apprenticeships %	Skills Bootcamps %
Yes	5%	12%	92%	14%
No	93%	86%	8%	83%
Don’t know	2%	2%	less than 1%	3%

Unweighted base. SWAPs, JCP/DWP Work trial programme, Apprenticeships: All employers (2,667). Skills Bootcamps: Employers based in England (2,299)

Most employers have not heard of SWAPs (93%), the JCP/DWP work trial programme (86%) and skills bootcamps (83%). Over 9 in 10 (92%) employers have heard of apprenticeships; large employers were more likely than SMEs to have heard of these (100% vs 92%).

Large employers were also more likely than SMEs to have heard of JCP/DWP’s work trial programme (21% vs 12%).

In 2024, employers were slightly more likely to say they had heard of apprenticeships, compared to the 2022 survey (an increase of 2.9pp).

Employer knowledge of SWAPs or the work trial programme had not changed significantly since the 2022 survey. Skills bootcamps were added to this question for the 2024 survey.

Only a small proportion of employers have recruited through various government schemes; 1 in 4 employers have recruited through apprenticeships.

Chart 3.11: Proportion of employers who have recruited through the following government schemes, I5, 2024

Response	Sector-based Work Academy Programmes (SWAPs) %	JCP/DWP Work trial programme %	Apprenticeships	Skills Bootcamps %
Yes	7%	12%	25%	3%
No	92%	86%	75%	96%
Don’t know	1%	2%	less than 1%	less than 1%

Unweighted base. Employers who have heard of… SWAPs (135); JCP/DWP Work trial programme (393); Apprenticeships (2,487); Skills Bootcamps (319)

Of those employers who have heard of the following government schemes, the majority have not recruited through them: SWAPs (92%); JCP/DWP’s work trial programme (86%); apprenticeships (75%); skills bootcamps (96%).

One in four (25%) employers said they have recruited through apprenticeships; this was the highest proportion across the schemes employers were prompted with.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to have recruited through apprenticeships (74% vs 24%).

The recruitment activities of employers through SWAPs, work trials and apprenticeships had not changed significantly since the 2022 survey; skills bootcamps were added to this question for the 2024 survey.

Under half of employers believed that candidates recruited through apprenticeships, or the work trial programme were job-ready when joining their organisation.

Chart 3.12: Proportion of employers who believe that individual candidates on these programmes were job-ready when they joined their organisation, I6, 2024

Response	JCP/DWP Work trial programme %	Apprenticeships %
Yes	35%	32%
No	64%	64%
Don’t know	1%	4%

Unweighted base: Employers who have recruited through… JCP/DWP Work trial programme (46) ; Apprenticeships (863)

Employers who had recruited through each government scheme were asked whether the candidates were job-ready on joining their organisation. Under half of employers who recruited through the JCP/DWP work trial programme (35%) and apprenticeships (32%) believed that the candidates were job ready.

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say that candidates recruited through the apprenticeship scheme were not job ready (65% vs 45%). However, these comparisons by organisation size should be used with some caution due the low base size for large employers (n=78) for this question.

There were no significant changes since the 2022 survey in the proportion of employers who believed candidates from the work trial programme and apprenticeships were job-ready when they joined their organisation.

It is not possible to report the data for this question for SWAPs and Skills Bootcamps due to low base sample sizes (n<40).

Employers thought it unlikely that they would use government skills recruitment schemes in the next 12 months.

Chart 3.13: Likelihood of employers making use of various government schemes in the next 12 months, I7, 2024

Response	Sector-based Work Academy Programmes (SWAPs) %	JCP/DWP Work trial programme %	Apprenticeships %	Skills Bootcamps %
Likely	8%	9%	15%	5%
Unlikely	80%	74%	66%	80%
Don’t know	6%	6%	6%	8%

Unweighted base: Employers who have heard of… SWAPs (135); JCP/DWP Work trial programme (393); Apprenticeships (2,487); Skills Bootcamps (319).

Of those employers who had heard of the government schemes they were prompted with, the majority thought it unlikely they would utilise those schemes, in the next 12 months.

The scheme employers thought they had the highest likelihood of utilising in the next 12 months was the apprenticeships scheme (15%). Overall, employers thought they were least likely to use skills bootcamps (5%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they would make use of apprenticeships (69% vs 15%).

The likelihood of employers utilising SWAPs, work trials or apprenticeships in the next 12 months has not changed significantly since the 2022 survey; skills bootcamps were added to this question for the 2024 survey.

Employers most commonly cited not looking to recruit new staff as the reason they are unlikely to engage with SWAPs in the next 12 months.

Chart 3.14: Reasons employers are unlikely to engage with SWAPs, I8, 2024

Response	All employers %
We are not looking to recruit new staff	34%
Don’t have time / resource to train anyone	11%
Prefer to recruit experienced staff	10%
No need (unspecified)	10%
Don’t have the work to offer them	9%
Doesn’t suit business model	8%
Too expensive/cost outweighs benefits	7%
Too much paperwork/red tape	5%
Bad experience with placements or training programmes in the past	4%
Regulatory restrictions or requirements	4%
Not suitable for job roles/business	3%
Lack of suitable applicants	3%
They are not suitable due to the size of the business	3%
Not interested / never offered before	2%
Prefer other forms of training	1%
Don’t know enough about them	1%
Other	1%
Don’t know	1%
Prefer not to say	5%

Unweighted base: Employers unlikely to engage with SWAPs (91)

Employers who reported that they were unlikely to engage with SWAPs in the next 12 months (80% of employers who had heard of SWAPs) were asked what their reasoning was for this. The most common answer given was that they were not looking to recruit new staff (34%). This was followed by a lack of time/resource to train anyone (11%) and a preference to recruit experienced staff (10%).

The reasons given for being unlikely to engage with SWAPs in the next 12 months have not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

One third of employers cited not looking to recruit new staff as their reason for being unlikely to engage with the JCP/DWP work trial programme in the next 12 months.

Chart 3.15: Reasons employers are unlikely to engage with JCP/DWP work trial programme, I8, 2024

Response	All employers %
We are not looking to recruit new staff	34%
No need (unspecified)	11%
Don’t have the work to offer them	11%
Bad experience with placements or training programmes in the past	9%
Not suitable for job roles/business	6%
Prefer to recruit experienced staff	5%
Doesn’t suit business model	4%
Don’t have time/resource to train anyone	4%
Too much paperwork/red tape	3%
on’t know enough about them	3%
Lack of suitable applicants	3%
They are not suitable due to the size of the business	3%
Not interested/never offered before	2%
Prefer other forms of training	2%
Too expensive/cost outweighs benefits	2%
Regulatory restrictions or requirements	1%
Lack of applicants	less than 1%
Other	6%
Don’t know	2%
Prefer not to say	4%

Unweighted base: Employers unlikely to engage with JCP/DWP Work trial programme (265)

Employers who reported that they were unlikely to engage with JCP/DWP’s work trial programme in the next 12 months (74% of employers who had heard of these) were asked their reasoning for this. The most common answer given was that they were not looking to recruit new staff (34%). This was followed by there being no need (11%) and not having the work to offer (11%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to say they were unlikely to engage with the work trial programme because they prefer to recruit experienced staff, or that they are not suitable for this programme due to the size of their business (a decrease of 9.2pp and 7.1pp, respectively).

Employers most commonly cited not looking to recruit new staff as the reason they are unlikely to engage with apprenticeships in the next 12 months.

Chart 3.16: Reasons employers are unlikely to engage with Apprenticeships, I8, 2024

Response	All employers %
We are not looking to recruit new staff	32%
Don’t have the work to offer them	12%
Not suitable for job roles/business	10%
Don’t have time / resource to train anyone	9%
They are not suitable due to the size of the business	9%
No need (unspecified)	7%
Bad experience with placements or training programmes in the past	6%
Prefer to recruit experienced staff	6%
Too expensive / cost outweighs benefits	5%
Doesn’t suit business model	3%
Apprenticeships are not offered for our industry	3%
Too much paperwork/red tape	3%
Regulatory restrictions or requirements	2%
Lack of applicants	1%
Don’t know enough about them	1%
Lack of suitable applicants	1%
Age-related restrictions	1%
Not interested / never offered before	1%
Prefer other forms of training	less than 1%
Other	4%
Don’t know	2%
Prefer not to say	4%

Unweighted base: Employers unlikely to engage with Apprenticeships (1,355)

Of those employers who reported they were unlikely to engage with apprenticeships in the next 12 months (66% of employers who had heard of these), almost 1 in 3 (32%) said this was due to the fact they were not looking to recruit new staff.

This was followed by not having the work to offer (12%) and apprenticeships not being suitable for their job roles/business (10%).

Employers in 2024 were more likely to say that they were not looking to recruit new staff, compared to the 2022 survey (an increase of 7.5pp).

A quarter of employers cited not looking to recruit new staff as the reason they are unlikely to engage with Skills Bootcamps in the next 12 months.

Chart 3.17: Reasons employers are unlikely to engage with Skills Bootcamps, I8, 2024

Response	All employers %
We are not looking to recruit new staff	26%
No need (unspecified)	12%
Not suitable for job roles/business	10%
Don’t know enough about them	9%
Prefer other forms of training	8%
They are not suitable due to the size of the business	7%
Don’t have the work to offer them	6%
Don’t have time/resource to train anyone	6%
Too expensive/cost outweighs benefits	4%
Doesn’t suit business model	3%
Prefer to recruit experienced staff	3%
Too much paperwork/red tape	3%
Bad experience with placements or training programmes in the past	3%
Skills Bootcamps are not offered for our industry	2%
Not interested/never offered before	2%
Lack of suitable applicants	1%
Other	3%
Don’t know	6%
Prefer not to say	6%

Unweighted base: Employers unlikely to engage with skills bootcamps (235)

Employers who reported that they were unlikely to engage with skills bootcamps in the next 12 months (80% of employers who had heard of these) were asked their reasoning for this.

The most common reason employers gave was that they were not looking to recruit new staff (26%). This was followed by having no need (12%), and skills bootcamps not being suitable for their job roles/business (10%).

Most employers have had no contact with DWP in the last 12 months; SMEs were more likely than large employers to have had no contact.

Chart 3.18: Employer contact with DWP in the last 12 months, K1, 2024

Response	All employers %
Workplace pensions	8%
Apprenticeships	6%
Universal Credit	3%
Work experience	2%
Advertising a job through DWP online services	2%
Child maintenance	2%
Reasonable Adjustments	1%
Access to Work	1%
Disability Confident	1%
Redundancy Support	1%
DWP Work trial programme	1%
In-work progression	1%
Mentoring Circles	1%
Positive Action	less than 1%
Inclusive recruitment support	less than 1%
Sector based work academies programme (SWAPs)	less than 1%
Other	1%
None of the above - no contact with DWP	79%
Don’t know	3%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

Most employers (79%) said they had not made contact or obtained information from DWP in the last 12 months. A small proportion of employers (3%) said they did not know whether they had contacted DWP.

Employers had most commonly contacted or obtained information from DWP regarding workplace pensions (8%). This was followed by apprenticeships (6%) and Universal Credit (3%).

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say they had not contacted DWP in the last 12 months (79% vs 32%).

Employers in 2024 were more likely to say that they have had no contact with DWP in the last 12 months (an increase of 7.0pp) compared to 2022. Employers in 2024 were also slightly less likely to say they had contacted DWP regarding apprenticeships (a decrease of 3.3pp) and inclusive recruitment support (a decrease of 0.8pp), than in the 2022 survey.

The response options have been amended since the 2022 survey. ‘In-work progression’ was added as an option for 2024, whereas ‘kickstart’ and ‘traineeships’ were removed.

Around half of employers who contacted DWP in the last 12 months were satisfied with the way their query was dealt with.

Chart 3.19: Employer satisfaction with how their query was dealt with by DWP, K2, 2024

Response	All employers %
Satisfied	48%
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	29%
Dissatisfied	14%
Don’t know	9%

Unweighted base: Employers who have contacted DWP in the past 12 months (658)

Employers who reported that they had made contact or obtained information from DWP in the last 12 months (18%) were asked how satisfied they were with how their most recent query was dealt with by DWP.

Around half (48%) of employers said they were satisfied with the way their query was dealt with, and over one in ten employers (14%) were dissatisfied with this. Almost 3 in 10 (29%) employers were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied by how their query was dealt with and 9 per cent did not know how satisfied or dissatisfied they were.

There were no significant differences in satisfaction levels between 2022 and 2024.

3.4. Employee progression

The most common measure employers undertake to support employee progression is encouraging employees to upskill.

Chart 3.20: The proportion of employers who have measures in place to support employee progression, 2024

Measure	Yes %	No %	Don’t know %
Monitor earnings progression	69%	28%	3%
Transparent progression pathway	36%	57%	8%
Encourage employees to upskill	75%	21%	4%
Provide training courses for employees	66%	32%	1%
Have someone with a formal responsibility for considering staff progression in working practices	49%	47%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

Employers were asked a series of questions about what measures they had in place to support and/or promote employee progression.

The most common measure that employers said they were undertaking, was encouraging their employees to upskill or undertake learning activities (75% of employers said they did this). This was followed by monitoring earnings progression (69%) and providing training courses for employees (66%). These results are examined further below.

Over two thirds of employers said they monitor the earnings progression of their employees.

Chart 3.21: The proportion of employers who monitor earnings progression, by organisation size, J1, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	69%	69%	86%
No	28%	28%	11%
Don’t know	3%	3%	2%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Around 7 in 10 (69%) employers said they monitor the earnings progression of their employees. Just under 3 in 10 (28%) employers said they do not monitor this, and 3 per cent did not know.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they monitor employee earnings progression (86% of large employers said this compared to 69% of SMEs). Employers with 2 to 4 staff were more likely than all other employer size bands to say they do not monitor employee earnings (35% of employers in this size band said this).

Rates of monitoring earnings progression have not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

Employers had a range of progression-related provision in place; the most common form was support for professional development.

Chart 3.22: Employer provision in relation to employee progression, J2, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Supporting professional development	55%	57%
Mentoring	37%	44%
Individualised progression and learning plans	32%	36%
Shadowing and work experience	29%	34%
Appraisals	1%	1%
Other things to help people progress in work	19%	4%
None of the above	5%	2%
Don’t know	26%	15%

Unweighted base: All employers. 2024 (2,667); 2022 (2,666)

Employers were asked what specific provision is available for all members of their staff in relation to employee progression. The most common response, cited by more than half of employers (55%) was supporting professional development for all members of staff.

This was followed by mentoring (37%) and individualised progression and learning plans (32%). Just over a quarter (26%) of employers were not sure if they offered to all employees any of the measures they were prompted with.

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were significantly less likely to say they offered mentoring (a decrease of 6.6pp) and shadowing/work experience (a decrease of 5.1pp). Instead, in 2024, employers were more likely to say they offer other things to help people progress in work (an increase of 14.9pp), or that they did not know (an increase of 11.0pp), or none of the above (an increase of 2.4pp).

Some of this change may be attributable to the removal of the ‘flexible working’ response option in 2024, due to this provision being asked about elsewhere in the survey.

Around a third of employers said they have a transparent progression pathway in their company.

Chart 3.23: The proportion of employers who have a transparent progression pathway in their company, by organisation size, J3, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	36%	36%	79%
No	57%	57%	17%
Don’t know	8%	8%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Employers were asked if there is a transparent progression pathway in their company, ensuring entry level jobs are a stepping stone to higher paid work.

Just over a third (36%) of employers said there was a clear progression pathway. However, over half of employers (57%) said they did not have a transparent progression pathway in their organisation, and 8 per cent did not know.

Large employers were more likely than all other size bands to say they had a transparent progression pathway (79% of large employers said this compared to 36% of SMEs).

The proportions of employers who said they did or did not have a transparent progression pathway in place has not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

Across all employer sizes, most employers encourage their employees to upskill or undertake learning activities.

Chart 3.24: The proportion of employers who encourage their employees to upskill/undertake learning activities, by organisation size, J4, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	75%	75%	94%
No	21%	21%	5%
Don’t know	4%	4%	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Employers were also asked whether they encourage their employees to upskill or undertake learning activities. Three quarters of employers (75%) said they encourage employees to do so. A further 1 in 5 (21%) employers said they did not encourage their employees to upskill or undertake learning activities, and 4 per cent of employers did not know.

Almost all large employers (94%) said they encourage their employees to upskill or undertake learning activities; these employers were significantly more likely than SMEs to do so (75%).

Rates of encouraging employees to upskill had not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

Two thirds of employers provide training courses for their employees, with most large employers doing so.

Chart 3.25: The proportion of employers who provide training courses for their employees, by organisation size, J6, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	66%	66%	95%
No	32%	33%	3%
Don’t know	1%	1%	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Employers were asked if they provide training courses for their employees. Two thirds of employers (66%) said they provide training courses, and just under a third (32%) said they did not. A very small proportion (1%) did not know.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they provide training courses (95% of large employers said this compared to 66% of SMEs).

Rates of training provision had not changed significantly since the 2022 survey.

Almost half of employers said they have a member of staff with formal responsibility for embedding the progression of staff into working practices.

Chart 3.26: The proportion of employers who have a member of staff with formal responsibility for embedding the progression of employees into working practices, by organisation size, J5, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	49%	49%	87%
No	47%	47%	11%
Don’t know	4%	4%	1%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667); SMEs (2,556); Large employers (111)

Employers were also asked if they have any HR or senior leadership-level responsibility for embedding the progression of staff into working practice. If organisations did not have a HR department, they were asked whether someone at their organisation had formal responsibility for considering staff progression in working practices.

Nearly half (49%) of employers said they have a member of staff with formal responsibility for embedding staff progression. Slightly fewer employers (47%) said they did not have anyone with this responsibility, and 4 per cent did not know.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to have someone with this responsibility in their organisation (87% of large employers said this compared to 49% of SMEs). Again, this was predominantly driven by employers in the smallest size bands.

There were no significant changes in how employers answered this question compared to 2022.

The most popular form of support employers said would help them progress staff was funding pots, however over a third of employers said none of the suggested options would help.

Chart 3.27: Forms of support or guidance that would help employers progress staff, J7, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Possible funding pots that employers can draw on to support training and progression	45%	53%
Clear signposting to advice and guidance support	25%	31%
Advice on how to offer career conversations and development discussions	19%	24%
Link person within Jobcentre Plus that employers can approach	15%	25%
Other	1%	2%
None	37%	33%
Don’t know	8%	5%

Unweighted base: All employers. 2024 (2,667); 2022 (2,666)

Employers were asked to select from a list what additional support or guidance, if any, would help them to progress staff.

The most common response chosen was possible funding pots that employers can draw on to support training and progression (45%). This was followed by clear signposting to advice and guidance support (25%) and advice on how to offer career conversations (19%).

Over a third of employers (37%) said none of the support they were presented with would help them to progress staff. Employers with 2 to 4 staff were more likely than all other size bands to say this (45%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to say each of the four possible forms of support or guidance they were prompted with. Instead, employers were slightly more likely to answer that they did not know (an increase of 2.3pp compared to the 2022 survey).

3.5. Older workers

Employers in 2024 were more likely to say they employ workers aged over 50 compared to 2022; but the share of over 50s in the workforce remains broadly consistent.

Chart 3.28: Proportion of employers who employ workers aged 50+, B1, 2024

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Yes	84%	73%
No	16%	27%
Don’t know	less than 1%	less than 1%

Unweighted base: All employers. 2024 (1,333); 2022 (2,667)

Over 4 in 5 (84%) employers said they currently employ someone over the age of 50. Sixteen per cent said they do not employ someone in this age group, and less than 1 per cent did not know.

Employers were more likely to say they currently employed someone over the age of 50, compared to the 2022 survey (84% said this in 2024 compared to 73% in 2022).

Chart 3.29: Proportion of employees aged 50+, B2, 2024

Response	All employers %
90 to 100%	18%
80 to 89%	2%
70 to 79%	7%
60 to 69%	9%
50 to 59%	17%
40 to 49%	4%
30 to 39%	11%
20 to 29%	11%
10 to 19%	6%
0 to 9%	15%
Don’t know	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who employ anyone over 50 years. 2024 (1,205)

The proportion of employees aged over 50 varied considerably, with 15 per cent of employers saying these workers made up 0 to 9% of their workforce, and 18 per cent saying they made up 90 to 100% of their workforce. There were no significant differences in how employers answered this question compared to the 2022 survey.

Experience and reliability remain the top two perceived benefits of having workers aged over 50 in the workforce.

Chart 3.30: Employer views on the perceived benefits of having workers aged over 50 in their organisation, B7, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Experience	83%	80%
Reliability	62%	55%
Loyalty to company	46%	39%
Punctuality	42%	33%
Good customer service skills	41%	32%
Good job specific skills	41%	36%
Good communication skills	38%	29%
Motivation/ self-motivation	35%	28%
Ability to cope with stress	31%	22%
Tend to be more even-tempered	31%	25%
Mentor / provide on the job training to new worker	29%	27%
Productivity	29%	22%
More diverse/balanced workforce	less than 1%	less than 1%
Other	4%	5%
No particular benefits	5%	6%
Don’t know	2%	2%

Unweighted base: Employers who employ anyone over 50 years. 2024 (1,205); 2022 (2,181)

Employers who employed workers aged over 50 (84%) were asked about the benefits of having these workers in their organisation. The most common perceived benefit was experience (83%), followed by reliability (62%), and loyalty to the company (46%). One in twenty (5%) employers said there were no particular benefits of having workers aged over 50 in their organisation.

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were significantly more likely to mention the following benefits:

• reliability (62% vs 55%)
• loyalty to company (46% vs. 39%)
• punctuality (42% vs. 33%)
• good customer service skills (41% vs. 32%)
• good communication skills (38% vs. 29%)
• motivation / self-motivation (35% vs. 28%)
• ability to cope with stress (31% vs. 22%)
• tend to be more even-tempered (31% vs. 25%)
• productivity (29% vs. 22%)

When asked about the challenges of having workers aged over 50, employers were more likely than in 2022 to mention retirement / succession planning.

Chart 3.31: Employer views on the perceived challenges of having workers aged over 50 in their organisation, B8, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Might retire soon/succession planning	26%	20%
Difficulty with physical aspects	19%	20%
Stuck in their ways	18%	18%
Health-related absence	16%	19%
Slow to learn new skills/tasks	14%	15%
Out of date skills and qualifications	11%	9%
Accommodating flexible working requests	6%	5%
More difficult to manage older workers	4%	3%
Accommodating caring responsibilities	4%	5%
Productivity	3%	4%
Motivation	2%	2%
Difficulty with cognitive aspects	2%	4%
Other	2%	1%
No particular challenges	41%	43%
Don’t know	1%	2%

Unweighted base: Employers who employ anyone over 50 years. 2024 (1,205); 2022 (2,181)

Employers who employed workers aged over 50 (84%) were also asked about the challenges of having workers of this age in their organisation. Employers reported a range of challenges, although a significant minority (41%) reported no challenges.

The most common challenges reported were that staff might retire soon (26%), difficulty with physical aspects of a job (19%), and staff being stuck in their ways (18%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were more likely to mention the challenge of staff potentially retiring soon and having succession planning problems (an increase of 6.4pp).

Around two thirds of employers agreed that workplaces should provide support for employees who are experiencing menopause.

Chart 3.32: Employer views on workplaces providing support for employees who are experiencing menopause, B12, 2024

Response	All employers %
Strongly agree	32%
Tend to agree	31%
Neither agree nor disagree	23%
Tend to disagree	5%
Strongly disagree	4%
Don’t know	3%
Prefer not to say	2%

Unweighted base: All employers (1,333)

Over 6 in 10 employers (64%) agreed that workplaces should provide support for employees who are experiencing menopause. Just under 1 in 10 employers (8%) disagreed with this statement. A small proportion of employers did not know how to respond or preferred not to answer (5%).

Large employers were more likely to agree that workplaces should provide support to employees experiencing menopause, compared to SMEs (91% of large employers agreed with this statement compared to 63% of SMEs). However, this comparison should be used with caution due to the low base size for large employers (n=46) for this question.

However, most employers do not have a policy in place to support the wellbeing of employees experiencing menopause.

Chart 3.33: Provision of a menopause policy, by organisation size, B9, 2024

Response	All %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	18%	17%	63%
No	77%	77%	25%
Don’t know	5%	5%	12%

Unweighted base: All employers (1,333); SMEs (1,287); Large employers (46)^{[footnote 6]}

Employers were asked if they have a policy in place to support the wellbeing of people in their organisation who are experiencing menopause.

Under 1 in 5 employers (18%) reported that they do have this type of policy in place. Just over 3 in 4 employers (77%) said they do not have a policy in place. A small proportion (5%) were not sure whether they did or did not have a policy.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they have a policy in place to support the wellbeing of employees experiencing menopause (63% of large employers said this vs 17% of SMEs).

Over half of employers offer no support to employees experiencing menopause; a third of employers offer workplace adjustments.

Chart 3.34: Types of support on offer to employees transitioning through menopause, B10, 2024

Support	All employers %
Workplace adjustments (eg. to workload, work pattern)	33%
Signposting to advice and guidance	17%
An employee assistance programme (EAP), or equivalent provided by an external organisation	10%
A support network or other forum	9%
A Menopause Champion, or other advocate	7%
Something else	3%
None of these	55%
Don’t know	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (1,333)

All employers were asked if they offer various forms of support to employees who are transitioning through menopause. Over half of employers (55%) said they do not offer, to these employees, any of the support they were prompted with.

Of those who did offer support, the most common form employers said they offered was workplace adjustments (33%). This was consistent across all organisation size bands.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they offered each form of support they were prompted with.

SMEs were more likely than large employers to report that they offer none of the support they were prompted with (55% of SMEs said this vs 11% of large employers). Again, these comparisons by organisation size should be used with some caution due the low base size for large employers (n=46) for this question.

Most employers do not provide training on menopause awareness within their organisation.

Chart 3.35: Provision of menopause training, by organisation size, B11a, 2024

Response	All %	SMEs %	Large employers %
Yes	5%	5%	34%
No	92%	93%	59%
Don’t know	3%	3%	8%

Unweighted base: All employers (1,333); SMEs (1,287); Large employers (46)^{[footnote 7]}

Employers were asked if they provide training on menopause awareness and how to provide support for employees experiencing menopause.

Most employers (92%) said they do not provide training on menopause awareness, with only a small proportion (5%) saying that they do provide this type of training. Very few employers (3%) did not know if they provide this type of training.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they did provide this form of training for employees (34% of large employers said this compared to 5% of SMEs).

3.6. Green jobs

Overall, most employers thought there were no roles in their organisation which could be considered as “green jobs”.

Chart 3.36: The proportion of employees in roles that could be considered “green jobs”, J8, 2024

Employees %	All employers %
None	63%
1 to 5	7%
6 to 10%	2%
11 to 15%	1%
16 to 20%	1%
More than 20 %	12%
Don’t know	13%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

Employers were asked what proportion of employees in their organisation are in roles that could be considered as “green jobs”. Survey respondents were provided with a definition and examples of roles that could be labelled as green jobs.

Around 1 in 4 (24%) employers said that their employees were in roles that could be considered green jobs. A further 63 per cent said that no employees were in green jobs, and 1 in 10 (13%) said they did not know.

Of those who said they had employees in green jobs, just over 1 in 10 (12%) employers said that more than 20 per cent of their employees were in this type of role.

4. Pension provision

4.1. Executive summary

This summary presents the key findings from a survey of 8,006 employers (each of which had at least two employees). The research looked at types of pension schemes offered by employers, as well as automatic enrolment, pension providers, provision of information and guidance for employees and flexibilities in pension-related contributions offered by employers:

Defined Contribution schemes were the most common type of pension scheme employers contributed to for new employees (49%). A small proportion of employers said they contributed to Defined Benefit schemes (7%), or another type of scheme (2%).

More employers appeared to be aware of the type of pension scheme they contribute to for new employees than in 2022, and this is likely due to the inclusion of definitions for Defined Contribution and Defined Benefit schemes to the survey questionnaire.

The majority of employers had not switched or thought about switching pension provider (82%). Compared to 2022, employers were more likely to say that they had not switched provider and wouldn’t know how to switch (44% said this in 2024 compared to 38% in 2022).

Almost half of employers who had not switched provider indicated they would not consider switching (46%).

Around 2 in 5 employers (43%) offer some form of information or guidance to their employees on the State Pension, and 1 in 6 (16%) provide information or guidance on preparing for retirement. Few employers who have provided guidance said that they experienced barriers in doing so (3%).

Few employers said they offered their employees flexibilities in how pension-related contributions can be received (11%). For these employers, the most common form of flexibility offered was employee salary sacrifice for pensions (42%), followed by matching contribution rates for any additional voluntary contributions made by employees (40%).

Most employers said they do not offer any financial support initiatives to their employees (73%). The most common form of support initiative offered by employers were salary advances (17%).

4.2. Pension schemes and automatic enrolment

Defined Contribution schemes were the most common type of pension scheme employers contributed to for new employees.

Chart 4.1: Type of pension scheme employers contribute to for new employees, P1, 2024

Pension scheme	All employers %
Defined Contribution (money purchase scheme)	49%
Defined Benefit	7%
Other	2%
No pension scheme	20%
Don’t know	19%
Prefer not to say	3%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669)

Employers were asked what type of pension scheme they contribute to for the majority of new employees. Just under half of employers (49%) said they offered a Defined Contribution (DC) pension scheme to new employees.

A small proportion of employers said they contribute to a Defined Benefit (DB) scheme (7%), or another type of scheme (2%).

A sizeable proportion of employers said they do not contribute towards a pension scheme (20%), or that they did not know which type of scheme they contributed to (19%).

Note: The proportion of employers saying they do not offer a pension scheme is driven almost exclusively by the very smallest employers with 2-4 staff members. Employers must offer a workplace pension where they have entitled workers. Employers who don’t offer a pension scheme may be sole traders or micro businesses with no eligible workers. Ineligible employees are those aged 18-21, those aged above State Pension Age, and those earning less than £10,000 a year.

Very small employers were more likely to say they did not offer a pension scheme.

Chart 4.2: Type of pension scheme employers contribute to for new employees by organisation size, P1, 2024

Pension scheme	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employer %
Defined Contribution (money purchase scheme)	49%	49%	53%
Defined Benefit	7%	7%	19%
No pension scheme	20%	20%	1%
Other	2%	2%	7%
Don’t know	19%	19%	16%
Prefer not to say	3%	3%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669), SME (2,553), large employer (116)

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say that they did not contribute towards a pension scheme for new employees (20% of SMEs said this compared to 1% of large employers). This was mostly driven by employers with 2 to 4 staff, who were more likely than employers of all other sizes to say they did not offer a pension scheme to new employees (31%).

In 2024, more employers were aware of the type of pension scheme they contribute to for new employees than in 2022.

Chart 4.3: Type of pension scheme employers contribute to for new employees, P1, 2024 and 2022

Pension scheme	2024 %	2022 %
Defined Contribution (money purchase scheme)	49%	42%
Defined Benefit	7%	4%
No pension scheme	20%	18%
Other	2%	2%
Don’t know	19%	19%
Prefer not to say	3%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers. 2024 (2,669); 2022 (2,667)

In 2024, employers were more likely to say they contributed to a DC scheme for new employees compared to 2022 (an increase of 7.1pp).

Similarly, compared to 2022, employers were slightly more likely to say they contributed to a DB scheme for the majority of their new employees (an increase of 2.5pp).

These increases are likely due to the addition of definitions to the survey questionnaire for DC and DB schemes. In line with this, the proportion of employers who were uncertain about what type of scheme they offered decreased over the same period (by 11.2pp).

There were no significant differences between 2022 and 2024 in the proportion of employers who said they do not offer a pension scheme, that they offer another type of pension scheme, or who preferred not to say what type of scheme they offer.

In the last financial year, most employers had not enrolled workers ineligible for automatic enrolment.

Chart 4.4: Employers who have automatically enrolled workers outside of the legislation criteria, P4, 2024

Response	Those aged 18 to 21 %	Those earning under £10,000 a year/£830 a month/£195 a week %	Those aged above State Pension Age %
Yes	15%	14%	6%
No	80%	80%	88%
Don’t know	5%	6%	6%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme (2,385)

All employers (except those who said they did not contribute to a pension scheme for their employees) were asked whether they had automatically enrolled specific workers who were ineligible for automatic enrolment in the last financial year.

Most employers had not done this. Just under 1 in 6 employers (15%) said they had enrolled workers aged 18-21 years, and a similar proportion said they had enrolled workers earning under £10,000 a year (14%). Few employers (6%) said that they had enrolled workers aged above the State Pension Age in the last financial year.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they had automatically enrolled workers aged 18-21, and workers aged above State Pension Age. For example, almost half (47%) of large employers said they had automatically enrolled workers aged 18-21 years in the last financial year, compared to over 1 in 10 (14%) SMEs.

Fewer employers reported automatically enrolling workers aged 18 to 21 years and workers above State Pension Age, compared to 2022.

Chart 4.5: Enrolment of workers aged 18 to 24, P4, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Yes	15%	18%
No	80%	76%
Don’t know	5%	7%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme. 2024 (2,385); 2022 (2,386)

In 2024, employers were more likely to say they had not automatically enrolled workers aged 18-21 years in the previous 12 months, compared to the 2022 survey (80% of employers said this compared to 76% in 2022).

Chart 4.6: Enrolment of workers aged above State Pension Age, P4, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Yes	6%	7%
No	88%	85%
Don’t know	6%	8%

Base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme. 2024 (2,385); 2022 (2,386)

Similarly, the proportion of employers who said they had not enrolled workers aged above State Pension Age increased slightly by 3.7pp (from 85% in 2022 to 88% in 2024).

Chart 4.7: Enrolment of workers earning under £10,000 a year, P4, 2024 and 2022

Response	2024 %	2022 %
Yes	14%	15%
No	80%	76%
Don’t know	6%	9%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme. 2024 (2,385); 2022 (2,386)

In 2024, fewer employers were unsure whether or not they automatically enrolled workers earning under £10,000 a year (a decrease of 3.2pp).

In response to any increases to employer pension contribution levels, many employers said they would absorb the increases and/or increase prices.

Chart 4.8: Actions employers would be likely to implement as part of a strategy to respond to increased pension contribution levels, P5, 2024

Action	All employers %
Absorb the increase as part of other overheads	46%
Increase prices	44%
Take a reduction on profits	38%
Lower wage increases	25%
Re-structure/reduce workforce	21%
Change the existing pension scheme	8%
Reduce the contribution levels for existing members prior to reforms happening	4%
Other	2%
None of these	4%
Don’t know	9%
Prefer not to say	1%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme (2,385)

All employers (except those who said they did not contribute to a pension scheme for their employees) were asked what actions their organisation would be likely to undertake in response to any increases to pension contribution levels that employers have to pay.

The most common response was that employers would absorb the increases as part of other overheads (46%), closely followed by increasing prices (44%).

There was, however, some uncertainty among respondents, with around one in twenty-five saying they would be unlikely to implement any of the suggested actions (4%), and a further 9 per cent unsure.

Large employers were more likely to answer ‘don’t know’ compared to SMEs (15% vs 9%). Large employers were also more likely than SMEs to say they would absorb the increases as part of other overheads, and that they would make changes to the existing pension scheme (57% and 20% of large employers selected these options, compared to 46% and 8% of SMEs respectively).

4.3. Pension providers

Employers take a range of factors into consideration when choosing a pension provider.

Chart 4.9: The factors employers consider when choosing a pension provider for their employees, O1, 2024

Factor	All employers %
The ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s)	48%
Advice from a professional body, or colleagues (more formal advice)	45%
The fees or costs on you (the employer)	29%
The value for members/your employees of the provider or scheme(s)	25%
The value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for you	23%
The governance of the scheme(s)	23%
The fees or costs on your employees	21%
The investment outcomes of the scheme(s)	12%
A previous relationship with the provider	11%
Advice from friends or families (less formal advice)	3%
Other	7%
Don’t know	12%
Not applicable	1%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme (2,385)

The survey asked all employers (except those who said they did not contribute to a pension scheme for their employees), what factors they take into consideration when choosing a pension provider for their employees. A range of factors were mentioned, with the most common being the ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s) (48%), and advice from a professional body, colleagues or fellow employers (45%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say the governance of the scheme (32% vs. 23%), the fees or costs on employees (31% vs. 21%), the investment outcomes (26% vs. 12%), a previous relationship with the provider (19% vs. 11%) or another factor (15% vs. 7%). SMEs were more likely than large employers to say the ease or convenience of the provider/scheme (48% vs. 30%) and advice from a professional body (45% vs. 33%).

Employers in 2024 were less likely to say they had considered most of the factors they were prompted with.

Chart 4.10: The factors employers consider when choosing a pension provider for their employees, O1, 2024 and 2022

Factor	2024 %	2022 %
The ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s)	48%	48%
Advice from a professional body, or colleagues (more formal advice)	45%	44%
The fees or costs on you (the employer)	29%	36%
The value for members/your employees of the provider or scheme(s)	25%	36%
The value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for you	23%	31%
The governance of the scheme(s)	23%	33%
The fees or costs on your employees	21%	31%
The investment outcomes of the scheme(s)	12%	22%
A previous relationship with the provider	11%	12%
Advice from friends or families (less formal advice)	3%	9%
Other	7%	2%
Don’t know	12%	18%
Not applicable	1%	6%

Unweighted base: 2022, All employers (2,667); 2024, all employers except those without a pension scheme (2,385)

Compared to the 2022 survey, fewer employers said they had considered most of the factors they were prompted with:

• the fees or costs on you (the employer): 29% vs 36%
• the value for members / your employees of the provider or scheme(s): 25% vs 36%
• the governance of the scheme: 23% vs 31%
• the value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for you: 23% vs 33%
• the fees or costs on your employees: 21% vs 31%
• the investment outcomes of the scheme(s): 12% vs 22%
• advice from friends or families (less formal advice): 3% vs 9%
• don’t know: 12% vs 18%
• not applicable: 1% vs 6%

Employers in 2024 were instead more likely to say that other factors were considered (7% said this in 2024 vs 1% in 2022). This systematic difference in responses could be due to the differing ordering of the questions between the survey waves.

Employers who offer DC schemes were more likely than average to say they had considered the ease of the scheme, and the costs involved.

Chart 4.11: The factors employers consider when choosing a pension provider for their employees, by type of pension scheme, O1, 2024

Factor	All employers %	Employers offering DC schemes %
The ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s)	48%	55%
Advice from a professional body, or colleagues (more formal advice)	45%	45%
The fees or costs on you (the employer)	29%	34%
The value for members/your employees of the provider or scheme(s)	25%	27%
The value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for you	23%	24%
The governance of the scheme(s)	23%	25%
The fees or costs on your employees	21%	24%
The investment outcomes of the scheme(s)	12%	12%
A previous relationship with the provider	11%	12%
Advice from friends or families (less formal advice)	3%	3%
Other	7%	6%
Don’t know	12%	7%
Not applicable	1%	0%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme (2,385); Employers offering DC schemes (1,556)

When compared to the combined average across all employers, those who contribute to DC schemes were more likely to say that they had considered:

• the ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s) (55% vs. 48% on average)
• the fees or costs for themselves (34% vs. 29%)
• the fees or costs for employees (24% vs. 21%).

Employers who offer DC schemes were also less likely than average to say they didn’t know what factors they had considered when choosing a pension provider/scheme (7% of DC employers said this compared to 12% of all employers).

The majority of employers had not switched or thought about switching pension provider.

Chart 4.12: Experience of switching pension provider, by type of pension scheme, O2, 2024

Experience	All employers %	Employers offering DC schemes %
Yes – I have switched provider once	5%	7%
Yes – I have switched provider more than once	1%	1%
Yes – I have thought about switching but not done it	4%	5%
No – I have not switched (but would know how to)	38%	41%
No – I have not switched and wouldn’t know how to switch providers	44%	42%
Don’t know	8%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers, except those without a pension scheme (2,385); Employers offering DC schemes (1,556)

Of employers who were asked this question, 1 in 10 (10%) had switched or thought about switching pension provider. Over 4 in 5 employers (82%) had not switched or thought about switching provider, and 8 per cent were unsure.

Very few employers had switched provider; 1 in 20 (5%) said they had switched provider once, and 1 per cent had switched provider more than once.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they had switched or thought about switching (18% of large employers vs. 10% of SMEs). SMEs were more likely than large employers to say they wouldn’t know how to switch (44% of SMEs vs. 18% of large employers).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were more likely to say that they had not switched provider and wouldn’t know how to switch (44% of employers said this in 2024 compared to 38% in 2022). Employers who offer DC schemes were slightly more likely than average to say that they had switched provider once (7% vs. 5%) and were less likely than the average to say they did not know if they had switched or thought about switching (4% vs. 8%).

A range of factors contributed to employers’ decisions to switch, these factors were consistent between 2022 and 2024.

Chart 4.13: Factors that contributed to a decision to switch pension provider, by type of pension scheme, O3, 2024

Factor	All employers %	Employers offering DC schemes %
The ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s)	36%	40%
The value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for you	33%	30%
The fees or costs on you (the employer)	30%	34%
The investment outcomes of the scheme(s)	30%	24%
The value for members/your employees of the provider or scheme(s)	29%	28%
Advice received from such as a professional body, colleagues, fellow employer or from others	28%	23%
The governance of the scheme(s)	24%	25%
The fees or costs on your employees	24%	26%
Other	9%	8%
Don’t know	4%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers who have switched provider (179); Employers who offered DC schemes and had switched provider (150)

Employers who had switched provider were asked what factors contributed towards their decision to switch. The most common factors, mentioned by at least a third of employers, were the ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s) (36%), and the value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for them as the employer (33%).

When comparing employers who offer DC pension schemes to the overall average, these employers were slightly less likely to mention the value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for them (30%), the investment outcomes of the scheme(s) (24%) and advice received from others (23%).

There were no significant differences of note observed between the 2022 and 2024 data.

Almost half of employers who had not switched provider indicated they would not consider switching.

Chart 4.14: Openness to switching pension provider, by type of pension scheme, O3aa, 2024

Response	All employers %	Employers offering DC schemes %
Yes	30%	33%
No	46%	45%
Don’t know	23%	22%

Unweighted base: All employers who had not switched provider (1,957); Employers who offered DC schemes and who had not switched provider (1,295)

Of employers who had not switched pension provider, over 2 in 5 (46%) said there were no circumstances under which they would consider switching their provider. Fewer employers (30%) said there were circumstances in which they would consider switching, and just under a quarter (23%) did not know.

Employers who offered DC pensions were slightly more likely than average to say there were circumstances under which they would consider switching provider (33% of employers who offer DC-type pensions said this compared to 30% of all employers).

Costs and value for money were the top concerns mentioned by employers who would consider switching.

Chart 4.15: Factors that would encourage employers to consider switching pension provider, by type of pension scheme, O3a, 2024

Factor	All employers %	Employers offering DC schemes %
Concern about the current fees or costs on you (the employer)	71%	71%
Concern about the value for members/your employees of the provider or scheme(s)	67%	70%
Concern about the value for money of the provider or scheme(s) for you	63%	64%
Concern about the fees or costs on your employees	62%	66%
Concern about the investment outcomes of the scheme(s)	59%	61%
Concern about the governance of the scheme(s)	55%	57%
Advice received from others, such as a professional body, colleagues, fellow…	53%	51%
Concern about the ease or convenience of the provider or scheme(s)	51%	52%
Other	4%	5%
Don’t know	1%	1%

Unweighted base: All employers who have not switched and would consider switching (636); All employers who offer DC schemes, have not switched and would consider switching provider (472)

Employers who had not switched provider but said there were circumstances under which they would consider switching were asked about these circumstances. At least half of employers answering the question thought that each of the options they were presented with were factors that would encourage them to consider switching provider.

The top concerns mentioned included the current fees or costs on themselves as the employer (71%), the value for members/employees (67%) and the value for money for themselves (63%).

These concerns were consistent when looking only at employers who offer DC schemes.

4.4. Information and guidance for employees

Less than half of employers said they offer information or guidance on the State Pension to their employees.

Chart 4.16: Provision of information or guidance on the State Pension to employees, O3b, 2024

Provision	All employers %
We do not provide information or guidance on this	49%
Signposted employees to the Check your State Pension website	23%
Advised employees of their State Pension age	23%
Notified employees that they may be able to buy additional qualifying years	14%
We offer information or guidance on this another way	13%
Don’t know	7%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669)

Employers were asked what information or guidance they provide to their employees on the State Pension. Over 2 in 5 employers (43%) said they offer some form of information or guidance, whilst just under half of employers (49%) said they do not provide information or guidance on this. A further 7 per cent did not know.

Over a fifth (23%) of employers said they have signposted employees to the Check your Pension website, and a further 1 in 5 (23%) said they advise employees of their State Pension age. Fourteen per cent said they notified employees that they may be able to buy additional qualifying years, and a further 13% said they offer information or guidance in another way.

Very small employers (2 to 4 staff) were more likely than employers with 100+ staff, to say that they did not provide information or guidance on the State Pension (51% of employers in this size band said this compared to 37% of employers with 100 to 249 staff, and 32% of employers with 250+ staff).

Large employers were more likely than all other organisation sizes to say they provide this information in another way (33%).

Most employers had not offered information or guidance on preparing for retirement to their employees.

Chart 4.17: Provision of information or guidance on preparing for retirement, O3ba, 2024

Response	All employers %
Yes	16%
No	80%
Don’t know	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669)

Employers were also asked if they have provided information or guidance to their employees on preparing for retirement.

Most employers (80%) had not provided information or guidance on this, compared to around 1 in 6 employers (16%) who had. A small proportion of respondents (4%) were uncertain whether or not they had done so.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say that they had provided information and guidance (49% of large employers said this compared to 16% of SMEs).

Information or guidance on preparing for retirement was most often offered ‘in another way’ to those prompted in the survey.

Chart 4.18: Methods of providing information or guidance to employees on preparing for retirement, O3c, 2024

Methods	All employers %
We offer information or guidance on this another way	39%
Signposting to government sites	34%
Written communication (eg posters, leaflets)	23%
Employer arranged events (eg courses, workshops, seminars)	17%
Signposting to MoneyHelper (including Pension Wise)	15%
Company intranet	11%
Mid-life MOT	7%
Signposting to financial adviser/consultant	5%
Signposting to other external organisation(s)	3%
Sigposting to pension provider	3%
Don’t know	12%

Unweighted base: Employers who have offered information or guidance on preparing for retirement (510)

Employers who said they do provide information or guidance to their employees (16%) were then asked to select from a list, in what ways they have offered this information or guidance to their staff.

The most common response, mentioned by almost 2 in 5 employers (39%) was that they provide this information in another way to those they were prompted about. Just over a third (34%) said they signpost to Government sites.

The response option ‘signposting to a financial adviser/consultant’ (5%) was an unprompted response given by employers answering this question.

Information or guidance was mostly provided on request.

Chart 4.19: Timing of information or guidance provided to employees on preparing for retirement, O3e, 2024

Timing	All employers %
On request	69%
When an employee changes job (eg joins the company, gets a promotion)	28%
On a regular basis (eg annually)	28%
When working arrangements change (eg a change in hours, parental leave)	15%
At specific employee ages	15%
At key employee life events (eg becoming a parent)	12%
At a specific employee tenure (eg working for your organisation for X amount of time)	10%
Other	4%
Don’t know	3%

Unweighted base: Employers who have offered information or guidance on the State Pension and/or on retirement (1,362)

Employers who said that they provide information to their employees on the State Pension (43%) and/or preparing for retirement (16%) were asked when they provide this.

Over two thirds of employers (69%) said that they provide it on request. This was followed by when an employee changes job (28%) and on a regular basis (28%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they provided this information or guidance on request, and on a regular basis (82% and 43% of large employers said this compared to 69% and 28% of SMEs respectively).

Few employers had experienced barriers in providing information and guidance to their employees on preparing for retirement.

Chart 4.20: Employers’ experience of barriers in providing information and guidance, by organisation size, O3ca, 2024

Response	All %	SMEs %	Large employer %
Yes	3%	3%	4%
No	86%	86%	77%
Don’t know	11%	11%	19%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669); SMEs (2,553); Large employers (116)

Employers were asked if they had experienced any barriers in providing information and guidance to their employees on preparing for retirement. Most employers had not experienced barriers (86%).

Less than 1 in 20 employers had experienced barriers (3%), although around 1 in 10 (11%) did not know if they had experienced barriers or not.

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say they had not experienced barriers (86% of SMEs said this compared to 77% of large employers).

Large employers were almost twice as likely to say they did not know if they had experienced barriers compared to SMEs (19% of large employers said this compared to 11% of SMEs).

Of those who experienced barriers, the two most common barriers concerned the provision of accurate information.

Chart 4.21: The barriers employers encounter in providing information and guidance to employees on preparing for retirement, O3d, 2024

Barriers	All employers %
We don’t want to provide incorrect information and guidance	67%
We don’t know what information and guidance to provide	55%
We do not have the staffing resource	43%
It is not our role, it is the government’s	37%
It is not our role, it is the pension provider’s	28%
It is not our role, it is the individual’s	19%
It is costly	18%
Lack of employee interest/engagement	3%
Other	8%
Don’t know	2%

Unweighted base: Employers who have experienced barriers (94)

Employers who had experienced barriers (3%) were asked what challenges they encounter in providing information and guidance to their employees on preparing for retirement.

Over two thirds of employers (67%) said they did not want to provide incorrect information and guidance, and over half (55%) said they did not know what information and guidance to provide.

4.5 Flexibilities in pension-related contributions

Few employers offered employees flexibilities in how they can receive pension-related contributions; large employers were more likely than SMEs to do so.

Chart 4.22: Employers who offer flexibilities in pension-related contributions to employees, P1aa, 2024

Response	All %	SMEs %	Large employer %
Yes	11%	11%	26%
No	69%	69%	41%
Don’t know	20%	20%	33%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669); SMEs (2,553); Large employers (116)

Just over 1 in 10 (11%) employers said they offered their employees any flexibilities in how they can receive pension-related contributions. Most employers (69%) said they did not offer any flexibilities, although a sizeable proportion were unsure (20%).

Large employers were more likely to say they offered flexibilities in pension-related contributions compared to SMEs (26% compared to 11%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they did not know if they offered flexibilities in how pension-related contributions could be received. A third of large employers (33%) said this compared to 1 in 5 (20%) SMEs.

The most common flexibility offered by employers was employee salary sacrifice for pensions.

Chart 4.23: Type of flexibilities offered in how pension-related contributions can be received, P1a, 2024

Flexibility	Percentage
Employee salary sacrifice for pensions	42%
The matching of contribution rates for any additional voluntary contributions	40%
Employer-only contributions	21%
Cash alternatives to pension contributions	4%
Other	4%
None of the above	3%
Don’t know	15%
Prefer not to say	6%

Unweighted base: Employers who offer flexibilities (357)

Employers who offer flexibilities to their employees in terms of how pension-related contributions can be received (11%) were asked to identify from a pre-set list which flexibilities they offer.

The most common flexibility offered was employee salary sacrifice for pensions (42%). This was followed by employers matching contribution rates for any additional voluntary contributions employees make to their pension (40%), and employer-only contributions (21%).

Despite saying they did offer flexibilities, just under 1 in 6 (15%) employers said they did not know what flexibilities they offer. Just over 1 in 20 (6%) preferred not to say, and a further 3 per cent said they did not offer any of the options listed.

4.6. Financial assistance initiatives

A minority of employers provided financial support initiatives to their employees, with salary advances the most common of these.

Chart 4.24: Financial assistance or support initiatives offered to employees, N2, 2024

Support	All employers %
Advances	17%
Savings scheme where deductions are made via payroll	4%
Earned Wage Access	4%
Other types of support	3%
None of these	73%
Don’t know	3%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,669)

Employers were asked which, if any, financial support initiatives they offer to their employees. Most employers (73%) said they did not offer any of the initiatives they were prompted with.

Of those who did offer financial support initiatives to their employees, the most common was letting their employee access a portion of their earned salary in advance (17%).

Few employers provided any of the other forms of support they were prompted with.

5. Diversity and disadvantaged groups

5.1. Executive summary

This summary presents the key findings from a survey of 8,006 employers (each of which had at least two employees). The research looked at employer attitudes and behaviours towards groups which may be disadvantaged in the labour market, as well as the overall diversity of their workplaces.

In terms of diversity in the workplace, employer action appears to have decreased since 2022. Employers in 2024 were less likely to report that they monitor the diversity of their workforce (a decrease of 10.9 percentage points (pp) to 39%) and were more likely to report that they did not actively seek to ensure their workforce is diverse (an increase of 10.9pp to 64%).

The likelihood of employers reporting no benefits in employing a diverse workforce has increased since the 2022 survey (an increase of 6.9pp to 27%). However, most employers (65%) felt that there were no barriers to employing a diverse workforce, which was consistent with the 2022 survey findings.

Most employers (66%) report that they do not receive applications, interview or employ people from disadvantaged groups; SMEs were more likely than large employers to report this. The most common form of support employers said would help encourage them to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups was a financial subsidy (22%); although compared with 2022, employers were overall less likely to say that each form of support they were prompted with would encourage them to take action on this.

5.2. Diversity in the workplace

Almost 4 in 10 employers monitor the diversity of their workforce; SMEs were less likely to report this than large employers.

Chart 5.1: Proportion of employers who monitor the diversity of their workforce, by organisation size, L1, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employer %
Yes	39%	39%	79%
No	55%	55%	18%
Don’t know	6%	6%	3%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667): SMEs (2,556), Large employers (111)

Almost 4 in 10 employers (39%) reported that they monitor the diversity of their workforce. Over half of employers (55%) said they do not monitor the diversity of their workforce; 6 per cent did not know.

Employers with 2-4 staff were more likely than all other employer sizes to say they do not monitor the diversity of their workforce (63% said this).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they monitor the diversity of their workforce (79% vs 39%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to report that they monitor the diversity of their workforce (a decrease of 10.9pp).

Most employers report that their diversity monitoring is not broken down by grade / level of seniority.

Chart 5.2: Proportion of employers who reported that they monitor diversity by grade/level of seniority, by organisation size, L2, 2024

Response	All employers %	SMEs %	Large employer %
Yes	26%	26%	56%
No	67%	67%	30%
Don’t know	7%	7%	14%

Unweighted base: Employers who monitor the diversity of their workforce (1,297): SMEs (1,210), Large employers (87)^{[footnote 8]}

Employers who reported that they monitor the diversity of their workforce (39%) were asked whether this was broken down by grade/level of seniority. Most employers said that their diversity monitoring was not broken down in this way (67%). Around 1 in 4 (26%) employers said their diversity monitoring was broken down by grade/level of seniority; 7 per cent did not know.

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say that their diversity monitoring was broken down by grade/level of seniority (56% vs 26%).

There were no significant differences in how employers responded to this question compared to the 2022 survey.

Around 1 in 5 employers actively seek to ensure that their workforce is diverse in terms of personal characteristics; employers were less likely to say they do this in 2024, compared to 2022.

Chart 5.3: Proportion of employers who say they actively seek to ensure their workforce is diverse in terms of personal characteristics, L3, 2022 and 2024

Action	2024 %	2022 %
Yes, through internal regulations on recruitment	18%	23%
Yes, through diverse recruitment panels	4%	6%
No	64%	53%
Other	3%	7%
Don’t know	7%	8%
Prefer not to say	5%	4%

Unweighted base: All employers: 2024 (2,667), 2022 (2,666)

Around 1 in 5 (21%^{[footnote 9]}) employers reported that they actively seek to ensure their workforce is diverse in terms of personal characteristics such as ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic background. Of these, 18 per cent said they ensure their workforce is diverse through internal regulations or procedures; whereas 4 per cent said they do this through diverse recruitment panels.

The majority of employers said they do not actively seek to ensure their workforce is diverse (64%); SMEs were more likely than large employers to report this (64% vs 22%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to say they actively seek to ensure their workforce is diverse through both internal regulations on recruitment, and diverse recruitment panels (a decrease of 5.6pp and 2.1pp, respectively); employers were also less likely to select ‘other’ in 2024 (a decrease of 3.4pp).

Employers in 2024 were more likely to say they did not actively seek to ensure their workforce is diverse (an increase of 10.9pp).

Employers most commonly cited no benefits in employing a diverse workforce; SMEs were more likely to report this than large employers.

Chart 5.4: Perceived benefits in employing a diverse workforce in terms of personal characteristics, L4, 2024

Perceived benefit	All employers %
No benefit	27%
Improved company culture	23%
Wider talent pool to pick from	18%
Better understanding of your customers	13%
Positive branding for your company/organisation	11%
Increased innovation	7%
Greater employee retention	6%
Enhanced productivity	6%
Other	11%
None of these	12%
Don’t know	13%
Prefer not to say	5%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

All employers were asked what the perceived benefits are in employing a diverse workforce in terms of personal characteristics (e.g. ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic background).

Employers most commonly cited no benefits (27%). This was followed by an improved company culture (23%) and a wider talent pool to pick from (18%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to report each of the perceived benefits, for example, 48 per cent of large employers cited improved company culture as a benefit to employing a diverse workforce, compared to 23 per cent of SMEs.

SMEs were more likely than large employers to report no perceived benefits (27% vs 4%).

In 2024, employers were more likely to cite no benefits in employing a diverse workforce than in 2022.

Chart 5.5: Perceived benefits in employing a diverse workforce in terms of personal characteristics, L4, 2022 and 2024

Perceived benefit	2024 %	2022 %
No benefit	27%	20%
Improved company culture	23%	31%
Wider talent pool to pick from	18%	22%
Better understanding of your customers	13%	19%
Positive branding for your company/organisation	11%	14%
Increased innovation	7%	10%
Greater employee retention	6%	8%
Enhanced productivity	6%	10%
None of these	12%	11%
Don’t know	13%	15%
Prefer not to say	5%	3%

Unweighted base: All employers: 2024 (2,667), 2022 (2,666)

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were more likely to report no benefits in employing a diverse workforce in terms of personal characteristics (an increase of 6.9pp).

Employers were less likely to report the following perceived benefits:

• improved company culture (a decrease of 7.9pp)
• better understanding of their customers (a decrease of 5.3pp)
• increased innovation (a decrease of 3.3pp)
• enhanced productivity (a decrease of 4.3pp)

Most employers said there were no barriers in employing a diverse workforce; SMEs were more likely to say this compared to large employers.

Chart 5.6: Perceived barriers in employing a diverse workforce in terms of personal characteristics, L5, 2024

Perceived barriers	All employers %
No barriers	65%
Language barriers	9%
Diverse individuals don’t apply as often	7%
Our organisation is located in an area with a low BAME population	6%
Gaps in experience and/or qualifications	5%
Organisation is resistant to change	less than 1%
Lack of technology to support employing a diverse workforce	less than 1%
Other	7%
Don’t know	7%
Prefer not to say	4%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

Most employers (65%) said that there were no barriers in employing a diverse workforce; employers with 2 to 4 staff were more likely than all other size bands to say this (68%).

The most common barrier cited by employers was language barriers (9%). This was followed by diverse individuals not applying as often (7%).

Large employers were more likely to cite diverse individuals don’t apply as often, compared to SMEs (18% vs 7%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were slightly less likely to cite lack of technology to support employing a diverse workforce (a decrease of 0.7pp); however, this response option was amended from 2022 which may have influenced this decrease. The remaining response options were not significantly different between 2022 and 2024.

5.3. Disadvantaged groups

The next set of questions are about disadvantaged groups. By disadvantaged groups we mean individuals who may be disadvantaged in the labour market, including those who have experience of homelessness, prison leavers, people with drug and/or alcohol dependency, care leavers, or ex-armed forces.

Few employers receive applications, interview or employ people from disadvantaged groups, but it is more common amongst large employers.

Chart 5.7: Employer recruitment activity towards disadvantaged groups, by organisation size, M1, 2024

Recruitment	All %	SMEs %	Large employers %
We receive applications from disadvantaged groups	13%	13%	51%
We interview people from disadvantaged groups	19%	19%	56%
We employ people from disadvantaged groups	18%	18%	66%
Don’t know	7%	7%	15%
None of these	66%	66%	13%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667): SMEs (2,556), Large employers (111)

When employers were asked about their recruitment activity towards disadvantaged groups, most employers said they did not receive applications, interview, or employ people from these groups (66%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they receive applications from disadvantaged groups (51% vs 13%), interview people from disadvantaged groups (56% vs 19%) and employ people from disadvantaged groups (66% vs 18%). They were also more likely to report that they did not know if they were undertaking any of the activities they were prompted with (15% vs 7%).

SMEs were more likely than large employers to select none of these (66% vs 13%).

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to say they receive applications from disadvantaged groups (a decrease of 4.0pp) or interview people from disadvantaged groups (a decrease of 4.5pp). In 2024, employers were more likely to report that none of these options were relevant (an increase of 4.9pp).

Note: it is not clear why employers have answered in the way they have (e.g., more employers saying they interview or employ people from disadvantaged groups than receive applications from these groups). This is potentially a result of employer interpretation of the question and/or their recruitment practices.

The most common form of support that would encourage employers to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups is a financial subsidy.

Chart 5.8: Support that would help or encourage employers to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups, M3, 2024

Support	All employers %
A financial subsidy	22%
Information on how to reach/engage with people from these groups	19%
Mentoring support for the employee provided externally	17%
Better understanding of the ‘benefits’ of employing people from these groups	17%
Support from Jobcentre Plus for you as an employer	17%
Hearing from other organisations who already employ people from these groups	16%
In work support provided by the Jobcentre to the employee	16%
Positive promotion of your company	15%
Buddying support for you as an employer from another company with a history of employing individuals with complex barriers	14%
Other	1%
None of these	49%
Don’t know	14%

Unweighted base: Employers who are not currently employing people from disadvantaged groups (1,975)

Employers who reported that they were not currently employing people from disadvantaged groups (82%) were asked what would help or encourage them to consider employing people from these groups.

The most common response was a financial subsidy (22%), followed by information on how to reach/engage with people from these groups (19%).

Almost half of employers (49%) said that none of the support measures they were prompted with would encourage them to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups.

Employers in 2024 were less likely to say that each support measure would encourage them to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups.

Chart 5.9: Support that would help or encourage employers to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups, M3, 2022 and 2024

Support	2024 %	2022 %
A financial subsidy	22%	34%
Information on how to reach/engage with people from these groups	19%	31%
Mentoring support for the employee provided externally	17%	28%
Better understanding of the ‘benefits’ of employing people from these groups	17%	30%
Support from Jobcentre Plus for you as an employer	17%	27%
Hearing from other organisations who already employ people from these groups	16%	28%
In work support provided by the Jobcentre to the employee	16%	25%
Positive promotion of your company	15%	24%
Buddying support for you as an employer from another company with a history of employing individuals with complex barriers	14%	22%
None of these	49%	32%
Don’t know	14%	15%

Unweighted base: Employers who are not currently employing people from disadvantaged groups: 2024 (1,975), 2022 (1,891)

For each form of support that employers were prompted with, they were less likely to say this would help or encourage them to consider employing people from disadvantaged groups in 2024, compared to the 2022 survey.

Employers in 2024 were more likely to say that none of the options they were presented with would help (an increase of 17.2pp).

Substance dependency or having a criminal record are the most common barriers to employing someone from a disadvantaged group.

Chart 5.10: Perceived barriers to employing someone from a disadvantaged group, M4, 2024

Perceived barriers	All employers %
Drug or alcohol dependency and in recovery and/or receiving treatment	50%
A criminal record	47%
Lack of education/skills	32%
A physical health condition	27%
A mental health condition	26%
Unstable or unsettled accommodation	22%
Lack of access to IT equipment and/or internet	13%
Other	3%
None of these	17%
Don’t know	5%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

The most common barrier to employing someone from a disadvantaged group cited by employers was drug or alcohol dependency and in recovery/or receiving treatment (50% said this). This was followed by a criminal record (47%) and lack of education/skills (32%).

Almost 1 in 5 employers (17%) said none of the barriers they were prompted with would make them less likely to employ someone from a disadvantaged group.

The wording of the response options changed between 2022 and 2024 and therefore comparisons between survey waves are not possible.

The most commonly cited group employers would be interested in supporting into employment was ex-armed forces personnel.

Chart 5.11: Groups employers would be interested in supporting into employment, M5, 2022 and 2024

Group	2024 %	2022 %
Ex-armed forces	47%	58%
Care leavers	30%	40%
Individuals experiencing homelessness	21%	28%
Prison leavers	12%	22%
People with drug/alcohol dependency	8%	14%
None of these	28%	22%
Don’t know	20%	15%

Unweighted base: All employers: 2024 (2,667), 2022 (2,666)

Almost half of employers (47%) said they would be interested in supporting ex-armed forces personnel into employment. This was followed by care leavers (30%) and individuals experiencing homelessness (21%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to be interested in supporting care leavers (45% vs 30%), prison leavers (26% vs 12%) and people with drug/alcohol dependency (15% vs 8%) into employment.

Compared to the 2022 survey, employers were less likely to say that they were interested in supporting each disadvantaged group into employment.

Employers in 2024 were more likely to select none of these (an increase of 6.3pp) or don’t know (an increase of 5.1pp).

6. Flexible working

The most common flexible working time arrangement provided by employers was flexibility in working hours.

Chart 6.1: Employer provision of flexible working time arrangements, Q1, 2024

Working time arrangement	Yes %	No %	Don’t know %
Flexibility in working hours	77%	21%	2%
Part-time working (working less than full-time hours, usually by working fewer days)	70%	28%	2%
The ability to reduce working hours (e.g. switching from full-time to part-time employment)	58%	38%	4%
Flexitime (where an employee has no set start or finish time but an agreement to work a set number of hours per week or month)	43%	56%	2%
Hybrid working (where an employee can spend some of their time working remotely and some in your organisation’s workspace)	39%	59%	2%
Home working (working at or from home in normal working hours)	37%	61%	1%
Compressed hours (working contracted hours over a reduced number of days)	29%	68%	3%
Job sharing schemes (sharing a full-time job with another employee)	19%	78%	3%
In another way	3%	78%	19%

Unweighted base: All employers (2,667)

The most common working time arrangement offered by employers was flexibility in working hours (77%); but this varied by organisation size. While this was the most common arrangement offered by SMEs, large employers were more likely to say they offered part-time working (98%).

Overall, 7 in 10 (70%) employers said they offer part-time working. This was followed by the ability to reduce working hours (58%) and flexitime (43%).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they offer each type of flexible working arrangement, with the exception of flexitime.

Employers who said they provide working time arrangements ‘in another way’ (3%) were asked to expand on this; these employers most commonly said that other arrangements were available on request (34%).

Most employers offer flexibility in working hours, part time working, flexitime and the ability to reduce working hours to all employees.

Chart 6.2: Groups that are offered flexibility in working hours, part time working, the ability to reduce working hours and flexitime by their employer, Q2, 2024

Group	Flexibility in working hours	Part-time working	The ability to reduce working hours	Flexitime
All employees	87%	81%	86%	88%
Employees with disabilities or long-term health conditions/illness	3%	5%	4%	2%
Employees who look after, or give help or support to someone else, due to ill health or problems	3%	6%	5%	4%
Employees approaching and considering retirement	4%	8%	6%	3%
None of these	6%	8%	4%	6%
Don’t know	1%	2%	2%	1%

Unweighted base: Employers who offer flexibility in working hours (2,081), part time working (2,074), the ability to reduce working hours (1,823) and flexitime (1,066).

Employers who said they offered their employees a working time arrangement were asked which groups these are available to.

For each of the eight working time arrangements, most employers said they offered these to all employees.

Flexitime was the most common working time arrangement offered to all employees (88%) and home working was the least common arrangement to be offered to all employees (72%, see chart 6.3).

There were no clear patterns in terms of which employee groups were more or less likely to be offered these arrangements.

Most employers offer hybrid working, home working, compressed hours and job-sharing schemes to all employees.

Chart 6.3: Groups that are offered hybrid working, home working, compressed hours and job-sharing schemes by employers, Q2, 2024

Group	Hybrid working	Home working	Compressed hours	Job sharing schemes
All employees	77%	72%	87%	86%
Employees with disabilities or long-term health conditions/illness	5%	6%	3%	3%
Employees who look after, or give help or support to someone else, due to ill health or problems	7%	7%	4%	4%
Employees approaching and considering retirement	6%	7%	5%	5%
None of these	11%	14%	6%	6%
Don’t know	3%	4%	1%	2%

Unweighted base: Employers who offer hybrid working (1,241), home working (1,080), compressed hours (860) and job sharing schemes (649)

SMEs were more likely than large employers to say that they offer hybrid working (77% vs 55%) and home working (72% vs 49%) to all employees.

Over 1 in 10 employers, who said they offer hybrid working or home working to their employees, said they do not offer these to any of the groups they were prompted with (11% and 14%, respectively).

Large employers were more likely than SMEs to say they did not offer hybrid working to any of the groups they were prompted with (21% vs 11%, respectively).

The most common reason employers do not offer working time arrangements is that they are not compatible with the type of job roles/work involved.

Chart 6.4: Reasons employers do not offer any flexible working time arrangements, Q3, 2024

Reason	All employers %
Not compatible with the type of job roles/ work involved	49%
There are not any benefits to our business	20%
Too costly	7%
It is managed by line managers on a case-by-case basis	2%
Employees do not want these options	2%
Other	1%
No barriers	13%
Don’t know	12%
Not applicable	13%

Unweighted base: Employers who do not offer any flexible working time arrangements (175)

Employers who said they do not offer any flexible working time arrangements (9%) were asked if there was anything stopping them from doing so.

The most common response was that these arrangements are not compatible with the type of job roles/work involved in their organisation (49%).

One in five (20%) employers said there are not any benefits to their business in having these policies in place. This was followed by the arrangements being too costly (7%).

Under 1 in 7 (13%) employers said there were no barriers stopping them from having any of these policies in place.

Under 1 in 7 (13%) employers said that the question was not applicable to their organisation. In some cases, this was because respondents thought their organisation had too few employees for the question to be applicable.

1. These definitions are slightly different to the ONS harmonised definitions of employer size, as this survey excluded organisations with less than 2 staff members. ↩

2. This value is different to the sum of the percentages shown in Chart 5 due to rounding of weighted values to the nearest integer. ↩

3. Most respondents to this question were small employers. ↩

4. Caution low base size ↩

5. Caution low base size ↩

6. Caution low base size ↩

7. Caution low base size ↩

8. Caution low base size ↩

9. This value is different to the sum of the percentages shown in Chart 3 due to rounding of weighted values to the nearest integer ↩