The UK is set to experience record-breaking temperatures that could exceed 38°C, prompting extreme heat warnings and health alerts. The Met Office has indicated that the sweltering conditions may persist until at least Thursday, raising concerns for vulnerable individuals and leading to weather warnings.
Record-breaking heat expected
Forecasters have expressed "growing confidence" that this week could surpass the current record for the hottest June temperature of 35.6°C, set in 1976 in Southampton. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has warned of significant impacts on health and social care services, including a potential rise in deaths, particularly among those aged 65 and over or with pre-existing health conditions.
The extreme heat may also disrupt rail, road, and air travel, with the Met Office warning of possible tarmac melting.
Legal perspective on workplace heat
Patrick Macken, a solicitor at Richard Nelson LLP, has clarified the legal position on heat in the workplace. He stated: "The answer is both yes and no. There is no specific office or work temperature threshold that entitles the workforce to stop working or relocate. The Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations 1992 may be the only statutory instrument that expressly addresses workplace temperature, but it’s arguably underwhelming and ambiguous. The obligation goes no further than maintaining a ‘reasonable’ temperature."
However, several other legal instruments come into play, notably the Employment Rights Act 1996. This Act provides recourse for employees who are dismissed or subjected to a 'detriment' because they left, or proposed to leave, the workplace due to serious and imminent danger. While this sounds like a high threshold, the danger does not need to be life-threatening; it includes exposure to harm, injury, or risk. Even the risk of danger is enough to trigger statutory protection.
Protection beyond dismissal
Macken explained: "The protection and resources available to employees under the Employment Rights Act 1996 go beyond instances of dismissal, but also apply if an employee is subjected to any ‘detriment’. Detriment has a broad application. It’s generally defined as anything a reasonable employee could perceive as placing them at a disadvantage; this doesn't have to be financial. This could include disciplinary action, such as warnings, or even just the commencement of a disciplinary procedure, regardless of the outcome."
He highlighted a notable case: "Begum v Sunlight Services Group Ltd. In this case, employees (the Claimant and her colleagues) were struggling with humidity in a controlled environment whilst undertaking their usual duties. When the manager refused to take simple measures, such as opening a door, the Claimant felt it was too unsafe to continue and threatened to leave. Her manager threatened dismissal in response. When the Claimant did leave, she was dismissed. The Tribunal found that the Claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed. Unlike ‘ordinary’ unfair dismissal, there is no defence to an automatic unfair dismissal."
Advice for employers
Macken advised: "Whilst each case is subject to its own merits, employers ought to be mindful of health & safety measures, and avoid knee-jerk decisions to discipline or dismiss employees who take preventative measures, such as adjusting their uniform or opening doors, to stay safe in the heat."
