Soundproof booths and mental health days needed for employees, HR experts say
A new report has revealed the changes that need to be made in the workplace to accommodate the needs of the upcoming generation.
Workplaces are being urged to adapt their environment to needs of the workforce
(Image: Getty Images )
HR specialists are encouraging employers to introduce sound-proof work booths and designated mental health days off to cater for the needs of the emerging generation in the workplace.
They recommend creating an environment where everyone can thrive. It includes offering flexible work schedules, promoting regular breaks, and implementing mentorship programmes.
The study commissioned by Benenden Health, which surveyed 500 HR professionals, revealed that a staggering 77% are taking steps to ensure their workplaces are suitable for neurodivergent individuals.
These recommendations were part of a report aimed at highlighting how employers can better support Generation Alpha as they join the workforce.
Benenden Health's Chief People Officer, Mike Hay, stated: "It is important to understand and support neurodivergent individuals, including those within Generation Alpha, who will make up a growing part of the workforce."
"Communication is key," he further added, "creating space for open, two-way conversations where employees feel safe to disclose their needs is essential, especially for those who may have faced stigma in the past."
Article continues below
Eight in ten recognise the importance of workplace adjustments
(Image: Getty Images )
Dan Harris from the organisation also commented: "Autism diagnosis has increased by almost 800% in 20 years and other neurodivergent diagnoses are also on the rise. Businesses of the future need to adapt to this and are set to fail if they don't bring in measures to support these individuals."
These measures include fostering open dialogue, advocating for regular breaks, and endorsing flexible working schedules.
Mike commented: "In the next five years, the workforce will be the most diverse it has ever been, and we need to acknowledge that it takes time to learn and adapt our workplaces and leadership styles to support everyone's needs."
A substantial 81% acknowledge the significance of these adjustments, suggesting a universal need for every individual to feel supported in order for productivity and creativity to truly thrive.
Most young people would seek out a workforce that took neurodiversity into account
(Image: Getty Images )
Over two-thirds have seen an increase in employees asking for reasonable adjustments in the workplace over the past year to meet their needs.
This view was echoed by those aged between 13 and 18, as a survey of 500 teenagers showed six out of 10 know with someone who is neurodivergent. Meanwhile, a fifth speak to their parents about neurodiversity on a regular basis.
More than half of parents believe this openness is attributed to a growing awareness of what neurodiversity is and what adjustments may be needed.
Article continues below
Mike added: "This report is more than research. It is a starting point for meaningful change."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
5 hours ago
- Scotsman
How Long Dogs Live 2025: Researchers found this is how long 19 popular breeds of adorable dog live on average - including the loving Labrador 🐕
We're a nation of dog lovers, with around one-in-three households including at least one four-legged friend . By far the most popular pet in the UK, they make for wonderful companions, all the while improving both our mental and physical health - and that's a scientific fact. The army of dog owners continues to grow, with 221 different breeds of pedigree dog to choose from, alongside numerous crossbreeds . Choosing the right breed is absolutely essential – for example opting for a small dog if you don't have much room at home, or a hypoallergenic dog if you suffer from allergies. There's also always the option of adopting a dog from a dog shelter for a minimal fee - for example from the Dogs Trust . There's even academic guidance to seek out, with Psychologist Stanley Coren's book 'The Intelligence of Dogs' ranking breeds by instincts the ability to adapt. Meanwhile, how long a dog lives is partly dependent on its breed - with some far more likely to reach a grand old age than others. Research published in the journal Scientific Reports has used the Royal Veterinary College's Veterinary Companion Animal Surveillance System (VetCompass), a database holding information on over two million animals, to work out the average life expectance of some of the UK's most popular breeds of dog. Researchers took a random sample of 30,563 dogs that died over a five year period to come to their findings. Here's what they found to be the average lifespan of 19 of the most common dog breeds. 1 . Jack Russell Terrier The Jack Russell Terrier was the longest living breed that the study looked at - with an average age of 12.72 years. The cheery wee dogs were originally bred for fox hunting in North Devon. | Canva/Getty Images Photo Sales 2 . Yorkshire Terrier Another terrier takes second spot. Small dogs tend to live longer than large dogs, so it's no surprise to see the tiny Yorkshire Terrier coming high up in this list with an average lifespan of 12.54 years. It orginated in the nineteenth century in - unsurprisingly - the English county of Yorkshire. | Canva/Getty Images Photo Sales 3 . Border Collie The world's most intelligent dog breed, the Border Collie is also one of the most long lived - with an expected life of 12.10 years. Bred first on the border between England and Scotland, it's often very successfully used to herd sheep. | Canva/Getty Images Photo Sales 4 . Springer Spaniel The wonderfully bouncy Springer Spaniel is expected to live around 11.92 years. Before becoming loved family pets, they were used to flush out (or 'spring' - hence the name) and retrieve game by hunters. | Canva/Getty Images Photo Sales
New Statesman
a day ago
- New Statesman
We need a culture change in maternity services
Photo by Matthew Cheetham / Getty Images The Health and Social Care Secretary is staking his reputation on providing safe care to women giving birth. 'Maternity safety will become the litmus test for all safety in the NHS,' Wes Streeting said on 23 June, as he announced a rapid investigation into maternity and neonatal services. He will take 'personal responsibility for it', noting that successive governments have failed to grip this national scandal adequately. Streeting has said the government's long-awaited ten-year plan for the NHS, which will be published on 3 July, will tackle maternity's 'safety crisis at its root, with an overhaul of the wider patient safety landscape'. The Health Secretary has already placed new personnel at the top of the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to turn around the 'failing organisation' – part of an attempt to 'declutter' the regulatory landscape in which more than 150 bodies will be scrapped. A shift from analogue to digital will be seen first in maternity, too, where AI technology will flag higher than expected rates of stillbirth, neonatal death and brain injury, triggering inspections. A focus on tackling inequalities in health outcomes – another theme of the plan – is also hugely relevant to maternity care: black women are two to three times more likely to die during pregnancy or shortly after birth than white women. While Streeting's aim to tackle 'the biggest patient safety challenge facing our country' is admirable, the task is mammoth. The rapid investigation will look at up to ten English maternity units that give ministers and NHS bosses the 'greatest cause for concern'. How will they be chosen? In its National Review of Maternity Services in England 2022 to 2024, the CQC found nearly half of all units either required improvement (36 per cent) or were deemed inadequate (12 per cent). Not one was rated outstanding for safety. Nearly two thirds (65 per cent) either required improvement or had inadequate safety provision. Streeting is right: the problem is systemic. 'It's not just a few bad units up and down the country. Maternity units are failing. Hospitals are failing. Trusts are failing.' Streeting could limit his choices to the 20-plus units that are currently rated inadequate by the CQC: from Scarborough and York hospitals in the north, to Poole in the south; Great Yarmouth's James Paget Hospital in the east, or Somerset's two failing units in the west, one of which was closed in May for at least six months. This approach would still leave half the services acknowledged to be unsafe unexamined. The units to be investigated will be chosen after analysing various NHS data sets. But each data set provides different answers. In the 2024 maternity survey, the CQC found two trusts performing 'much worse than expected': University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Six trusts were 'worse than expected'. While some run inadequate maternity services, the majority do not. Then there's the danger of putting too much faith in the CQC when the regulator is facing heavy criticism. It has been accused of failing to heed concerns about maternity services until long after they've been raised by whistleblowing staff and by families who have been harmed. In Leeds, for example, where a BBC investigation found that the deaths of two mothers and 56 babies could potentially have been avoided between 2019 and 2024, maternity services were not rated inadequate until May – at least five years after concerns were first raised. In Oxford, where more than 500 families are calling for an inquiry, maternity services are not judged inadequate. Nor are Nottingham's, where around 2,500 families are taking part in the former midwife Donna Ockenden's independent investigation into failings. The Health Secretary could look at data on deaths. Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust had a neonatal mortality rate nearly twice the average of similar services in 2023. Among smaller hospitals, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust appears to be an outlier in the rate of stillbirths. But official data sets can be flawed. As Streeting acknowledged to doctors, 'some services don't even record incidents that have resulted in serious harm'. Other information indicating poor maternity care doesn't exist at all: there are no recent, reliable data on the life-changing injuries women can suffer during childbirth. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Behind every number, every set of statistics, are real lives – and deaths. Too many babies are dying and being harmed because of poor maternity care. Too many women are receiving life-changing injuries. Too many mums and dads are being left traumatised. And we are spending an eye-watering amount compensating families for that poor maternity care. In the financial year 2023-24, maternity payouts comprised 41 per cent of total NHS clinical negligence payments: £1.15bn of £2.8bn. The NHS predicts that 49 per cent of the £5.1bn it will pay out in future as a result of care delivered in 2023-24 will be to maternity cases. To put that into perspective, NHS England spends around £3bn a year in total delivering maternity and neonatal services. It is vital that maternity services are not seen as just another part of the NHS that needs improving. For there is something bigger going on – something unique that cannot simply be explained by staff shortages, low morale or a lack of funding. Many hospitals provide good care in all other departments but have an inadequate maternity unit. This is a problem of culture. And with the best will in the world, that is the hardest thing of all to change. [See also: Cover Story: Just raise tax!] Related
New Statesman
a day ago
- New Statesman
The horror of Gaza's children's hospitals
Photo by Belal Khaled/Anadolu via Getty Images On 16 June, I gave testimony to the Foreign Affairs Committee in Westminster. I wish I could have shared stories of hope, or progress, or of basic human decency. But I was there to testify about the atrocities Israel is committing in Gaza, and to ask how long the UK government will remain complicit. The last major functioning hospital in southern Gaza, Nasser Hospital, is at risk of being forced out of service by the Israeli military. Tanks have moved within striking distance. Forced displacement orders have been issued. There are hundreds of patients inside, including dozens in intensive care. Among the exhausted doctors who stay to care for patients are colleagues I worked alongside a few months ago, when I was volunteering there. If the hospital is bombed, invaded or forced to shut down – as has happened to nearly every other hospital in Gaza – the healthcare system in the south will collapse entirely. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will be left with no healthcare. And patients will die – this is not hyperbole. This is part of a pattern of violations by the Israeli military that UN experts and human rights groups have concluded amounts to a genocide unfolding before our eyes. On 23 March, I was treating patients at Nasser Hospital, including dozens of children injured by military air strikes following Israel's decision to break the ceasefire on 18 March. Then, without warning, a huge blast shook the building. We ran outside to see what had happened and a colleague screamed: 'They hit surgery.' Flames engulfed the building. The biggest operating hospital in Gaza, full of staff and patients, had been targeted by an Israeli strike. A war crime in plain sight. On the day Israel broke the ceasefire we were awoken in the middle of the night at the hospital, where volunteer medical staff both worked and slept, by the biggest air strikes I'd ever experienced. The doors were banging, and the walls were shaking. Everybody was in a state of panic. As the ambulances and donkey carts of casualties started to flood in, our emergency room and paediatric intensive care unit were overwhelmed. Many of the patients were children, bombs dropped on them while they slept in their tents. In the first couple of hours, at least 76 casualties were taken straight to the morgue, dead on arrival. We later learned that at least 183 children were killed in Israeli military attacks in just that one day. We ran around between patients who were rapidly losing blood, gasping for life. We had to make agonising decisions about which children to prioritise. Some of the children I saw had injuries they could never survive. Others could have been saved with the necessary resources, but we had shortages of everything. I remember their faces, their earrings, their two little first teeth. I remember how carefully they had been dressed for sleep in their cold tents, the delicateness with which their hair was braided. I remember a baby, not yet one, brought in by her uncle. She had multiple perforations to her bowel, bleeding around her kidney, and swelling of her brain after Israeli bombs hit her home. Her mother was killed and her father injured in the same attack. A few days after her life-saving surgery, her first and only repeated word was 'mama'. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Another little girl, about five years old, had the word 'unknown' written on her abdomen – no family had come in with her. She had severe bleeding in her spleen, multiple perforations to her bowel, and shrapnel going through her brain, resulting in paralysis on one side of her body. There was a boy, about six years old. An artery in his leg was severed, he was haemorrhaging when we treated him. His foot was crushed, and we thought he might have a brain injury. His siblings were all killed bar one sister. This is just a snapshot of the patients I saw on the day of one of the largest child death tolls in Gaza's history. As the hospital now faces an invasion, staff continue to treat an influx of injuries, many of them from attacks at US-supported Israeli militarised 'aid' distribution points. Doctors report that most of the patients have been injured by direct sniper fire to the head or chest, and almost all of them are acutely malnourished. Meanwhile, infants in the neonatal department risk starving to death as the hospital runs out of essential baby formula that continues to be barred from entering by Israel. Since October 2023, at least 56,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 17,100 children. Some 132,000 people have been injured, and some 92 per cent of homes damaged or destroyed. And these figures are all likely underestimates according to experts' analyses; thousands are missing. Nothing I write here could fully encapsulate the devastating catalogue of atrocities that has occurred in Gaza in the past 20 months. These numbers and stories should make anyone feel disgusted and moved to act. Yet the lack of action is nothing short of abhorrent. The killing or injuring of more than 50,000 children is not an 'inevitable outcome of war'. These are children born into an illegal siege, primarily to families who are already refugees from violent displacement. And those numbers are just the children who have been reported. Thousands more are trapped under rubble, left with life-changing injuries, or living with chronic conditions without access to proper medical care. Gaza's health system has been systematically destroyed by the Israeli military. The Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital, Gaza's only cancer facility, was destroyed. Al Amal and the European Gaza Hospital have been forced out of service. There are now no functioning hospitals in Rafah or north Gaza. According to a UN commission, this amounts to the crime of 'extermination'. The testimonies of doctors leaving Gaza, along with evidence from human rights organisations and UN bodies, demand urgent action. The supply of British arms to Israel makes the UK complicit in these atrocities. It is no longer enough to express concern while enabling violence. The UK must immediately suspend arms sales to Israel and uphold its legal and moral obligations under international law. Silence and inaction are not neutral; they are choices that perpetuate suffering. It is time to choose accountability over complicity, and justice over political convenience. We refuse to let these atrocities go unnoticed. We refuse to accept a world in which Palestinians are forced to endure this nightmare in silence. Dr Tanya Haj-Hassan is a paediatric intensive care physician who was in Gaza from 15 February to 26 March as part of a medical team with Medical Aid for Palestinians [See also: Israel's hollow victory] Related
