Proximity Bias in a Hybrid Team: How to Avoid a Discrimination Claim

Navigating the Legal Landscape of Hybrid Working

Hybrid working has transformed from a pandemic necessity into a permanent fixture of modern employment. Across the UK, businesses are discovering that blending office presence with remote work offers unprecedented flexibility, yet it also brings unexpected legal challenges that many employers haven't fully considered.

When we talk about hybrid working, we're referring to arrangements where employees split their time between traditional office spaces and remote locations. This might mean fixed office days each week, flexible arrangements where staff choose their optimal working environment daily, or role-based models where certain positions require more physical presence than others. The variety of approaches reflects how organisations are adapting to new expectations around workplace flexibility.

However, one significant risk has emerged from these new working patterns: proximity bias. This unconscious tendency to favour employees who are physically present can create an uneven playing field without you even realising it. When office-based colleagues receive more attention, opportunities, or informal mentoring simply because they're visible, remote workers can find themselves at a distinct disadvantage.

Why should this concern you legally?

The answer lies in UK employment law, particularly the Equality Act 2010. When hybrid working arrangements inadvertently favour one group over another, you might face indirect discrimination claims. These cases can be costly and damaging to your reputation, especially when they involve protected characteristics such as caring responsibilities, disabilities, or other factors that influence someone's ability to work from the office regularly.

This comprehensive guide will help you understand these legal risks and implement practical strategies to build fair, compliant hybrid working environments. You'll discover how to recognise proximity bias, develop robust policies that protect both your business and your employees, and create systems that ensure equal opportunities regardless of where your team members work.

Understanding Proximity Bias and Its Impact on Hybrid Teams

What Is Proximity Bias in the Workplace?

Proximity bias represents one of the most subtle yet significant challenges in hybrid working environments. At its core, this bias stems from the simple human tendency to pay more attention to people we see regularly. In traditional office settings, this wasn't particularly problematic because everyone shared the same physical space. However, hybrid working has created a two-tier system where some employees benefit from daily face-to-face interactions whilst others participate remotely.

This bias operates largely below the conscious level. You might find yourself naturally turning to the colleague sitting nearby when an urgent project arises, or including office-based team members in impromptu discussions that lead to new opportunities. These aren't deliberate acts of favouritism, but they can create systematic disadvantages for remote workers who aren't physically present to participate in these spontaneous moments.

The implications extend beyond simple convenience. Research indicates that proximity bias can influence performance evaluations, promotion decisions, and even basic recognition of contributions. When managers consistently interact with certain team members whilst others participate primarily through screens, it becomes easier to overlook the remote workers' achievements and potential.

How Proximity Bias Affects Opportunities and Career Progression

The impact of proximity bias on career development can be profound and long-lasting. Remote workers often miss out on informal learning opportunities that happen naturally in office environments. Consider the value of:

• Overhearing strategic discussions
• Being invited to join client calls on short notice
• Receiving impromptu feedback from senior colleagues

These interactions, whilst seemingly minor, contribute significantly to professional growth and visibility within an organisation.

Training and development opportunities frequently favour office-based employees too. When learning sessions are scheduled in person, remote workers might receive recorded versions or miss out entirely if technical issues arise. Mentoring relationships, which are crucial for career advancement, can also suffer when they rely heavily on casual interactions and spontaneous conversations.

Perhaps most concerning is the impact on performance recognition. Office-based employees benefit from greater visibility of their daily contributions. Their colleagues witness their problem-solving in real-time, observe their collaboration skills during team discussions, and notice their dedication through physical presence. Remote workers, regardless of their actual performance levels, may struggle to achieve the same level of recognition for their contributions.

Recent surveys have highlighted these concerns, with significant percentages of remote workers expressing worry that their contributions are undervalued compared to their office-based colleagues. This perception alone can affect morale, engagement, and retention, creating additional costs for employers beyond the legal risks.

"The biggest challenge with hybrid work is that proximity creates privilege. Those who are seen are more likely to be heard, remembered, and rewarded." - Dr. Tsedal Neeley, Harvard Business School professor and author of "Remote: Office Not Required"

The Link Between Proximity Bias and Discrimination

The transformation of proximity bias from a workplace annoyance into a legal risk occurs when it intersects with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. This intersection is more common than many employers realise, as the reasons people choose or need flexible working arrangements often relate to protected characteristics.

Parents and carers, who are protected under provisions related to sex discrimination and family responsibilities, may rely more heavily on remote working to balance their duties. Similarly, employees with disabilities might find remote working more accessible than traditional office environments. Age can also play a factor, as older workers might prefer to avoid lengthy commutes or have health considerations that make remote working preferable.

When proximity bias results in these groups receiving fewer opportunities, less favourable treatment, or reduced chances for advancement, it can constitute indirect discrimination. The law doesn't require intent to discriminate; it focuses on the effect of policies and practices. If your hybrid working approach systematically disadvantages people with protected characteristics, you could face employment tribunal claims regardless of your intentions.

The legal test for indirect discrimination involves examining whether a seemingly neutral policy or practice puts people with a particular protected characteristic at a disadvantage compared to others. If proximity bias leads to office-based employees receiving better treatment, and those employees are predominantly from non-protected groups whilst remote workers include higher proportions of people with protected characteristics, you may have created an indirectly discriminatory system.

The Legal Framework: Proximity Bias and UK Employment Law

Key Legislation: Equality Act 2010 and Flexible Working Rights

The Equality Act 2010 forms the backbone of anti-discrimination law in the UK, and its provisions directly impact how you manage hybrid working arrangements. Under this legislation, both direct and indirect discrimination are prohibited across nine protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

Direct discrimination in hybrid working might occur if you explicitly state that office-based employees will receive preferential treatment. However, indirect discrimination is more subtle and potentially more problematic. This occurs when you apply a policy or practice equally to everyone, but it puts people with a particular protected characteristic at a disadvantage. For example, if promotion decisions heavily weight face-to-face interaction and networking, this might indirectly discriminate against employees who cannot regularly attend the office due to caring responsibilities or disabilities.

The Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Act 2023 has strengthened employees' rights further by introducing a day-one right to request flexible working arrangements. Previously, employees needed two years of service before making such requests. Now, any employee can request changes to their working arrangements from their first day of employment. As an employer, you're required to deal with these requests in a reasonable manner and within specified timeframes.

This legislative framework means you cannot simply ignore requests for hybrid working or dismiss them without proper consideration. You must demonstrate that any refusal is based on legitimate business grounds and that you've explored alternative arrangements. The eight statutory grounds for refusing flexible working requests include burden of additional costs, detrimental effect on ability to meet customer demand, inability to reorganise work among existing staff, detrimental impact on quality, detrimental impact on performance, insufficiency of work during proposed hours, planned structural changes, and any other grounds the employer considers relevant.

Understanding Indirect Discrimination Claims

Indirect discrimination claims in hybrid working contexts typically involve employees arguing that seemingly neutral policies disproportionately affect them due to their protected characteristics. The legal framework requires examining whether a practice, policy, or decision puts people sharing a protected characteristic at a particular disadvantage compared to others.

To establish an indirect discrimination claim, an employee must demonstrate:

1. That you applied a provision, criterion, or practice to everyone
2. That this practice puts people sharing their protected characteristic at a particular disadvantage
3. That the practice has put them personally at that disadvantage

However, indirect discrimination can be justified if you can show that the practice serves a legitimate aim and is a proportionate means of achieving that aim. This is where careful documentation and clear business rationale become essential. For instance, requiring certain roles to maintain regular office presence might be justified for client-facing positions where physical presence genuinely enhances service delivery.

The concept of proportionality is particularly important. Even if you have a legitimate business reason for a policy, you must consider whether there are less discriminatory ways to achieve the same objective. Could technology bridge the gap? Are there alternative arrangements that would meet business needs whilst reducing discriminatory impact? Courts and tribunals will scrutinise whether you've genuinely explored all reasonable alternatives.

The Role of Employment Tribunals

Employment tribunals serve as the primary forum for resolving discrimination disputes, and their approach to hybrid working cases is still evolving as these arrangements become more commonplace. Tribunals have broad powers to examine workplace practices and can award significant compensation when they find discrimination has occurred.

Unlike some other employment claims, discrimination awards are uncapped, meaning tribunals can award compensation that fully reflects the financial losses and emotional distress experienced by the claimant. Awards can include compensation for past and future loss of earnings, benefits, and injury to feelings. In cases involving promotion denials or career setbacks due to proximity bias, these awards can be substantial.

The increase in hybrid working has led to more tribunal cases examining these issues. Tribunals are becoming more sophisticated in understanding how unconscious bias can operate in flexible working environments. They're also more willing to examine workplace cultures and practices that might disadvantage remote workers, even when there's no explicit policy creating different treatment.

Tribunals will examine evidence such as promotion statistics, training records, project allocation patterns, and performance management data to identify whether proximity bias has created discriminatory outcomes. They'll also consider witness testimony about workplace culture and decision-making processes. This comprehensive approach means that even subtle forms of bias can be identified and challenged.

Identifying and Mitigating Proximity Bias in Practice

Recognising Unconscious Bias in Decision-Making

Unconscious bias in hybrid working environments manifests in ways that can surprise even well-intentioned managers. You might find yourself unconsciously associating physical presence with dedication and productivity, leading to subtle favouritism in work allocation and performance evaluation. These biases often emerge during informal moments – the project assignment that happens during a corridor conversation, the promotion discussion that occurs over lunch, or the mentoring opportunity that arises from casual office interactions.

One common manifestation involves meeting dynamics. Office-based participants often dominate discussions, not necessarily because they have better ideas, but because they're more visible and can engage in non-verbal communication more effectively. Remote participants might struggle to interject, miss subtle cues, or feel less connected to the group dynamic. Over time, this can lead to their contributions being undervalued or overlooked entirely.

Performance evaluation presents another area where unconscious bias frequently operates. Managers might unconsciously conflate visibility with productivity, leading to higher ratings for employees they see regularly. The colleague who arrives early and stays late becomes more memorable than the remote worker who delivers excellent results from home. This visibility bias can significantly impact career progression and compensation decisions.

Training programmes specifically designed to address unconscious bias in hybrid environments can help managers recognise these patterns. Such training should include practical exercises that highlight how bias operates and provide tools for making more objective decisions. Regular bias audits should examine:

• Patterns in promotions by work location
• Project assignment distribution
• Performance rating disparities
• Training opportunity allocation

Strategies for Fair Work Allocation and Opportunities

Creating fair work allocation systems requires deliberate structural changes that remove proximity bias from decision-making processes. Start by establishing transparent criteria for project assignments that focus on skills, availability, and development needs rather than physical location. Document these criteria and ensure all managers understand and apply them consistently.

Consider implementing rotation systems for high-visibility projects and client interactions. This ensures that both office-based and remote employees receive equal exposure to career-enhancing opportunities. When urgent projects arise, resist the temptation to assign them to whoever is immediately available in the office. Instead, assess who has the right skills and capacity, regardless of their current location.

Regular opportunity audits can help identify patterns that might indicate bias. Track project assignments, training nominations, conference attendance, and other development opportunities by employee location. If office-based employees consistently receive more opportunities, investigate the underlying causes and adjust your processes accordingly.

Establish clear communication protocols that ensure all team members are informed about opportunities simultaneously. Use collaborative platforms and structured communication channels rather than relying on informal office conversations. This creates a more level playing field where remote workers have equal access to information about upcoming projects and development opportunities.

Ensuring Equitable Training and Development

Training and development programmes require careful design to avoid inadvertently favouring office-based employees. Hybrid-friendly training should offer multiple participation methods and ensure that remote participants can engage as fully as their office-based colleagues. This might involve investing in better technology, redesigning training materials, or offering flexible scheduling options.

Recording training sessions and making them available for later viewing helps level the playing field, but it shouldn't be the only solution. Live participation often provides more valuable learning experiences through interactive discussions and networking opportunities. Consider offering the same training in multiple formats – some sessions in person, others virtual, and some using hybrid approaches where both attendance methods are equally valuable.

Mentoring programmes present particular challenges in hybrid environments. Traditional mentoring often relies on informal interactions and spontaneous conversations that favour office-based relationships. Structure your mentoring programmes to include regular, scheduled interactions that can occur effectively regardless of location. Provide guidance to mentors on how to build strong relationships with remote mentees and ensure they're receiving equal development opportunities.

Skills development tracking becomes even more important in hybrid environments. Monitor whether remote employees are accessing development opportunities at similar rates to office-based colleagues. If disparities exist, investigate the causes and adjust your programmes accordingly. Sometimes simple changes, such as offering virtual lunch-and-learn sessions or online skills assessments, can significantly improve access for remote workers.

Promoting Inclusive Communication and Collaboration

Effective communication in hybrid teams requires intentional design and consistent implementation. Meeting protocols should ensure that remote participants can contribute as effectively as those physically present. This involves more than just providing good video technology; it requires changing meeting culture to actively include remote voices.

Develop meeting practices that give equal voice to all participants. This might include rotating who leads discussions, using digital collaboration tools that allow simultaneous input, or implementing speaking protocols that ensure remote participants have regular opportunities to contribute. Train meeting leaders to actively monitor participation and draw out contributions from remote attendees.

Informal communication channels need particular attention in hybrid environments. Office-based employees benefit from casual conversations, impromptu discussions, and social interactions that build relationships and share information. Create structured alternatives for remote workers, such as virtual coffee chats, online team-building activities, or digital collaboration spaces that encourage informal interaction.

Documentation becomes more important when teams are distributed. Important decisions, project updates, and strategic discussions should be recorded and shared with all team members, regardless of their participation method. This ensures that remote workers have access to the same information and context as their office-based colleagues, preventing information asymmetries that could disadvantage them.

Building a Fair and Legally Compliant Hybrid Working Framework

Developing a Clear Hybrid Working Policy

A comprehensive hybrid working policy serves as your foundation for fair and legally compliant practices. This document should clearly articulate your organisation's approach to flexible working, including eligibility criteria, application processes, and expectations for different working arrangements. Whilst not legally mandated, such policies provide essential clarity and consistency that can protect you from discrimination claims.

Your policy should address several key areas comprehensively. Define what hybrid working means in your organisation and outline the various arrangements available. Specify any roles or circumstances where office presence is genuinely required, ensuring these requirements are objectively justified. Describe the decision-making process for approving or declining flexible working requests, including the criteria you'll use and the timescales involved.

Performance management in hybrid environments requires specific attention in your policy. Outline how you'll measure and evaluate performance for both office-based and remote workers, emphasising outcome-based metrics rather than presence-based assessments. Address communication expectations, including response times, meeting participation, and availability requirements that apply regardless of work location.

The policy should also cover practical considerations such as equipment provision, health and safety responsibilities, data protection requirements, and expense reimbursement. Clear guidance on these matters helps prevent misunderstandings and ensures all employees receive consistent treatment. Regular policy reviews ensure your framework remains current with legal developments and business needs.

"The most successful hybrid policies are those that are explicit about expectations and outcomes, rather than leaving things to chance or individual interpretation." - Professor Lynda Gratton, London Business School

Adapting Employment Contracts

Employment contracts may require updates to reflect hybrid working arrangements, particularly when these become permanent features of the employment relationship. The key is determining whether flexible working is a temporary accommodation or a fundamental change to the terms and conditions of employment. This distinction can have significant legal implications for both parties.

When hybrid working becomes an established pattern, it may become an implied term of the employment contract, giving employees legitimate expectations about continued flexible arrangements. If you later need to change these arrangements, you might need to follow formal consultation processes and potentially seek employee agreement to contract variations.

Contract clauses should clearly specify work location expectations and any requirements for office attendance. Avoid overly rigid language that might prevent reasonable adjustments for changing business needs, but ensure sufficient clarity to manage expectations. Consider including provisions that allow for review and adjustment of working arrangements based on business requirements or performance considerations.

Address practical contract implications such as place of work clauses, which might need updating if employees regularly work from home. Consider tax and employment law implications of permanent home working, including potential impacts on jurisdiction for employment law purposes if employees move to different locations. These technical considerations can become important if employment disputes arise.

Managing Flexible Working Requests

The statutory process for handling flexible working requests requires careful attention to procedural requirements and decision-making criteria. Under current legislation, you must deal with requests within specified timeframes and provide clear reasoning for any decisions. This process should be thoroughly documented to demonstrate compliance with legal obligations.

Establish a structured approach for receiving and assessing flexible working requests. This should include initial acknowledgment timeframes, assessment criteria, consultation processes where appropriate, and clear communication of decisions. Train managers responsible for handling these requests to ensure consistent application of your decision-making framework.

Your assessment process should genuinely consider each request on its merits, exploring creative solutions where initial proposals might present challenges. This might involve suggesting alternative arrangements that meet both employee needs and business requirements. Document your consideration process thoroughly, including any alternatives explored and the reasoning behind your final decision.

Appeal processes provide important safeguards for both employees and employers. Clear appeal procedures demonstrate commitment to fair treatment and provide opportunities to reconsider decisions where new information emerges or circumstances change. These processes can also help identify areas where your initial assessment procedures might need refinement.

The Importance of Documentation

Comprehensive documentation serves as your primary defence against discrimination claims and demonstrates your commitment to fair treatment. This documentation should cover all aspects of hybrid working management, from initial policy development through individual decision-making processes. The quality and consistency of your records can significantly influence the outcome of any legal challenges.

Performance management documentation becomes particularly important in hybrid environments where subjective assessments might be influenced by proximity bias. Maintain detailed records of performance discussions, objectives setting, achievement reviews, and any performance concerns. Ensure these records focus on outcomes and behaviours rather than location-based observations.

Decision-making records should capture the rationale behind key choices such as project assignments, promotion decisions, training opportunities, and flexible working approvals or refusals. Include information about alternatives considered and the criteria used for decisions. This level of detail demonstrates objective decision-making and can counter allegations of bias or discrimination.

Regular audit documentation helps identify patterns that might indicate systemic issues with your hybrid working approach. Track metrics such as promotion rates, training participation, project allocation, and performance ratings by work location and protected characteristics. This data can help you proactively identify and address potential discrimination risks before they become legal challenges.

Case Studies and Real-World Examples

Real-world applications of these principles provide valuable insights into both the risks and opportunities of hybrid working. Consider a technology company that implemented hybrid working without adjusting its promotion criteria. Promotion decisions continued to heavily weight "leadership presence" and "team influence," criteria that unconsciously favoured office-based employees who had more opportunities for visible leadership and informal team interactions.

Over eighteen months, a clear pattern emerged: office-based employees received 78% of promotions despite representing only 60% of eligible candidates. When analysed by protected characteristics, the pattern became more concerning. Employees with caring responsibilities, predominantly women, were significantly over-represented among remote workers and under-represented in promotion outcomes. This pattern led to several grievances and ultimately an employment tribunal claim that resulted in substantial compensation awards and reputational damage.

In contrast, a financial services firm took a proactive approach to hybrid working fairness. They redesigned their promotion criteria to focus on measurable outcomes and implemented structured processes for opportunity allocation. Monthly reviews tracked participation in development opportunities and project assignments by work location and demographics. When disparities emerged, they investigated causes and adjusted processes accordingly.

The financial services firm also invested in technology and training to ensure effective hybrid collaboration. Meeting protocols actively included remote participants, mentoring programmes used structured virtual interactions, and performance management focused entirely on results rather than presence. After two years, their promotion and development opportunity statistics showed no significant differences between office-based and remote employees, and employee satisfaction surveys indicated high levels of confidence in fair treatment regardless of work location.

A healthcare organisation provides another instructive example. Initially, they assumed that client-facing roles required consistent office presence, potentially limiting flexible working opportunities for employees in these positions. However, when they examined their assumptions more critically, they discovered that many client interactions could be effectively managed remotely with appropriate technology and protocols.

By redesigning their service delivery model to accommodate hybrid working, they not only improved employee satisfaction but also enhanced service quality through more flexible scheduling options. This approach helped them avoid potential discrimination issues whilst discovering that assumptions about physical presence requirements weren't always accurate.

Ensuring Fairness in Performance Management and Promotions

Shifting Focus to Outcomes Over Presence

Transforming performance management for hybrid working requires fundamental changes in how you define and measure success. Traditional approaches that conflate physical presence with productivity become counterproductive and potentially discriminatory in flexible working environments. Instead, focus on clear, measurable outcomes that can be achieved regardless of work location.

Develop specific, measurable objectives for each role that emphasise results rather than activities. These objectives should be sufficiently detailed to enable fair assessment but flexible enough to accommodate different working styles and approaches. Regular objective-setting discussions should focus on what needs to be achieved rather than how or where work is performed.

Technology can support outcome-based performance management through project tracking systems, performance dashboards, and collaborative platforms that provide visibility into work progress and results. However, avoid surveillance-style monitoring that could damage trust and create additional legal risks. The goal is transparency and accountability, not micromanagement.

Regular performance discussions become even more important in hybrid environments where informal feedback opportunities are reduced. Structure these conversations to focus on achievement against objectives, professional development progress, and support needs. Ensure that performance feedback is based on documented evidence rather than impressions or assumptions about productivity based on physical presence.

"In hybrid work, presence is not performance. We need to measure what matters: results, impact, and value creation." - Prithwiraj Choudhury, Harvard Business School Associate Professor

Designing Inclusive Promotion Processes

Promotion processes in hybrid working environments require careful design to prevent proximity bias from influencing decisions. Start by clearly defining promotion criteria that focus on skills, achievements, and potential rather than visibility or presence. These criteria should be measurable, relevant to role requirements, and consistently applied across all candidates.

Promotion criteria should focus on:

• Measurable skills and competencies
• Documented achievements and results
• Demonstrated potential for growth
• Objective performance outcomes

Structured promotion panels that include diverse perspectives can help counter individual biases. Ensure panel members receive training on unconscious bias and understand the importance of focusing on objective criteria. Consider including panel members who work in different locations to provide varied perspectives on candidate contributions and potential.

Evidence-based assessment processes help ensure objectivity in promotion decisions. Require documented evidence of achievements, skills demonstration, and performance outcomes rather than relying on informal impressions or recommendations. This approach levels the playing field between candidates who may have different levels of visibility within the organisation.

Feedback mechanisms for unsuccessful candidates provide important insights into your promotion process fairness. If patterns emerge suggesting that certain groups or work locations are consistently unsuccessful, investigate whether your criteria or assessment processes might be inadvertently biased. This feedback can also help identify development opportunities that could improve future promotion prospects.

Litigated: Your Partner in Navigating Hybrid Working Legal Risks

Managing hybrid working arrangements whilst avoiding legal risks requires staying current with evolving employment law and tribunal decisions. Litigated provides exactly this kind of specialised support, offering comprehensive analysis of employment tribunal cases that can guide your decision-making and policy development.

Through detailed case analysis, Litigated helps you understand how employment tribunals are interpreting discrimination law in hybrid working contexts. You'll gain insights into successful and unsuccessful claims, helping you identify potential risks in your own practices. This analysis goes beyond simple case summaries to provide practical guidance on implementing compliant hybrid working policies.

The platform's public news updates keep you informed about legislative changes, tribunal decisions, and regulatory guidance that could impact your hybrid working arrangements. Given the rapidly evolving nature of flexible working law, staying current with these developments is essential for maintaining compliance and avoiding costly legal challenges.

For members, Litigated provides in-depth analysis and practical guidance specifically designed for HR professionals, business owners, and legal advisors managing hybrid teams. This content translates complex legal principles into actionable strategies, helping you build robust policies and procedures that protect both your business and your employees.

The expert analysis available through Litigated helps you anticipate potential issues before they become problems. By understanding how tribunals approach proximity bias cases and what evidence they consider compelling, you can proactively adjust your practices to minimise legal risks whilst creating fairer, more inclusive working environments.

Litigated's commitment to making employment law accessible and actionable makes it an invaluable resource for anyone managing the complexities of hybrid working. Whether you're developing new policies, addressing employee concerns, or simply wanting to ensure your practices remain compliant, Litigated provides the expertise and insights you need to make informed decisions.

Addressing Health, Safety, and Wellbeing in a Hybrid Context

Employer's Health and Safety Obligations for Remote Workers

Your duty of care extends to all employees regardless of where they work, creating specific obligations for supporting remote workers' health and safety. This responsibility goes beyond providing equipment; it encompasses ensuring that home working environments meet appropriate safety standards and that employees understand their responsibilities for maintaining safe working conditions.

Comprehensive home office assessments should examine:

1. Ergonomic workstation setup
2. Lighting and heating adequacy
3. Electrical safety compliance
4. General workspace suitability

Provide clear guidance on optimal workstation setup and offer support for employees who need equipment or adjustments to create safe working environments. Consider providing equipment allowances or direct provision of ergonomic chairs, monitors, and other essential items.

Mental health considerations are equally important in hybrid working arrangements. Remote workers may experience isolation, difficulty maintaining work-life boundaries, or stress related to managing home and work responsibilities simultaneously. Provide resources and support for mental health challenges, including access to employee assistance programmes, mental health training, and clear policies on working hours and availability expectations.

Regular check-ins with remote workers should include discussions about health and safety concerns, not just work progress. Train managers to recognise signs of stress or health issues that might be exacerbated by remote working arrangements. Create clear reporting procedures for health and safety concerns and ensure remote workers know how to access support when needed.

Supporting Mental Health and Preventing Isolation

Hybrid working can create unique mental health challenges that require proactive management and support. Remote workers may struggle with professional isolation, reduced social interaction, and difficulty separating work and personal life. These challenges can affect productivity, engagement, and overall wellbeing, making mental health support a business necessity as well as a moral obligation.

Implement regular check-in schedules that go beyond work-related discussions to include wellbeing conversations. Train managers to recognise signs of stress, isolation, or burnout and provide them with resources for supporting team members who may be struggling. These conversations should be part of regular management practice, not exceptional interventions.

Create structured opportunities for social interaction and team building that work effectively for both remote and office-based employees. This might include virtual coffee breaks, online team activities, or hybrid social events that accommodate different participation preferences. The goal is maintaining team cohesion and preventing remote workers from feeling disconnected from their colleagues.

Flexible working policies should include clear expectations about working hours, availability, and response times to help employees maintain healthy boundaries. Without the natural separation that commuting provides, remote workers may struggle to "switch off" from work, leading to longer hours and increased stress. Clear policies help establish appropriate boundaries that protect employee wellbeing.

Fostering an Inclusive Hybrid Workplace Culture

Building Trust and Psychological Safety

Trust forms the foundation of successful hybrid working relationships, but building and maintaining trust requires different approaches when team members work in various locations. Psychological safety – the belief that you can express ideas, concerns, and mistakes without fear of negative consequences – becomes even more important when physical cues and informal interactions are reduced.

Establish clear communication protocols that encourage openness and regular feedback. Create multiple channels for employees to raise concerns, share ideas, or request support. These might include regular one-to-one meetings, anonymous feedback systems, team discussion forums, or structured review processes. The key is ensuring that all employees, regardless of location, feel comfortable participating.

Transparency in decision-making helps build trust across hybrid teams. When employees understand how decisions are made and what factors influence outcomes, they're more likely to trust that the process is fair. Share information about business developments, strategic decisions, and policy changes consistently with all team members, ensuring remote workers receive the same information as their office-based colleagues.

Recognition programmes should acknowledge contributions from all team members equally, regardless of their work location. Celebrate achievements, share success stories, and provide feedback that demonstrates you value all employees' contributions. Public recognition that highlights remote workers' achievements can help counter any perception that office presence is more valued than results.

Promoting Diversity and Inclusion

Hybrid working can either enhance or hinder diversity and inclusion efforts, depending on how it's implemented. When done well, flexible working arrangements can accommodate diverse needs and circumstances, creating more inclusive workplaces. However, poorly managed hybrid working can create new forms of exclusion or reinforce existing inequalities.

Design your hybrid working policies to accommodate diverse needs without creating stigma or disadvantage. This means avoiding assumptions about who might want or need flexible working arrangements and ensuring that all employees have equal access to hybrid working opportunities. Consider how different groups might be affected by your policies and adjust them to promote inclusion rather than create barriers.

Regular diversity monitoring should include analysis of hybrid working uptake and outcomes by different demographic groups. If certain groups are over-represented among remote workers or under-represented in office-based roles, investigate whether this reflects genuine choice or potential barriers. Use this data to identify areas where your policies might need adjustment to better support inclusion.

Training programmes should address unconscious bias in hybrid working contexts, helping managers understand how their assumptions and decision-making might inadvertently create discriminatory outcomes. This training should be ongoing and updated as your hybrid working practices evolve and mature.

Conclusion

Proximity bias in hybrid teams presents genuine legal risks that require proactive management and careful policy design. The potential for discrimination claims under UK employment law means that addressing these issues isn't just good practice – it's essential for legal compliance and business protection.

The key to success lies in recognising that hybrid working requires intentional design rather than informal adaptation. You cannot simply add remote working options to existing processes and expect fair outcomes. Instead, you must fundamentally review how opportunities are allocated, performance is measured, and career progression is managed to ensure that physical presence doesn't become a proxy for value or contribution.

Building robust, transparent processes that focus on outcomes rather than presence benefits everyone in your organisation. Remote workers gain equal access to opportunities and recognition, whilst office-based employees benefit from clearer expectations and more objective assessment criteria. The result is a more engaged, productive workforce with reduced legal risks.

Regular monitoring and adjustment of your hybrid working practices ensures that you stay ahead of potential problems rather than reacting to complaints or legal challenges. By tracking key metrics, gathering employee feedback, and staying current with legal developments, you can maintain a fair and compliant hybrid working environment that supports business success whilst protecting employee rights.

FAQs

Can an Employer Force Employees to Return to the Office in a Hybrid Model?

Your ability to require office attendance depends largely on the terms specified in employment contracts and how hybrid working arrangements were initially established. If contracts specify office-based work, you generally have more flexibility to require office presence. However, the Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Act 2023 gives all employees the right to request flexible working from day one, and you must consider these requests reasonably. If hybrid working has become an established practice, changing arrangements might require formal consultation and potentially employee agreement to contract variations.

What Are the Main Legal Risks of Not Addressing Proximity Bias?

The primary legal risk involves potential indirect discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010. When proximity bias systematically disadvantages employees with protected characteristics – such as those with caring responsibilities, disabilities, or other factors that make remote working necessary – you could face employment tribunal claims. These claims can result in uncapped compensation awards that reflect both financial losses and injury to feelings. Additionally, failing to address proximity bias can damage your reputation as an employer and affect your ability to attract and retain talented employees.

How Can We Ensure Fair Promotion Opportunities for Remote Staff?

Ensuring fair promotions requires implementing objective, outcome-based assessment criteria that don't favour physical presence. Develop clear promotion criteria focused on measurable achievements, skills, and potential rather than visibility or office attendance. Use structured promotion panels with diverse perspectives and require documented evidence of candidate qualifications rather than informal recommendations. Provide equal access to development opportunities that prepare employees for promotion, and regularly audit promotion outcomes to identify any patterns that might indicate bias.

Do We Need a Specific Hybrid Working Policy?

Whilst not legally mandated, a comprehensive hybrid working policy is highly recommended best practice. Such policies provide clarity on eligibility criteria, application processes, performance expectations, and decision-making procedures. They help ensure consistent treatment of all employees and can serve as important evidence of your commitment to fairness if legal challenges arise. A well-designed policy should cover practical aspects such as equipment provision, health and safety responsibilities, communication expectations, and performance management approaches that work effectively for hybrid teams.

SIGN UP

For FREE access to Litigated's Member Articles

Subscribe

Email sent! Check your inbox to complete your signup.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nick

With a background in international business and a passion for technology, Nick aims to blend his diverse expertise to advocate for justice in employment and technology law.