Sir Charlie Mayfield who is leading the government’s Keep Britain Working Review expects Britain can ‘radically’ transform its labour inactivity crisis within a period of five to 10 years.
But advisers Health & Protection has spoken to think five years to turnaround these issues would be too optimistic.
Last November, Sir Charlie, the former chairman of John Lewis, was charged by the government with leading the Keep Britain Working Review, an independent review focusing on what more employers can do to tackle economic inactivity due to ill-health and disability.
It is expected that the government will release Sir Charlie’s findings later in the autumn.
Participating in a panel debate at the launch of Bupa’s 2025 edition of its Wellbeing Index last week, Sir Charlie (pictured) highlighted that private medical insurance (PMI) and group income protection (GIP) have a role to play in tackling the UK’s labour inactivity crisis.
Radically transforming the situation
Speaking during the same debate, Sir Charlie maintained that while the country’s labour inactivity issues were “pretty entrenched” and “complicated” and could not be solved within a year, this is possible over the longer term.
“I do think we could radically transform the situation in this country over a period of five to 10 years,” he said.
“And I think we can make a lot of progress and build a lot of momentum within the space of three years and I see plenty of scope for us to achieve that.”
Good going
But when asked about this timeline for improvement, advisers told Health & Protection that solving these issues within five years was optimistic.
John Kerr, director of Incorporate Benefits, told Health & Protection: “Five to 10 years would be good going wouldn’t it?
“Nothing in the UK runs particularly fast, so I would have thought it was optimistic.”
Kerr added engagement with the private health and protection sector was needed to see what can be done to help.
“Is there any kind of integration within this?” he continued. “Are there any incentives for employers to take this out now? I don’t know.
“I think for this to be done within five years would be remarkable.
“Especially when you look at how auto enrolment was rolled out when you’re looking at a seismic change such as this.”
More realistic timeline
Mike Hesch, head of UK employee benefits at Engage Health Group, told Health & Protection 10 years was more realistic.
“I would also say that it also feels like that there are too many things on the government’s plate to make it in a five year period,” Hesch continued.
“Within that 10 year period, I would say that they have got to have done something by then.
“And then you ask, do I think the current government is going to be in office in 10 or five years time? – Probably not.
“So then the question is does it all sit on the backburner again and the new government has new challenges and this stuff doesn’t actually go anywhere.”
Focus on GPs
In order to meet the target, more needs to be done to prevent health issues occurring in the first place, according to Emma Wood, director of healthcare at Broadway Insurance.
“For me, it’s the prevention piece and what insurance can do in terms of helping to detect conditions early,” Wood said.
“You can’t get in to see your own GP. Is there something more that needs to be done more around primary care and having those initial conversations with a GP.”
While Wood maintained that virtual GP services were “brilliant”, there are issues when people need a face-to-face consultation.
“I know Bupa has a centre in Manchester that you can go to,” Wood continued. “There’s a clinic and you get discounted rates as a Bupa member. Vitality has some down in London.
“But it’s going to be around this early detection and getting help there, so that it relieves some of the pressures on the NHS and helps with turnaround times and appointment times there.”
Underestimating the challenge
Kristian Breeze, director of healthcare at Ascend Broking Group, maintained the timeline risks underestimating the scale of the challenge.
“The reality is that structural barriers remain deeply entrenched, and unless employers and policymakers take bold, coordinated action, progress will be slow and uneven,” Breeze continued.
Breeze added that boosting economic inactivity is not simply a matter of matching people to jobs.
“For many, the decision to return to work hinges on whether employment feels secure, supportive, and sustainable,” he added.
“Rising living costs, NHS backlogs, and mental health pressures mean that work must offer more than a pay check, it must offer protection and wellbeing.”
Going beyond statutory minimums
Consequently, Breeze told UK plc that if they want to attract and retain talent, they need to go beyond statutory minimums and provide benefits such as group private medical and income protection insurance, mental health support and flexible hybrid work models.
IPT exemptions
He also called on the government to introduce Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) exemptions for employers providing health and protection benefits, encourage wider adoption of health-related benefits and align fiscal policy with the national goal of reducing economic inactivity.
Breeze further maintained that the government needs to expand Access to Work Grants and streamline processes to support SMEs in offering health-related benefits and foster public-private sector partnerships to co-fund occupational health services for sectors with high inactivity rates.
“The Keep Britain Working review is right: this is a systemic issue,” he continued.
“But systemic change requires shared responsibility. Employers must invest in health and protection benefits, and the government must incentivise them to do so.
“Without these measures, the ambition of an 80% employment rate will remain aspirational rather than achievable.”