Building workplace resilience to rising temperatures

A series of recommendations by the Climate Change Committee (CCC) includes calls for a national maximum temperature for workplaces to protect workers’ safety and incentivise the deployment of cooling. How can this and other measures help FMs respond to rising UK temperatures?

THE HR CONSULTANT’S VIEW
TRACEY BURKE,
SENIOR HR CONSULTANT, WORKNEST

As UK summers become hotter and more frequent heatwaves become the norm, employers are increasingly having to think beyond air conditioning and building management when considering their response to rising temperatures. The Climate Change Committee’s recommendation for a national maximum workplace temperature has reignited debate about how organisations can better protect employee health, safety and wellbeing in hot conditions.

While there is currently no legal maximum workplace temperature in the UK, employers already have a duty to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of their workforce. Introducing a maximum temperature threshold could provide greater clarity for employers and employees alike, helping organisations assess risks more consistently and encouraging investment in cooling measures where necessary.

However, temperature limits alone are unlikely to be enough. Effective heat management requires a broader, risk-based approach that recognises that different employees, roles and workplaces will be affected in different ways. Facilities teams play a vital role in maintaining comfortable working environments through ventilation, shading, cooling systems and building design, but HR policies and people management practices are equally important.

Employers should review workplace risk assessments during periods of hot weather and consider whether additional controls are needed. Attention should be paid to vulnerable workers, including pregnant employees, older workers, those with underlying health conditions and employees undertaking physically demanding tasks.

Simple adjustments can make a significant difference. Allowing more frequent rest breaks, providing access to cool drinking water, rotating physically strenuous duties and scheduling demanding work for cooler parts of the day can help reduce the risk of heat-related illness. Where possible, employers should also consider offering greater flexibility around working hours or enabling hybrid and remote working arrangements during extreme weather events.

Dress codes are another area where employers can demonstrate a practical and proportionate response. Many organisations already relax requirements during hot weather, allowing lighter clothing while maintaining appropriate standards of professionalism and safety. This can improve comfort and productivity without creating operational challenges.

Communication is equally important. Employees should understand the signs of heat stress, dehydration and heat exhaustion. They should know how to report concerns and feel confident that any issues raised will be taken seriously. Managers should be trained to recognise when staff may be struggling and empowered to make reasonable adjustments where necessary.

Ultimately, the conversation around maximum workplace temperatures should be viewed as part of a wider adaptation strategy. Rising temperatures are not a temporary challenge but a long-term workplace issue. Organisations that combine physical workplace improvements with flexible people policies, clear communication and robust risk assessment processes will be better placed to protect employee wellbeing, maintain productivity and meet their legal obligations as the UK’s climate continues to change. 

THE CHARTERED INSTITUTION OF BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERS’ VIEW
DR ANASTASIA MYLONA,
TECHNICAL DIRECTOR, CIBSE

The Climate Change Committee’s recommendation for a national maximum workplace temperature reflects a growing reality: overheating in buildings is no longer a future risk but a current challenge that affects occupant health, wellbeing, comfort and productivity.

Setting an upper thermal comfort limit, however, presents a significant challenge. Thermal comfort is shaped by a complex interaction of environmental, physiological, behavioural and psychological factors. People’s tolerance to heat varies depending on age, health status, activity level, clothing, acclimatisation and cultural expectations, meaning a single temperature threshold cannot adequately represent all occupants. In addition, adaptive opportunities such as opening windows, adjusting clothing or using fans can significantly influence perceptions of comfort and acceptability.

Climate change further complicates this picture, as populations are increasingly exposed to higher outdoor temperatures and more frequent heatwaves, shifting expectations as well as increasing health risks. As a result, defining an upper thermal comfort limit requires balancing occupant comfort, health protection, energy efficiency and resilience, while recognising the diversity of building types and occupant vulnerabilities. This makes universally applicable overheating criteria both technically complex and highly context dependent.

For facilities managers, measures such as workplace temperature thresholds can help raise awareness of overheating risks and encourage proactive action to improve building resilience. However, the response should not be limited to increasing the use of conventional air conditioning.

While cooling technologies will undoubtedly play an important role in some settings, particularly where vulnerable occupants are involved, an overreliance on air conditioning risks increasing electricity demand and costs. This places additional pressure on energy infrastructure during peak summer periods and contributes to the urban heat island effect.

The most effective approach is to prioritise reducing overheating risk at source, through a fabric-first, passive and whole-system strategy. This includes measures such as solar shading, effective ventilation, thermal mass, improved building operations, urban greening and the use of intelligent building controls.

Facilities managers have a key role to play in implementing and optimising these measures across existing building portfolios. Where active cooling is required, the focus should be on highly efficient, low-carbon solutions that provide cooling while supporting the transition to a net zero energy system.

THE SUSTAINABILITY SOLUTIONS EXPERT’S VIEW
STEVE MOLLOY,
SUSTAINABILITY & COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS MANAGER, DAIKIN

UK buildings are increasingly having to cope with temperatures they were never originally designed for. While introducing a maximum temperature threshold would help protect occupant wellbeing and productivity, it should also serve as a catalyst for organisations to assess whether their existing cooling infrastructure can meet future demands.

A key first step is reviewing the findings of the building’s most recent TM44 air conditioning inspection. If recommendations or required actions were identified, it is important to establish whether these have been implemented. TM44 inspections highlight inefficiencies, control issues or maintenance requirements that can significantly affect cooling performance during periods of hot weather.

Rising numbers of complaints about overheating, inconsistent temperatures or poor comfort levels may indicate that systems are no longer operating effectively or that cooling demand has changed. Facilities managers should investigate whether these issues stem from equipment performance, control strategies or changes within the building.

Many buildings have evolved considerably since their HVAC systems were originally installed. Increased occupancy levels, changes to layouts, new IT equipment or repurposed spaces can all alter cooling requirements. Where building usage has changed, it is important to assess whether the HVAC system was appropriately modified and recommissioned to match the new demands. Systems that were once fit for purpose may now be undersized, inefficient or unable to deliver cooling where it is needed most.

Controls are another critical area for review. In many cases, cooling systems are technically capable of meeting demand, but ineffective control strategies prevent them from operating efficiently. Facilities managers should evaluate whether systems are being controlled correctly, ensuring cooling is delivered at the right time, in the right locations and only when required. Optimised controls not only improve occupant comfort but can also reduce energy consumption and operating costs.

Asset lifecycle planning should also form part of the conversation. Understanding how much operational life remains in existing equipment enables facilities managers to develop proactive replacement strategies rather than reacting to failures during extreme weather events. Due to rapid advances in VRV technology in the past 10 years, modern HVAC technologies can deliver significant improvements in efficiency, resilience and controllability compared to older systems.

Where facilities management companies subcontract air conditioning services, technicians should be properly trained and familiar with the equipment installed within the building. Manufacturer-supported training programmes and accredited partner networks can help ensure systems are maintained, optimised and serviced in line with best practice.

As workplace temperatures continue to rise, regulatory measures may provide an important framework for action. However, the most effective response will come from facilities managers taking a strategic approach to assessing, optimising and future-proofing their cooling infrastructure today.

THE LEGAL EXPERT’S VIEW
NATALIE PEACOCK,
EMPLOYMENT LAWYER, ROGERS AND NORTON

Many workers wrongly believe there is a legal maximum temperature for offices and workplaces in the UK, but employers can still face serious consequences if they fail to keep staff safe as employers still owe a duty of care to their staff. Personally, I have worked in different offices, some with air conditioning and some without air conditioning and surrounded by glass windows. I know which one I prefer. Although employers are not obliged to install air conditioning, the law requires employers to take reasonable steps to ensure the workplace is safe.

Heat is a foreseeable risk which employers are expected to manage. Failing to manage the risk can amount to a breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act. Workers should expect employers to take practical steps during heatwaves, including allowing extra breaks and making sure staff can stay cool and hydrated.

Employers must consider carrying out risk assessments regarding hot weather and its impact on their workforce. They should consider ensuring breaks are taken and providing facilities for their workforce to stay hydrated. They should also consider workplace ventilation and providing shelter/shade for outdoor workers. Some employers I have dealt with also consider providing their workforce with free suncream and fans.

Any workers struggling in the heat may also be able to ask for flexible hours or permission to work from home during the hottest parts of the day. To reduce the impact of extreme heat on their workforce, employers may consider making simple, temporary adjustments, such as flexible hours for working during cooler parts of the day or agreeing to requests for working from home.

Duties to protect employees continue even when working from home. Employers should carry out homeworking risk assessments and may consider providing fans for their employees’ homes. In addition, any workers with medical conditions affected by heat could have extra legal protections if employers fail to make reasonable adjustments.

Extreme heat can cause health issues which the employer may be liable for if they have not taken reasonable steps to prevent exposure to the heat. Employees with medical conditions aggravated by heat may require reasonable adjustments, leaving employers at risk of claims for disability discrimination. Ultimately, while employers cannot control the weather, there are steps they can take to protect their workforce which not only improves comfort but helps sustain performance during a heatwave.

THE HVAC EXPERT’S VIEW
RICHARD BEELEY,
NATIONAL COMMERCIAL FM MANAGER, WOLSELEY COMMERCIAL FM

Protecting both critical assets and, more importantly, people, must be a priority for every facilities manager. When temperatures rise, so do the risks of reduced productivity, system failures and genuine health and safety concerns. This isn’t just about comfort; it’s about safeguarding workplaces and keeping operations running safely and effectively.

The UK is experiencing more frequent and intense periods of hot weather, and many buildings were not originally designed to cope with prolonged high temperatures. As a result, facilities managers are increasingly being challenged to balance occupant comfort, energy efficiency and operational resilience. The recommendations from the Climate Change Committee are therefore a welcome step towards helping organisations prepare for a future where extreme heat becomes more commonplace.

We need to stop reacting to heat and start planning for it. That means investing in smarter ventilation, effective cooling strategies, and ensuring buildings are fit for purpose in extreme conditions. However, cooling solutions must also be considered through a sustainability lens. FMs should look to optimise existing systems, improve building controls, reduce solar gain through shading, and ensure HVAC equipment is operating as efficiently as possible before considering more energy-intensive interventions. A proactive approach can improve comfort levels while supporting wider net zero and energy reduction goals.

Above all, it means putting people first. Simple, practical steps – such as adapting working hours, providing access to cooler environments, encouraging regular hydration, and ensuring clear communication around heat-related risks can make an immediate difference. But without clear direction, these measures risk being applied inconsistently across organisations and sectors.

That’s why strong, unambiguous guidance for employers is critical. A defined maximum workplace temperature sets a clear expectation, removes uncertainty, and forces the right conversations at leadership level. It drives accountability, supports long-term investment in building resilience, and ensures that protecting people is not optional.

I fully support stronger regulation in this area. As temperatures continue to rise, we must be equally committed to raising our standards. Protecting our people in extreme conditions isn’t just good practice, it’s non-negotiable.