Why employees still put off getting help with mental health worries

In a survey of 8,000 UK employees, Bupa has found that 71% had gone to work while struggling with their mental health. Overall, 56% had delayed getting professional help for mental and physical conditions because they didn’t want to take time off.

In spite of the changing attitudes to mental health, workers are still reluctant to risk showing they aren’t fully engaged or available. One third believed that taking time off for health reasons might affect their career prospects. Anxieties about the cost of living were given as a leading reason for avoiding time off.

Work first, health second

The current state of the economy, financial worries and the need to stay in jobs meant wellbeing issues had to be put on hold, according to around half of those surveyed for the Bupa Wellbeing Index.

At the same time, 22% also admitted that ignoring the symptoms of illness had led to them needing more urgent medical interventions. Poor mental wellbeing was a major reason why 24% had left their job (18% for people with physical health issues).

Showing commitment

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “The availability of health support, all the different services and channels from EAPs to NHS centres, evidently isn’t an answer in itself. People need to feel confident that the attitudes towards them among line managers and colleagues won’t be affected.

“In their communications and advice to managers, HR need to be emphasising the importance of encouraging openness about mental health conditions — not just as a talking point, as something that’s now accepted, but as an issue that will sometimes involve flexibility and understanding in practice. People might be more willing to admit to suffering from anxiety and depression but that doesn’t help if they’re still insecure about what that really means for their job.

“Employees will occasionally need time off to access advise and support early on. And small amounts of disruption to routines now are far preferable to longer periods of absence, disengagement and problems with retention later.”

Health and wellbeing support is being used to prevent long-term absence — but what actually works?

58% of employers in a survey of 500 senior HR professionals in the UK said that long-term employee absence was having a “high to severe” impact on their operations. 30% said short-term absences were the cause of the same level of problems.

Most commonly the causes were chronic illnesses, heart disease and diabetes (28%); acute medical conditions such as cancer or stroke (27%). But in combination, the most prevalent causes are home-life-related depression or anxiety accounted (21%) and work-related stress (18%).

Absence and the causes are tracked…

Among those surveyed, 89% felt their organisation has a “good understanding” of absence and causes. And 61% use their health and wellbeing offerings in general as preventative measures to limit absence. 15% don’t use health and wellbeing support specifically for its impact on absence.

The most used interventions to help staff return to work are the offer of flexible working arrangements (42%), counselling for mental health (34%) and occupational health support (25%).

…but the impact of efforts to limit absence usually aren’t

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “A clear understanding of the picture on absence is the first stage. Its essential for informing a health and wellbeing strategy: what issues should be targeted for advice and support, among which groups in the employee population.

“But given the degree of the implications of both long and short-term absence, the disruption, the strain on colleagues, there needs to be more attention to what health and wellbeing interventions have an impact, that help to prevent or limit the extent of long-term absence. In other words, as EAP providers and employers with common challenges, we should be aiming for a stage where data is being shared on what works, when and for which conditions and types of employee.”

Why do 42% of people trust AI more than a mental health professional?

The new AXA Mind Health Report 2026 claims that more than one in three adults in the UK are “impacted by poor mental health” — the highest level in Europe, and third worst in the world (based on a global survey among 19,000 18 to 75 year-olds).

The findings point to the existence of barriers to accessing professional support: 60% saying they haven’t visited a mental health professional in the past 12 months; 25% fearing they would be be stigmatised or judged negatively for doing so.

This has potentially led to people using technology as a replacement for medical help, with almost half (46 per cent) of Brits turning to AI tools for mental health support, although this is below the global average of 63 per cent. A third (33 per cent) use AI tools to self-manage their mental health and 42 per cent trust them more than a mental health professional for guidance.

Preferring AI

More people are using AI (46%) as an easier, less visible option, with 42% saying they trusted the software tool more than using a professional service.

At the same time, the evidence highlights a mixed picture when it comes to experiences using AI. 57% found the tools helpful; 43% were dissatisfied with the advice received. Significantly, 27% claimed that some of the AI recommendations had “led them to engage in harmful behaviour”.

No replacement

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “In many situations AI can be a useful tool. But in this new world we have to ensure there’s a balance with AI only being used for mental health advice and support in particular situations — and not as a replacement for expert, human contact and relationships.

“The findings highlight the challenges faced by our sector. It’s been an age-old issue that employees have tended to see EAPs as a service that people use in a crisis. More than ever, there needs to be work alongside employers to ensure that accessing an EAP isn’t seen as a sign of weakness, that confidentiality is assured, and more employees use services earlier to deal with minor problems before they escalate.”

Why ‘healthy jobs’ will revive the UK economy

A focus on investing in ‘good work’ is the key to dealing with the UK’s high levels of economic inactivity, according to the New Economics Foundation think tank.

Its report The Good Work Effect: How High-Quality Work Can Lead a Jobs Recovery, is based on research into the link between poor job quality and the likelihood of leaving work. The evidence from this suggests that employees in roles that are rigid, insecure, or lacking in managerial support will be likely to drop out of the jobs market when their health, mental or physical, is affected.

Authors point to how inactivity is the result of “cumulative pressures, rather than single shocks” and small differences in the nature of jobs can make a big difference to employee experience and attitudes.

Healthy jobs

By contrast, the data points to how employees in ‘healthy jobs’ — defined as jobs with greater levels of autonomy when it comes to their work hours and tasks performed, with some sense of job security, and where there’s the chance to speak up and be listened to — were disproportionately protected against needing to leave their job because of illness.

The New Economics Foundation has called for the government to invest in a “good-jobs-led economic recovery” based on a higher employment rate, rather than any growth in more ‘flexible’ but also more precarious job roles. The issue will only become more urgent as UK society continues to age and more people in the workforce will need to manage health conditions alongside paid work.

The best preventative care

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “Our experience from decades of providing EAPs tells us that good work is the best form of preventative care. No level of health and wellbeing support, none of the perks like gym memberships, health insurance or access to GP services, can compensate for feeling constantly insecure, unvalued and losing control of tasks and what can be delivered.

“This is why it’s so important that employers talk to their EAP partner about the available evidence on their people and how they’re feeling, picking up as early as possible on any trends in terms of increased stress and anxiety, and how issues like job design, performance targets, team culture and managerial styles are affecting employees.”

Should there be mandatory reporting of psychosocial risks in workplaces?

Economists at the University of Sydney have highlighted the rise of ‘workplace depression’ in the UK. In a survey of 20,000 UK employees, 49% said their jobs had “made them feel depressed at least some of the time in the past few weeks”. The main cause was found to be not having enough time to do tasks required, the need for multi-tasking and lack of autonomy.

The researchers call for the introduction of mandatory reporting by firms of psychosocial hazards, of  “any aspects of a workplace or its culture that can cause psychological or physical harm” — similar to the current measures around reporting on gender pay gaps.

Hazards in the window

The reporting, the University argues, would incentivise organisations to improve workplace cultures and working conditions, and allow employees and potential employees to compare the performance of employers, and make informed choices about who they want to work for.

It points to the government scheme, Safe Work Australia, which already demands that businesses monitor and consult on psychosocial hazards.

Better now

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “Given the wider social and economic costs from poor mental health, long-term illnesses and economic inactivity, the scrutiny of employers and workplace cultures is only going to keep growing.

“It would be sensible for HR leaders to plan for the future and look at how they can, first of all, understand where the pressure points are in their organisation, working with their EAP partner. And then look at using the evidence to track where extra support to changes are needed to prevent ordinary stresses and pressures turning into mental health problems that are damaging to everyone involved. If voluntary reporting becomes commonplace, or mandatory measures are necessary, then the pro-active employers will be in position to embrace the new situation and take advantage.”

Investors call for greater focus on mental wellbeing support in workplaces

The impact of employee mental health on bottom line performance and investment risk has been flagged by CCLA Investment Management.

Its Corporate Mental Health Benchmark UK 100 highlighted an increased engagement and interest among employers in the mental wellbeing issue. But the research also found that only 41% use data insights on what’s actually happening in workplaces to inform their mental health strategy.

Performance factor

The Benchmark is a signal of the growing attention among investors and the financial sector in general to how organisations manage the new risks around employee mental health and what that means for overall business performance.

“Organisations are now facing a new wave of challenges, including economic uncertainty, geopolitical instability, rapid technological shifts, and the escalating effects of climate change,” said CCLA. “In this increasingly complex environment, the pressures on employees’ mental resilience continue to grow, making it essential for businesses to maintain a strong focus on supporting the mental health and well-being of their people.”

The data is all there

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “Investors know that poorly supported employees, just like business models that aren’t designed to meet the challenges of climate change and the need for sustainability, are a real danger when it comes to their money.

“Not using the data available from EAPAs means mental wellbeing support programmes can remain a token activity. There has to be a joined up approach using the evidence on issues and trends among specific demographic elements of an organisation to keep on building and developing the types of support offered, and to understand what the underlying causes may be in terms of workplace environments and pressures.”

Are mental health concerns being used as an excuse for youth unemployment?

The number of 16-24 year-olds in the UK who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) has reached the highest level in 12 years. 60% of all NEETs haven’t ever had a job. And this comes with implications for taxpayers, an estimated £125 billion a year.

The Department for Work and Pension’s independent review of the issue has been led by Alan Milburn, concluding that the rises have been caused by the changing nature of work opportunities (the impact of technologies such as AI) and the ‘epidemic’ of mental health issues among younger people. A ‘solutions’ report is expected this year.

Worries about the work ethic

The review has included evidence from employers that suggests a lack of drive and initiative among young people. There can be a low number of applicants for less attractive role, many no-shows for interviews (including for apprenticeships and training roles), and in general, more young people who are willing to point to mental health issues when faced with work demands and issues of performance.

As a result, there is criticism among commentators of how school education and the wider culture has focused on wellbeing at the expense of resilience and the work ethic.

Work for wellbeing

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “Rather than a problem for organisations, the issue of youth unemployment is an opportunity. We know that being in work is the foundation for good mental health for the great majority of employees. It means a basis of financial security, a sense of purpose and belonging, challenges and rewards and friendships as a daily routine.

“There are always going to be trade-offs between those benefits and the pressures involved with workplaces and meeting the demands and expectations that come with them — but good employers are able to get the balance right, through thoughtful job design, management practices and attention to health and wellbeing in general as part of the deal.

“The issue of NEETs is the chance for employers to make this case and to demonstrate how much they do for the health of the nation and for those people, whatever age they might be, who are willing to take on challenges and responsibilities.”

Do HR professionals need tailored treatment over mental health?

A new ‘HR mental wellbeing report 2026’ among 3,000 HR professionals over the course of three years has found that only 13% felt their mental health had been “well supported” at work.

Low mood and depression had affected 74%; and 44% believed they had experienced symptoms of clinical depression (compared with the national average in the UK population of 18%). Anxiety was reported by 73% (40% at a clinically significant level) compared with 15% nationally. The report, carried out by Ultimate Resilience and Everywhen, suggested that 38% of the staff surveyed were considering leaving the profession as a result.

Tailored health for HR

The findings also point to the value of wellbeing support: the HR professionals who did feel supported by their employer reported how they were less likely to be dealing with the symptoms of anxiety, depression and burnout, and less likely to be taking sick leave because of stress or thinking about leaving the profession.

The complexity and demands on HR, argues the report authors, means that the usual signposting to an EAP and advice on wellbeing and mental health isn’t enough for people in those roles. Instead, they say, employers should be provided with services tailored to their particular needs, including “access to tailored mental health support and structured supervision”, along with “psychologically-informed reflective spaces, such as HR supervision”. Specific communications are needed to understand the needs of HR teams.

What’s happening?

EAPA UK chair, Karl Bennett said: “Of all the functions within an organisation, HR should be the most aware of the advice around mental health and wellbeing, and the different kinds of support services available. So what’s going wrong?

“It may be that some HR professionals feel that services like the EAP are for other people, not themselves — as well as there being a level of overfamiliarity, an assumption they know the general advice and what an EAP is for, its critical value in helping people at early stages and to defuse potential problems.

“All types and levels of workers face their own kinds of pressures and challenges, and for HR teams to receive special treatment in terms of tailoring, given the range of services that are already available, feels unnecessary and a misunderstanding of the underlying causes.”

Our EAP: Accor Hotels

For an employer like hotel group Accor, the large workforce involved ranges widely across ages and backgrounds, as well as types of role and long to short-term involvements. An EAP had to be flexible enough to work for 4,500 UK employees in its London HQ and a network of hotels across the country, from senior managers to temporary staff.

‘Hospitality burnout’ has been identified as a particular risk for the sector — a result of the constant pressures or ‘emotional labour’ that comes with delivering hotel services to customers with high expectations.

With this in mind, Accor introduced a single platform for access to support on both physical and mental health, alongside a particular focus on issues such as the cost of living and financial wellbeing, and a menopause helpline.

“We needed a one-stop solution for our diverse and multi-generational UK-based workforce which would be easy to use and accessible while bringing together existing and new benefits,” said Fran Carr, Talent and Culture Director UK/Ireland & Nordics, Accor Hotels. “The menopause helpline, in particular, will support a large proportion of our employees.” 

The centralised, health management platform includes 24/7 access to counselling arrangements, face-to-face and virtual, online GP services and financial wellbeing tools. The EAP is focused on personalised attention, with the opportunity to undertake wellbeing assessments and set personal goals.

Menopause Action Plans: From obligation to opportunity

Ann O’Neill, CEO and Co-founder, Adora Digital Health:

Something significant shifted in April 2026. Employers with 250 or more employees can now voluntarily publish a Menopause Action Plan under the Employment Rights Act 2025 – and from April 2027, it becomes mandatory.

For those of us working in employee wellbeing, this should feel like a long-overdue moment of recognition. For employers, it is also a moment of real legal consequence.

The stakes are higher than many HR teams yet realise. The same legislation reduces the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims from two years to just six months, effective January 2027, and removes the cap on compensation entirely. Menopause-related performance management or absence handling that falls short of the standard – already capable of engaging protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 – could now carry dramatically greater financial and reputational exposure.

But I want to focus on the opportunity, not just the obligation. The guidance asks employers to take meaningful action across six areas: manager training, peer support networks, workplace adjustments, risk assessments, policy review, and access to occupational health. Employers must demonstrate progress on at least one. The Government has made clear it wants to see lasting change, not tick-box compliance – and will publish a list of organisations that fail to submit.

What does meaningful action actually look like? In my experience, it starts with women feeling seen. Many are quietly managing severe symptoms — disrupted sleep, brain fog, anxiety, joint pain — while trying to maintain performance and presence at work. They are often unsure whether what they are experiencing is menopause, whether to disclose it, or where to turn. The pathway to support is frequently unclear and slow.

Employers who invest in changing that experience — through education, clinical access, and a culture where women’s health is spoken about openly — will not only meet their legal obligations. They will retain experienced female talent at a critical career stage, and signal to their wider workforce that they take inclusion seriously.

The menopause action plan is not a policy exercise. It is a chance to do something that genuinely matters.

Ann O’Neill is CEO and co-founder of Adora Digital Health, a clinically led digital platform supporting women with their menstrual health through perimenopause and menopause. Adora provides personalised assessments, symptom tracking, expert-led webinars, clinical drop-ins, specialist consultations, and manager education tools designed to help employers build credible, compliant menopause action plans.