The UK’s clocks will move back this Sunday, meaning millions will finish their workday in darkness for the first time since last autumn. But the signs have been there for a while; it can hardly have escaped anyone’s notice that it is no longer exactly light at 6pm. A software firm’s analysis of Office for National Statistics data reveals how much this shift affects daily life—and how little has changed since the practice began over a century ago.
More than three days of work in the dark by Christmas
Retain, which specializes in capacity planning, calculated that UK employees will spend an average of 31 minutes per day working in the dark after the change. By Christmas, that adds up to roughly 23 hours, nearly three full workdays, of commuting, meetings, and tasks completed under artificial light. The firm described the finding as “staggering,” though workplace journalists noted the pattern isn’t new. “This mucking about with clocks has been going on for some time,” one veteran observed. Still, the data shows a persistent frustration: more than 60% of Britons say they’d prefer to keep British Summer Time year-round, according to YouGov.
The roots of the twice-yearly adjustment trace back to 1907, when builder William Willett, great-great-grandfather of Coldplay’s Chris Martin, proposed shifting clocks to make better use of daylight. His idea became law in 1916, though the autumn reversal remains controversial. Willett’s great-grandson later penned Clocks, a song that captures the unease of time’s relentless march without mentioning productivity. We can even pin this on an individual who died 111 years ago: the builder Willett himself, whose original proposal sought to balance spring sunshine with autumn’s return to Greenwich Mean Time.
Read Also: UK struggles to fill skilled jobs despite falling migration
Productivity dips and the battle for daylight
Retain’s analysis suggests the shift takes a toll. Employees report lower energy and focus when commuting or working in darkness, particularly in northern regions where daylight fades earliest. The firm recommends scheduling demanding tasks during daylight hours and setting clearer work-life boundaries to offset the effect. Rachel Paterson, marketing director at Retain, says, “While we can’t control the number of daylight hours in the day, there are several practical steps we can take at work to avoid productivity dips and burnout before they happen.” The advice, aligning focus with natural light, avoiding late-night meetings, mirrors long-standing HR guidance. Yet the reality often falls short. Many workers, the data implies, are left scrambling to adapt.
Adam McCulloch, who has covered HR for Personnel Today since rejoining in 2017, notes that while daylight saving’s productivity impact is debated, its disruption is undeniable. His earlier career as a sub-editor in the 1990s and later freelance work across sectors, from aviation to social work, has given him a broad perspective on workplace rhythms. The shift’s effects, he observes, are felt most keenly by those in roles requiring sustained concentration, where artificial lighting cannot fully compensate for lost daylight.
Why the clock change endures, and who benefits
The persistence of daylight saving, despite widespread discontent, reflects deeper economic and social forces. Willett’s original pitch centered on energy savings and leisure time, but modern critiques focus on productivity losses. McCulloch’s interest in industrial relations, sparked by witnessing a tense 1984 confrontation between Arthur Scargill and Ian McGregor while working as a temp, highlights how workplace tensions often mirror broader societal shifts. The clock change, like many long-standing practices, persists not because it’s universally loved, but because the alternatives require political will.
Leave a Reply