Study of more than 8,000 midlife women weakens the productivity case for UK menopause plans

Davis presented the finding at the International Menopause Society's World Congress in Rio de Janeiro ^[8]. It goes after the productivity argument for these plans and leaves the legal duty where it was ^[6]. In a 2025 systematic review in the journal Menopause, Davis had already reported that menopausal status alone was not consistently associated with work outcomes ^[9]. The same review found the evidence that symptoms harm work ability was mixed, and possibly confounded by other factors in middle-aged women's working lives ^[9]. The new work goes further. Among women in work, menopause was not associated with absenteeism, presenteeism, productivity loss or poor work ability ^[2].

Davis has been blunt about the policy. She told The Times that the UK measures were "ahead of the knowledge" ^[12]. "The policies have been driven by emotion and insufficient fact," she said. "I believe in evidence. I am all for health policy based on data. And if you have a health or workplace policy not based on data, there is the potential for long-term harm." ^[13]

The study has limits. It is cross-sectional and still undergoing peer review ^[10], so it shows association at one point in time, and its review is not finished. We do not know yet whether the reviewed version will hold. On Davis's account, the evidence behind the policy is weaker. The Women and Equalities Committee's 2022 report cited Bupa research that "almost 900,000 women in the UK had left their jobs because of menopausal symptoms" ^[3]. Davis told The Times that figure was extrapolated from a survey of 1,000 women that included women who left because they were pregnant ^[4]. "That's not menopause," she said ^[5]. The AMY sample is more than eight times the size of that survey ^[17].

Sample design matters here as much as size. Dr Jen Gunter, a gynaecologist who attended the Rio congress, wrote on her Substack that it was "very important" the AMY survey was advertised as a midlife survey, not a menopause-at-work survey ^[14]. In surveys advertised by topic, she wrote, "people for whom the advertised survey topic is personally relevant are more likely to respond, distorting the sample" ^[15].

For an employer with more than 250 staff, the trade-off is between two kinds of plan. One leads with visible menopause provision. Champions in every workplace and awareness training for all employees are among the initiatives Personnel Today lists ^[7]. The other puts money into the job and health factors the AMY data did tie to poor work ability ^[11]. That kind is harder to present as a menopause plan. Personnel Today's account does not say which initiatives the Office for Equality and Opportunity guidance requires ^[7].

The menopause framing carries its own risk. The AMY researchers concluded that "over-attribution of work difficulties to menopausal symptoms risks widening workplace gender inequalities" ^[18]. "I'm strongly against this whole focus on perimenopause in the workplace," Davis told The Times ^[16]. A plan published voluntarily this year sets the content an employer will report against once the duty applies, next to its gender pay gap figures ^[6]. In my view, the safer plan to publish until the reviewed Rio paper appears is one that commits money only to measures the evidence supports ^[10].