Social media addiction at work: why UK managers need to take it seriously
- Paul Kleian
- Mar 27
- 6 min read
A US court case may have grabbed the headlines recently, but the issue affecting businesses is much closer to home. Problematic social media use is not just a teenage safeguarding concern as the US court found. It can affect concentration, judgement, safety, wellbeing and performance at work too.
The question for employers is no longer whether this exists, but whether managers know how to spot it and respond properly.
In March 2026, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google liable in a landmark case involving harm linked to a young woman’s use of Instagram and YouTube, awarding $6 million in damages. The companies were found negligent in the design or operation of their platforms and liable for failing to warn adequately about the risks. Both are expected to appeal. Whatever happens next legally, the wider public message is already clear: concerns about compulsive digital behaviour are no longer being dismissed as overreaction.
For UK employers, that matters because this is not really a story about one claimant in California. It is a story about attention, habit, reward, distraction and dependency. Those things do not magically switch off when someone starts work.
According to Ofcom’s Online Nation 2025, UK adults aged 24+ spend an average of 4 hours 30 minutes online each day, while 18 to 24-year-olds average 6 hours 20 minutes. That is a huge amount of daily exposure to platforms built to hold attention, trigger repeat checking and keep people engaged.
BUPA’s 2025 workplace research adds a direct workplace warning. In its survey data, 34% of employees said they had used or witnessed addictive behaviours relating to mobile devices and social media during work hours, 48% said they, themselves had turned to addictive behaviours to cope with workplace stress, 57% said they had struggled with some form of addiction, and 71% of employers said they were concerned about addiction-related issues at work. Bupa explicitly included social media among the behaviours under discussion.
The academic literature points the same way. Gao and Shao’s 2024 systematic review of 42 studies found that problematic social media use was associated with employee work-related and psychological outcomes, and argued that the issue has practical implications for managers and workplace psychologists. That is not tabloid panic, it is a growing evidence base.
What does addictive digital behaviour at work look like?
The phrase itself can sound a bit dramatic, which is one reason organisations sometimes avoid it. In practice, the signs are often less dramatic and more familiar.
They can include
repeated checking of phones during tasks or meetings,
loss of concentration,
irritability when interrupted,
poor attention to detail,
sleep-related fatigue,
secrecy about screen use,
mood dips linked to online interactions,
and people who look busy but are mentally somewhere else.
Over time, this can slide into presenteeism, weaker judgement, lower productivity and strained working relationships. That pattern is consistent with the research linking problematic social media use to poorer employee outcomes and wellbeing.
Of course that risk manifests itself differently in different workplaces. . .
In offices roles, the damage can be quiet but expensive
In office, finance, customer service, HR and admin environments, the most obvious effect is divided attention. Someone may switch constantly between tasks and notifications, struggle to complete routine work without interruption, make avoidable errors, miss key details in emails or spreadsheets, or drift in and out of meetings.
On the surface, that can look like poor organisation or low motivation. In reality, it may be a pattern of compulsive checking leading to poor attention. In roles involving confidential data, payroll, procurement, scheduling or client communication, even small lapses can have consequences. A missed figure, a mistyped date or email, or a failure to notice an attachment has not gone can all be costly.
Where staff are using screens most of the time, employers have clear health and safety duties. HSE says employers must protect workers from the risks of display screens and must provide training, information, assessments and suitable breaks or changes of activity.
That matters because in screen-heavy jobs, unhealthy non-work digital habits can pile on top of already intensive screen use. The result may be more fatigue, fewer proper breaks, poorer posture, eye strain and reduced recovery time. HSE’s guidance for home workers is especially clear that workers need training in good posture and good working practices, and that work should be planned to allow breaks or changes of activity.
In industrial settings, distraction can become a safety issue
In warehouses, workshops, production lines, loading areas and plant environments, distraction is not only inefficient. It can be dangerous.
A worker who is semi-focussed on a phone may be slower to register movement, less alert to hazards, more likely to miss instructions, and less able to react quickly around vehicles, machinery or lifting operations. Even when a person is not visibly using a phone, compulsive preoccupation with notifications or online content can reduce situational awareness.
There is good reason for managers to take that seriously. RoSPA states that a substantial body of research shows using a hand-held or hands-free mobile phone while driving is a significant distraction and substantially increases crash risk. That evidence is about driving specifically, but the management lesson is broader: attention is a safety-critical resource. Where work depends on awareness, timing and fast decisions, digital distraction is not a minor matter.
Working from home can hide the problem
At home, compulsive digital behaviour is easier to miss because there is less direct oversight and more room for habits to blur together. A person can appear available on Teams, answer messages quickly, and still be struggling with fragmented attention, poor sleep, endless switching between work and non-work content, or stress-driven scrolling.
ACAS says employers are responsible for employees’ health, safety and wellbeing when working from home as well as in the workplace. Its guidance notes that home workers can find it harder to switch off, may work longer hours, and should take regular rest breaks away from a screen.
That is important, because digital overuse at home often feeds a cycle: poor boundaries lead to more screen time, more screen time leads to fatigue, fatigue weakens concentration, and lower concentration increases the temptation to seek quick stimulation or escape online. The employee may not appear unwell in any obvious sense. They may simply become less consistent, more distracted, more tired and less resilient.
Managers can miss that for months if they are not trained to recognise the signs.
Policies matter!
A lot of organisations have policies covering alcohol, drugs, misconduct, attendance and general wellbeing. Far fewer say anything useful about problematic digital behaviour.
That gap matters because without clear guidance, managers are left to guess whether they are looking at a conduct issue, a capability issue, a wellbeing issue or some combination of all three. Some will ignore the problem because they are worried about sounding intrusive. Others will come down too heavily and turn an early warning sign into conflict. Some are living with the issue themselves and are blind to it.
What is needed is a sensible middle ground: policies that acknowledge digital risks, and managers who know how to use judgement. That means understanding what to look for, how to start a conversation, how to separate occasional overuse from a developing pattern, how to document concerns fairly, and how to signpost to support.
Questions you should be asking now:
Would your current HR policies help a manager deal with harmful digital behaviour in a fair and practical way?
Would your managers recognise the signs if a team member’s social media use was beginning to affect concentration, behaviour, reliability or safety?
Would they know how to raise it sympathetically rather than making it worse?
Would they know where to direct that employee for help?
If the answer to any of those questions is “probably not”, your business is at risk.
From concern to practical action
The point here is not to demonise technology. Social media can inform, connect and support people. But when use becomes compulsive, stress-driven or disruptive, the workplace feels the impact.
That impact will look different in a warehouse, on a roadside, in a housing office, at a kitchen table, or in a finance team but the common thread is the same: diminished attention, blurred boundaries, reduced judgement and avoidable risk.
At Ozone3, we help organisations
review HR policies,
train managers to spot the signs of harmful digital behaviour,
address concerns sympathetically
and consistently, and signpost staff towards appropriate support.
Please read this as an early warning, not a passing headline. Then decide whether your managers are genuinely equipped to deal with it.
You can contact us for a free confidential discussion via the form below or a phone call.
References:
Acas (2025) Wellbeing when working from home.
Bupa (2025) 1 in 3 workers admit to on-the-job substance use or addictive behaviour.
Gao, S. and Shao, Q. (2024) ‘Problematic Social Media Use and Employee Outcomes’, SAGE Open.
HSE (2025) Working safely with display screen equipment and related guidance on home working, breaks, assessments and training.
Ofcom (2025) Online Nation 2025.
Reuters (2026) Coverage of the Los Angeles jury verdict in the Meta/Google social media addiction case, 25 March 2026.
RoSPA (2025) Driver distraction and related employer guidance on mobile phone use and work-related driving.
Comments