Shift Work Isn’t Broken – But How We Manage It Might Be
Shift work has always been part of how certain industries operate. Healthcare, logistics, aviation, manufacturing – these sectors don’t fit neatly into a nine-to-five world, and they never will.
For a long time, the assumption has been simple: shift work is demanding, the hours are unconventional, and that’s just the nature of the job.
But that assumption is starting to look outdated.
Recent sector research which led to an aviation-focused white paper published by MyBuzz Technologies Ltd in 2025, suggests something more nuanced is happening. The issue isn’t shift work itself, it’s the growing gap between how it’s managed and what today’s workforce expects from it.
And that gap is becoming harder for businesses to ignore.
It’s not the hours – it’s the uncertainty
There’s a tendency to frame shift work as inherently difficult because of unsociable hours. But many workers choose these roles for exactly that reason. Night shifts, compressed hours, or rotating patterns can offer flexibility that traditional roles don’t.
What’s far less acceptable is unpredictability.
The research highlights a consistent frustration: not knowing what’s coming next!
Late rota changes, limited forward visibility and poor communication make it difficult for employees to plan their lives outside of work. And it’s here where the real strain begins.
When people can’t rely on their schedule, everything else becomes harder – family time, rest, social plans, even basic routines. Over time, it’s not the shift pattern that drives dissatisfaction, but the lack of control around it.
The “glamour” factor is fading – and that matters
One of the more surprising insights from the aviation research is how perceptions of the industry are changing.
Aviation has long been seen as an attractive, even aspirational sector. But that reputation is weakening, particularly among operational staff. The appeal of the industry is no longer enough to offset the stresses in the sector and downsides of how work is structured.
These issues aren’t isolated to the aviation sector.
While most industries don’t rely on a sense of glamour to attract talent, many have historically leaned on stability, familiarity, or simply a lack of alternatives. Those dynamics are changing.
Workers today are more willing to move between industries, roles and career paths in search of something that fits better around their lives. Flexibility, predictability and balance are no longer secondary considerations, they are often the deciding factors.
In that context, any organisation that assumes people will simply “put up with” difficult scheduling is taking a risk. Businesses who get this wrong can see serious implications across their organisation.
Managers are under pressure too
It would be easy to position this as a simple disconnect between business needs and employee expectations. In reality, managers are often caught in the middle.
The research points to a familiar pattern: scheduling is frequently reactive. Managers are dealing with fluctuating demand, staff availability, sickness, and last-minute changes – often with limited time and tools to manage it all.
The result is a constant cycle of adjustment.
From the outside, this can look like poor planning. From the inside, it often reflects the reality of trying to keep operations running under pressure.
But the impact is the same. When scheduling becomes reactive, it creates instability for everyone involved.
This is no longer just an operational issue
What’s becoming clear is that scheduling is not just a logistical exercise. It has become a key factor in how people experience their job, and whether they choose to stay in it.
High turnover, absenteeism and disengagement are often treated as separate challenges. In many cases, they are symptoms of the same underlying issue: people feel they have little control over their time.
And time, increasingly, is what employees value most.
This is particularly relevant in sectors facing skills shortages. When talent is limited, even small improvements in working conditions can make a meaningful difference. Conversely, persistent friction in day-to-day working life can push people away faster than expected.
A different way of thinking about shift work
The most effective organisations are starting to rethink their approach.
Rather than focusing solely on coverage and efficiency, they are paying closer attention to how schedules are experienced. That means considering visibility, communication and the degree of flexibility people have in managing their time.
Importantly, this doesn’t require a complete overhaul of operations. The research suggests that relatively small changes (clearer rotas, earlier notice of shifts, more consistent communication etc.) can significantly improve how work feels on the ground.
It’s less about reinventing shift work, and more about managing it with greater awareness of its human impact.
The bigger picture
The conversation around shift work is changing, whether businesses actively engage with it or not.
Employees are reassessing what they want from work. Industries that once relied on reputation or tradition to attract talent are finding that those factors carry less weight than they used to. And managers are being asked to deliver more with systems and processes that haven’t always kept pace.
Against that backdrop, one thing is becoming clear: the cost of getting shift work wrong is rising.
Not just in operational terms, but in retention, engagement and long-term resilience.
Shift work itself isn’t going away – in fact, it is on the increase globally. But the expectations around it have already changed.
The question for shift working businesses is whether their approach has changed with it.
Article by Matt Jones – Director
incorporating