Nice new corner! Come and chat!

[NeverEverAnythingEver]

We have our new board! Calling all cademics/aspiring academics/fed-up academics - come and chat!

And since no one will be able to get RCUK funding without Athena swan, it's pretty antediluvian for a department to refuse formal and informal flexible working arrangements.

I find it hard to believe that AS will be imposed as a strict requirement any time soon, across most of the RCUK. I suspect that in for my own two RCUK it would be introduced softly first: show us your AS award or show us how you are working towards an AS award. A bit like Pathways to Impact, which in principle can be used to turn down grant applications but in practice virtually never is.

And as said earlier on in this thread AS initiatives to schedule in core hours are at tension with increased workloads at many universities.

I'm pretty sure both my university and my department would love to timetable the classes they organise, respectively, past 6 pm...

I find it hard to believe that AS will be imposed as a strict requirement any time soon, across most of the RCUK. I suspect that in for my own two RCUK it would be introduced softly first: show us your AS award or show us how you are working towards an AS award. A bit like Pathways to Impact, which in principle can be used to turn down grant applications but in practice virtually never is

As far as I recall, it's up for review this year or next. A softly-softly approach would make sense at first, though I think NIHR jumped straight in when it made AS a requirement. I suspect the recent broadening of AS to the humanities might be to more easily align it with the full arts-science remit of RCUK.

surely part time hours should be a subset of full time hours?

Well, no, not necessarily. Certainly not in my dept - or even my own case - where a lot of actual work gets done away from the office outside 9-5 working hours.

There is an overlap of hours where everyone is probably available or at least can arrange to be with some notice - some depts formalise it as core hours, but others don't. It might be 9:30-3 or 10-4 or whatever works for a particular department.

Our department has always been very friendly when it comes to timetabling and would accommodate any kinds of flexible hours as much as we could. We even have lecturers commuting from other countries ... But recently the Administration decided that we lazy academics should be made to work all hours, and those that don't want to must formally apply, and the timetabling would be done centrally. Funnily enough now I don't really feel like working outside the hours I said I would (I'm part-time)...

Never Basically what you've said, except that it was the other way round - administration are great about timetabling but the department decided to harass me over something that they had organised. As I say, a disciplinary meeting for not attending something that I'd already said I couldn't attend at a time when I didn't have childcare. Multiple other occasions of the same combination of factors brought up at the meeting.

Now the department are saying that it's no longer up to them, but we have a new HoD, who is trying to actually be nice rather than call disciplinary meetings at the drop of a hat, and who's thinking up creative ways to annoy get round central administration.

worst, I really think they treated you terribly. But now reading all this has made me much more supportive of the 'core hours' thing. Even though you said your beef doesn't apply to me, it actually does - I do work full time, but there are times (one afternoon a week) that I will not casually schedule items. It actually makes it hard for me to meet up (socially, though) with a friend who works part time, 50%: half a day at home and two days in, but one her days in is my half-day. I don't feel that just because I work full time that it should mean I am available at any time. I did fill out a whole flexible-working form, but my HoS said to do it informally. I've heard other Schools who did the same thing. At least here, I think it is the centre that is just a bit not up on the way academics work (my friend who does 50% had a lot of trouble trying to explain why she couldn't just 'log in' her hours at her desk computer, since even when she was on campus she was often in meetings elsewhere), and departments which are more sensible. But that does leave it to individual personalities to do it properly.

I think treatment of part-time academic staff overall is poor. One of the reasons I am staying full time is that if I were to, for example, go to 90% and only pull 90% of my salary, first of all, I really wouldn't want to work 'over' like I do now. But that would mean my working hours were cut to in fact 65-72% of what I do now! Yet my responsibilities would probably remain just about 100%. So I would come off far worse. Talking with people here has suggested it needs to be a 50-60% contract before you see a significant difference in workload. When I went on mat leave they actually tried to give first year - which takes a good 25% of my full time load - to someone on an 80% contract, without reducing any of her responsibilities! That is ridiculous. Things should not be like that.

Full time shouldn't be an infinite amount of hours, and part time shouldn't be basically full time hours until you get to a drastic reduction. But this is a whole academic culture thing, and I think it goes beyond the academics to the admin as well. I listened to the Director of Research of another school vent a few years ago - he had been called to a meeting of DoR's by the centre, as they were concerned that funding applications (and thus grant income) had dropped drastically in the last year. What was going on? All the DoR's answered that it was obvious: the top research-active staff across the whole Uni were involved in putting together the REF submission. Thus, they were not submitting grants. Thus grant applications dropped. The centre apparently just couldn't comprehend that when you take a group of people and give them a giant admin job above and beyond their normal work, that they will do less of what they did before.

I've heard higher ups in our school complain similarly but less specifically, that the centre 'sees academic labour as an infinite resource'.

I wonder if Athena Swan will help such things? But I also worry that is being held up as some kind of sword of fire, keeping people like worst from noting poor treatment, for fear of hurting the department's standing. I was conspicuously not included in the 'case studies' of how the department supported mat leave returners - they had to go back a decade to find the last mat leave returner, and pitched it around her current flexible working arrangements for her disabled child. I worry poor practice will be hidden instead of addressed.

I've heard higher ups in our school complain similarly but less specifically, that the centre 'sees academic labour as an infinite resource'.

I think this is indeed a huge problem, not just in the UK. Increasingly academics are expected to take on huge administration tasks, as well as day to day administration. It is simply assumed that they will do this in addition to their teaching and research but, as you say, this is not realistic. Ultimately research is strongly affected by the increasingly unreasonably expectations of academics.

And I know of other cases where Athena SWAN was fudged. I certainly wouldn't myself agree to be a case study, because I feel I have been treated worse because of my gender and I have certainly never had any support for family issues.

And of course there's the "let's not pay cleaners peanuts to empty bins because academics will do it for free", except that we aren't actually free.

Interesting chat on core hours - it makes me think my uni has been actually really good! We teach when we can, all my colleagues with childcare responsibilities can timetable lectures when fits them (start after 10am, end before 5pm) etc. And Athena SWAN agenda is enforced whenever possible.

But the dark side of this is of course the piss takers. One of my staff is on a typical academic research contract (we all work a nominal 35hours a week, but our contracts state that we may need to work beyond these hours to ensure completion of the work - which we all do, especially in the evenings at home / WE / hols). This employee's job description also clearly stated a requirement for flexible working, including evenings and WE [this was clear and upfront, and linked to the very particular adult education project]. Since the beginning, this person has counted minutes, arrived late in the morning because of school run (and missed key tasks), have left on the dot, or before (and dropped their workload on others), and refused 90% of the evening and WE commitments (we re not even talking over time). HR is kindly protecting them in their attitude to work, despite it being in total opposition to what everyone else does [because we are, and feel, like mugs].

I would completely refuse to be a "case study". If they want a token woman they can bloody go and fucking recruit another one.

Never that's crap. At least there are a few more women than 1 token in my department.

Agree re the odd piss taker. Though I can't really settle down to brain work at the computer at the weekend, thankfully I can and do pull my weight on things like open days, conferences that extend over weekends, hosting visitors etc because at least I have DH to do childcare those days. In fact with two preschool DC it can be more relaxing.

Worst - I concur would often happily be at work in deserted office at the WE than at home with two pre-school caged beasts fighting in front of bloody Frozen

Maybe this colleague does need to leave at 4.45 not 4 but I have agreed to take less pay so my working hours are guaranteed to fit round my childcare, because of the lack of flexibility of the childcare. This colleague though seems to think that they should be able to get paid full time but fix their hours at less than full time

I agree with your irritation at this. I try to ensure our meetings never start before 9.30 and finish by 4.30. Most offices work 9-5pm and I don't see why academics can't be expected to work within those hours.

Of course, I do not want a clocking in clocking out mentality. but I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect that a research seminar 4-5pm is absolutely fine.

And if it's OK for someone to moan about that because of child care, then it's OK for anyone and everyone to moan. "Family friendly" needs to work for everyone, not just those with small/young children.

*Most offices work 9-5pm and I don't see why academics can't be expected to work within those hours.
*
... Because academics are not office workers?

One of the reasons I got into this game was the cultural norm (at least in my discipline) that work does not equal sitting at your desk. A brief stint in the corporate world made me intensely dislike presenteeism, and the notion that everyone should be in their office 9-5 regardless of whether it was peak or quiet time on your project. As an academic, so long as I turn up for teaching and meetings, I can do the rest of my work whilst on the moon, for all anyone should care.

A 9-5 expectation is needlessly inflexible and the very opposite of family-friendly.

As an academic, so long as I turn up for teaching and meetings, I can do the rest of my work whilst on the moon, for all anyone should care.

But the original question was not whether people should have to be in the office 9-5 every day: it was whether holding a seminar at 4-5 is reasonable.

If 4-5 is the only time which fits with timetabling constraints and other departmental seminars/meetings, then it doesn't seem entirely reasonable for one or two (full time) academics to ask for it to be changed just to fit with their personal lives. Surely such a seminar would fit under the heading of "meetings that you should turn up for".

Scheduling it in hours of 10-3 could be viewed as being "needlessly inflexible and the very opposite of family-friendly" i.e. those hours are not necessarily the most convenient for many staff.

Ultimately departments have to look at the compromise that fits the most staff (which might be 4-5 seminars and might not be). The original issue was that 2 full-time staff were allowed to say that they couldn't be present at 4-5 while the OP had been told she needed to formally become part-time if she couldn't be present at 4-5, i.e. the department was being inconsistent.

I think this discussion re-appears cyclically. I am always surprised that academics can do their job in term-time (teaching, admin, research) without being in the office most of the time - it must be so field/university dependent. I have so many meetings/seminars/lectures that just turning up for them means that I have to be in the office most days from before 9 until at least 5.

disquit I'm sure it is field-dependent. Only a couple of academics in my department are in the office every day. Even during termtime, most people manage to keep one day clear of meetings to work from home.

But the basic idea of family-friendly working is exactly the idea that if some people in the dept need to leave at 4:45, then that should be accommodated. It's perfectly possible to work full time hours and draw a full time salary without being in the office til 5. And if enough people in the department have to leave at 4:45, then the accommodation should include scheduling things like seminars at a time they can attend, as otherwise you're excluding them unfairly.

It's all about being collegiate, surely? It's no skin on anyone's nose if family-friendly working practices clump departmental activities into core hours (whatever hours lets the most number of people attend something) rather than spreading them out over a 9-6 day. I'm really quite bewildered by opposition to this idea.

Obviously that should say it's no skin off anyone's nose...

It is skin off my nose if I'm given enormous grief for asking for set hours that don't inconvenience anyone (my set hours are till 5 not till 4) but this proposed seminar move means other people (including me sometimes) can't come to it - the current time is the only non-meeting, non-teaching hour in the week.

And I agree I also find I'm in the office with meeting at 9(15ish) and teaching at 4 more days than not. I probably work from home one day, two out of three weeks, which is not bad, but not what some seem to be saying. Once I'm on campus, with DCs in the campus nursery, I may as well use my office anyway.

(And don't get me started on booking the DCs in for nursery breakfast for a 9 am meeting and nobody else turns up till 9.15).

I agree that if lots of people are unhappy with a 4-5 time then it shouldn't be scheduled then.

On the other hand, suppose one person is unhappy with a 4-5 time but 20+ other people are perfectly happy with the time (and timetabling gives no other option): then it is a much greyer area. Should 20+ people have to reschedule just because e.g. one professor (married to a barrister) doesn't want to pay £10 for an after school club? (And, yes, this is a real example, in which I know for sure that there is an after school club and it would cost £10 because my child attends the same school. And the relevance of professor married to barrister is that £200 per year for attending the after school club 20 times would be a drop in the ocean.)

And as for It's no skin on anyone's nose if family-friendly working practices clump departmental activities into core hours - it's often not that simple. Trying to cluster all activities into a smaller number of hours usually means that there are more clashes, and that therefore you are actually preventing people from attending. So there is a balance between putting all activities between 10-3 (or whatever) so that people can collect children from school and clashing activities so that some of those who want to come can't make it because they are teaching/attending university meetings etc.

Interestingly the seminars used to be 5-6 but were moved because one parent with a DC in the campus nursery could then never come. And yes, 30-40 people are happy with the time and this couple could either take it in turns or, like the professor and the barrister, adjust childcare.

And the issue of cramming everything into the few popular hours is even more acute if you don't work every day - I try to make our department seminars but smaller journal clubs, joint lab meetings for shared facilities etc could easily take up all my time in the office if they were all always on my working days so I no longer complain about this if they move between days occasionally.

So there is a balance between putting all activities between 10-3 (or whatever) so that people can collect children from school and clashing activities so that some of those who want to come can't make it because they are teaching/attending university meetings etc.

Sure, it's a balance that should be worked out carefully. 10-3 would be a pretty extreme example of core hours though - I've never heard of anywhere with that range.

But, for example, I'd be perfectly happy for my department's seminars to be scheduled at a time when I had teaching a few weeks of the year (so I miss a quarter of seminars, say) if it suddenly allowed a couple of my colleagues to attend for the first time. That's what I meant by collegiate: it's appropriate for everyone to give a little rather than have someone lose out completely.

Over the whole course of a year, most people should be able to make seminars most of the time. That's all flexible working should be trying to achieve.

Actually, I'll rephrase that: everyone should be able to make seminars at least some of the time. That's much closer to the goals of flexible working.

My experience of 4-5 seminars is that they never actually finish at 5. So that may be part of the issue.

I'd never get anything done if I had to be in the office or on campus 9-5 every day. They insist on putting us in busy shared offices and it is impossible to get anything beyond very basic admin done in them. If you want to read quietly or write or actually think, you can't be in the office. And you can't go to the library because it's not very big and full of students who will bother you. You can't even write a lecture or mark essays in our offices because they're too busy and noisy and there is constant coming and going.

This contributes to how unproductive most of us are in research terms (research funding is not something people get in my department with any regularity, and anyone with funding just leaves), but the ridiculous teaching and admin loads make it impossible to do much at all. Our workload model is so unrealistic (and allows almost no research time at all) that it gives no prep time for anything other than lectures, and you only get 1 hour prep time for each hour of lecturing, even on brand new modules. Inevitably, we all end up with stupid amounts of contact time.

The admin we're expected to do is also ridiculous. For example, we are expected to find out the names of each student whose had their work marked anonymously, update their feedback sheets, and then put hundreds of essays into alphabetical order because the university will not pay admin staff to do so, nor will the assignments office simply work in student numbers (and they wouldn't order them for us either). If you've got 500 students on your module (and this is not unheard of), this takes days. It's a total waste of money for the university and the time is not reflected in your workload. The pointless admin relates to student assessment so you can't not do it, and it's always your already meagre in principle research time that gets sacrificed.