To think flexible working requests after maternity leave are very rarely granted?

[NotAnotherNewNappy]

I work for the civil service and went back to work three days per week after DD1 was born. This has worked out really well, both proffessionally and personally, and I've always encouraged my friends to at least try to work moreflexibly after having a family.

However, it seems impossible in almost every other sector. All three of my friends who have made requests have had them refused:one works for a police force, one for a charity and one for a major British luxury fashion brand. I am fuming on their behalf. Is it really so bleak out there for working mothers?

I'm going back part-time and know lots of other mothers who've gone back part time.

But I think a lot depends on the sector you work in. With my job, there's no shift patterns and it's not customer facing, so there's no set times people have to be in the office (although management have imposed core hours of 10am - 4pm) as long as the work gets done, so that means people going part-time have less of an impact on the business. We've also got a number of semi-retired part time workers in our office.

The only person in my office that I know to have been refused flexible working, was someone in his 30's with no caring responsibilities who wanted every Friday off so he could have long weekends.

in nhs and i have now got my part time hours and the right pay, just the job is not rewarding. or doesnt seem to be as rewarding as previous full time positions. perhaps that is just me thinking the grass is greener though.

FatFaced my job description in most jobs has changed from the day I signed the original contract, and it's never been to remove tasks. Should I have refused to carry out the additional tasks and responsibilities because that's not what I signed up to?

Circumstances change, on both sides, and both sides need to be flexible to adapt to such changes.

Mine was granted (2004). But when I got back, a few weeks later they rehashed my role to such an extent that I was at the bottom of my role again so (among other reasons) I left. I didn't know at the time that what they did (basically force me to quit by giving me a boring role) wasn't the done thing.

I know a lot of people who have been able to work the hours they've requested after returning to work. When the request has been declined it has always been because the woman is in a managerial position and they've claimed that they can't have managers working part time.

I have worked for one large, very well-known company that was totally inflexible and inconsiderate about it, though.

So actually a large majority of women on this thread were granted PT work.

Not so bleak really.

I work for a large Japanese enterprise. My request was accepted and I know of many other people in the company who have flexible arrangements, men and women, so that they can look after their children.

I have never known anyone in my circle of friends to be refused. I guess it depends on the sector you're in.

I have for the past 5 years worked one day from home. Works well, no one has ever made a negative comment.

But my new boss (last 6 months) has made everything difficult, and he is about to make an issue of it...he is US based, and due over here soon. I think that will be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

I don't know of anyone at my office (male or female) who has been refused a flexible working request (except one, but the suggestion was a bit convoluted and they were granted a different working pattern), but I work for a charity that is very family oriented, and my manager and the board are very compassionate towards home commitments (such as children or caring) are very accomodating. I'm going back part-time later this year.

I think you do have to be honest and accept that sometimes your request is not in the best interests of the company though.

fedupwith, is that in your contract re the working from home?

I work in a call centre for a large bank and have had 3 flexible working requests put through and all have been approved. I haven't known anyone have it turned down - including those that have asked for reasons other than childcare.

Sorry to post and run, I had ab awful busy day with the DC yesterday.

In my organisation we seem to be beneffitting from the financial benefits of flexible working, as most of us who work part time manage to fulfill a FT post (mostly by prioritising and working flat out when we're here) and saving on accomodation costs. I have definitely become more strategically minded since cutting my hours and have been promoted as a consequence.

It is interesting what some of you say about it being harder when you are more senior, my friend who works for a charity was pretty senior and only wanted to cut down to 95% hours (so she could pick up her DD from nursery) but was refused point blank.

The other two may have been victims of the recession - the policewoman was told if they let her cut her hours they'd risk losing funding for the post, and the fashionista (it's ok, she doesn't take taxis) was told there was a recruitment freeze on so they couldn't loose any more staff hours.

I work for a charity and was refused it.

I know some people who have been granted it and others who weren't in pretty equal numbers, most in the charity world

My request to drop from 5 full days to 4 was granted. I'm a manager for an SME in the creative sector. My boss was happy for the opportunity to cut a day a week from the wages bill.

And DH's request to do compressed hours and work from home one day a week was also granted. He works for a huge multinational. There is no culture of presenteeism at his workplace, as long as the work is done properly they are happy to be flexible.

Perhaps the facts that my company is partly Swedish-owned, and DH's department is based in Germany and headed by a German is significant...?

I work in telecoms and don't know anyone in my sector (across both very large and very small size companies) that has been refused a 'reasonable' request. Possibly it helps that we're relatively geard up to support flexible working anyway, but there are lots of women across the industry working 3 4 day weeks or have negotiated fixed hours or a 5-in-4 day week. And even more who still work full time, but have agreed 2 or more home-based days each week.

So its not all bad out there!

I work for one of the largest mining firms in the world. Flex working was approved. 3 days in the office and one at home.

YANBU. Lip service IME. In the last two places I worked, if you asked to work flexibly (note, not even dropping hours, but moving hours to suit childcare responsibilities or working from home for a few hours) not only would the request be refused "for business reasons", but you'd get your card marked as someone who was less committed to the job and they would start "managing" you out.

Fedup: my top level boss is also American and just doesn't get part time working. Left my local boss and HR to deal with it which they did without any problem.

Both myself and my colleague were refused (nhs). We work in a v small and highly specialised department, so for us to reduce hours means that the department cannot offer the service it needs to.
I was just granted permission to finish half an hour early if I only take half an hr for lunch. And that's only as long as it doesn't affect the service in any way.
I'm currently exploring other career options that may allow greater flexibility as we are ttc number 2

I could have had 4 but not 3 days in old job (solicitor private practice). I moved in house and do 3. I probably do 4 days work but that's a price I'm prepared to pay to have 2 days with DDs. I am quite senior and they know they get a lot for their Money by letting me work like this.

I've been working from home for the past 6 weeks, and by the time I go on maternity leave, it will be two months working from home. One person in our team works remotely from another country. I don't do business with anyone in the London office - all of my meetings are web based or conference calls with the US or Europe.

When I return to work, I plan on asking for full time remote working. I've thought about it long and hard and from the businesses perspective, they will be getting more hours out of me. I won't be coming in late/leaving early to pick up the baby from the nursery, there's less disruption to work from any emergencies baby or nursery-wise as I'll be ten minutes away instead of an hour's commute, and I can offer to work for longer because of not commuting in each day.

From my perspective it means I am available quickly for my baby if they need me, and I can save a few hundred each month not commuting in - thus being able to afford nursery fees! If my manager refuses my request, I will ask them to prove why a job in web, where I already work remotely with colleagues in other countries, and with other colleagues also working remotely in our team, can't be done :)

It depends on the job, doesn't it? If your work can manage it, then that's great. But if you were engaged to do a full-time job and now want to do it differently, it can mean that's not the job you were appointed to do. Flexitime can be really awkward for employers and their refusal's not always something that deserves to be fumed over, although I'm sure sometimes it is of course!

Like with teaching, part-time is hugely awkward firstly for time tabling, and secondly because the school then has to appoint another new teacher for precisely the hours you don't want to work any more. Then, if you say, a year later, that actually child care is so expensive that you're leaving, or in fact you're not coming back from maternity leave after all because you can't bear to leave your baby, or whatever, they have the 2nd part-timer and can't get a full-time successor for you. It's not that they don't want to help you, it's that what you want is a huge pain in the arse for them...

As someone who spent many years advising on it in a professional capacity, I would say most employers are willing to try and accommodate it if:

1. the request is viable. I saw lots of requests where a woman, for example, wanted to work tues-thurs but the nature of the role meant it needed to be a job share (e.g. teaching or whatever). Imagine trying to recruit someone to just work Mondays and Fridays - needle in a haystack. And then the woman requesting couldn't change days cos those were the days their mum could do childcare... Or people who think they can work from home without putting any childcare in place - saw a good few of those a while back.

1. they are good employers anyway. shit employers are shit employers, whether on flexible working or anything else.

As an aside. Job shares are far more difficult than people understand anyway - costs (like insurance, which double), mangement time (two lots of appraisals, etc), what happens if one person leaves, recruiting for very set hours, liaising and consistency in work (often resulting in having to have overlap days), second maternity leaves and holiday (e.g. do they have to have some of their holiday together? You can end up with two months of the year where you only have half a job)... One of the most difficult forms of flexible working IME.

Mine was refused, pretty much exactly a year ago. Recruitment industry.

I know two people who have "proper" jobs whose requests were granted, both Government jobs.
I know quite a few people in temp type jobs who just reduced their hours easily enough (think call centres, food industry etc)
Everyone else I can think of (hmm, at least 10 women off the top of my head) had to go back full time or not at all.