AIBU about this flexible working request

[zeezeek]

I've had a flexible working request from someone in my team. As he's childfree it's not for any childcare responsibilities, but because he's just been appointed as Chair of Governors at a local primary school due to the fact that the school has recently had a poor (undeserved in my opinion) OfSTED inspection. As he is an experienced Governor he has been brought in to help the school's governing board improve.

To do that he will need time out of the day to attend meetings and visit the school, so has asked if he could have flexible working to allow that. He is mostly based in the office and has the sort of job that can be done from home or can catch up in the evenings - he's perfectly willing to do that as and when necessary. So I am happy to grant his request.

However, last year I had to turn down another person's request. She wanted to cut her hours so that she had a day at home with her children. I had to refuse her request due to the fact that she was working on a project that had some very tight and important deadlines coming up and her role was (still is) vital to the success of the project and there was no-one who was experienced enough in that particular field to cover her for that day. She was obviously upset and annoyed, but accepted the decision.

Now I'm concerned that if I agree to this new request I'm going to end up pissing off another valued member of staff, but don't want to turn down his request because it is completely reasonable and we can accomodate it. It is likely that in about 6 months time I might be able to allow the other one, but at the moment it is very much all hands on deck with that project.

AIBU to allow one and not the other?

The first request would have negatively impacted the needs of the business, OP. The second one won't. You have to look at every request on an individual basis - some you will be able to accommodate, some you won't. That's just the way it goes.

You can't refuse this mans request for fear of upsetting another member of staff. Circumstances in both cases are completely different.

You haven't read the link above then myfavourite.

The school governor's reason if very relevant as if he wasn't a school governor, they wouldn't have to grant him time off.

I'm starting to think we need to differentiate between flexible working and part time working - they are two different things and are not comparable.

One of these scenarios is a flexible working request - the person has requested to fulfil their role outside of regular working hours. The other has asked for a reduced working week, meaning there is still one days worth of work which needs doing at some point.

the reason to sweeten the pill is that if you piss off a key member of staff by allowing flexi working to a less useful and less key staff member, the 'critical' person may quite likely look for a new position where they feel more appreciated if they have any sense.

Two different requests. Ensure you clearly document reasons

It sounds fine. Just reiterate that you will be happy to look at her request again after the current project is over (if you feel it will be possible).

The reason for the time off is irrelevant.

Not if it's for public service it isn't.

It is two separate situations.
I would assume that for him it would also be temporary-and he's not involved in a complicated situation.
I would agree in principal for him-he's doing a public service with no value to himself, I assume he isn't a parental governor, but say you need to review it every 6 months and he may be refused if it's effecting his work with you.

It would make no difference even if he was a parent governor, Witchend.

A member of staff should also be sensible and recognise that their request was turned down for good business reasons, rather than just strop off to a new job.

Don't draw knives because I don't mean this as a criticism etc - but just wondering why you're asking for advice about a confidential work matter on a public internet forum.
Team leaders should be able to make these decisions on their own, isn't that what they're paid for, or if not at least discuss it with a senior.
Staff involved in something like this would probably be pissed off if they knew this was on a public thread

I had no idea about the time off for governors thing, which is very embarrassing as I am a school governor myself!

When the first request was made I explained why it couldn't be accomodated and it was accepted, albeit rather grumpily. She works in a very specialised field and was employed for this project and is paid for by the project, so I can't give her a pay rise. We have a year left on that project so we're at a very crucial stage of getting everything together and analysed and papers written etc. She could leave and I can't do anything to stop her. However, there aren't any other projects here that need her expertise so she would have to move away and the family are all settled here, so I guess she wouldn't want to do that.

I can't offer her compressed hours because I need her to be at least contactable every day. Everyone in my team is welcome to work from home as long as we don't have a meeting that they need to attend that day. When she has leave or is sick then I cover for her as I'm the only other person who can do her job - but I don't have the capacity as I have other projects that I'm involved in as well as teaching and PhD supervision commitments.

I have approved the other request.

getting the best working conditions the market will bear for your family isn't throwing a strop necessarily. free labour market etc.

Enigmatic101 - thank you for your concern, but I like to think I'm old enough and experienced enough to decide what to post on here. There is nothing identifiable in any of my posts.

You might be old and experienced but are you being professional or competent. It's not about identifying anyone.
I'm not concerned I couldn't care less but you asked for opinions so are gonna get ones you don't like.

i see, so in reality it might create a less pleasant working atmosphere but that's about it. Probably best to talk to her about it then to clear the air. I didn't realize it was such a niche area!

It's worth looking into public duties time off allowed as this may get around the flexible working application. At my company you don't have to make a flexible working application for governors duties as it's considered in a different light. Whilst you are perfectly entitled (and reasonable) to treat these two requests differently finding a third way may make the message to your first applicant easier to manage. FWIW you sound like an excellent and thoughtful manager who wants to do the best by their staff as well as the business.

I think you should consider how you can actively make changes or work towards accommodating the woman asking to drop to 4 days a week. Not clear whether she wants to be full time on a 4 day pattern or drop her hours, but either way I'd be actively seeking a solution.

I work in projects and I therefore know just how hard it is to get really good project staff. The fact this woman is critical means she must be good?

I've also worked with a couple of women in project roles who were working less than 5 days a week (still do in fact)

In my experience, you get more quality work per day out of people who do less than 5 days. People have a limited time frame where they can work really effectively, for most people in projects, that's less than the 5 long days they work. One truly excellent former colleague of mine got as much done in her part time 3 day week as most of the full timers. We would have done pretty much anything to keep her in the team, she was the best Business Analyst I've ever worked with.

If I was you, I would seriously consider how you make accommodations for this person that allow them to do the job, but keep them happy enough to want to.

There are options where you can retain her as full time if you need to - compressed hours so she does 4x10 hour days or works 9 in 10 (a day free every other week) and so on.

The company I am currently working at offers a compressed hours 9 in 10 scheme to all employees and I genuinely hardly notice which colleagues are on it and which aren't to be honest.

I'm saying this as a full time 5 day a week working man with no children BTW - I'm not an activist campaigning for working mums to be given special treatment, I'm a pragmatist that thinks it is usually in the employers interest to actively try to make reasonable accommodations regardless of why they are requested. Keeping staff happy is the best way to keep them effective.

That link is very clear: you CAN If you're a school governor but you MUST be allowed time off for jury service. It's at the company's discretion, not a law.

Who qualifies for time off
Employees MUST BE allowed to take time off for jury service.

An employee CAN also get a ‘reasonable’ amount of time off if they’re:

a magistrate (also known as a justice of the peace)
a local councillor
a school governor...

as a senior manager is MN really the most appropriate place to discuss this issue?

There is nothing identifiable in any of my posts

Reasonable time off

The amount of time off should be agreed between the employee and employer beforehand, based on:

how long the duties might take
the amount of time the employee has already had off for public duties
how the time off will affect the business

The employer can refuse a request for time off if they think it’s unreasonable.

This request is not unreasonable, so no, the employer cannot refuse it.

Presumably the man's request is time limited, as soon as the new management team in the school is embedded he won't need to be so hands on and can work his normal hours, whereas the childcare issue is long term so would have greater impact over time.

"This request is not unreasonable, so no, the employer cannot refuse it."

Eh? By whose definition?
No, as well feel it may negatively impact the business.

Employers aren't required to provide a detailed justification to an employee. It's a good business practice, but it's not legally required. Like most of the stuff ACAS advises employers "should" but aren't legally required to do.