To wonder why some companies/managers have such a problem with flexi working?

[MotherOfDragons90]

My team, and the department it sits within are super flexible. Working from home is encouraged, we use Skype a lot for meetings, core hours are 10-2 but people’s hours vary immensely depending on workload/personal life etc. I think this is great, as it means I can finish a project late into the evening without having to worry about getting OT approved, or leave early on a Friday if I’ve got a weekend away booked or something.

DHs company used to be similar but they’ve recently revoked pretty much all forms of flexi working. He now has set hours of 8-4, and even that he only got because he’s been there a long time, new starters must do 9-5. No working from home except in unusual circumstances.

I get that in certain industries it isn’t possible, but I’m talking office type environments. It’s made things very awkward for my DH and I because he commute together and in the past have tried to align our flexi working and wfh days to save travel costs (AND the planet!). Traffic is hell at 4pm too!

AIBU to think this is absolutely bonkers and not conducive to a positive working environment at all? Please could I ask what your jobs policies are towards flexi working and any good reasons for banning all together?

I recently left a company after 25 years service. Initially we had flexitime, could work from home, many part time workers. Gradually over the last few years this has all been removed, and many requests for part time work are now refused. It was like stepping back in time.

Not really a job where I could do it -although the times I've taken my PPA time at home (in teaching) I've got so much more done than trying to work in a corner of the staffroom with constant interruptions (and the evil school printer).

DH's company have just looked at their seating allocations for his team and they're basically bargaining on 3 WFH or hot desking elsewhere in the building at any one time - they all tend to work full time on their company laptops and the company is very set up to allow people to work from home if required. He's got an initial arrangement to work a slightly compressed week next year for childcare and basically the general rule is "don't take the piss" - and most of the staff work some variation of tweaked hours for doing childcare related pickups or whatever (and they're mostly male before anyone comments on that) and days working from home here and there. Company long since got rid of desk phones for their department so they're all on mobiles anyway.

A previous boss of his really didn't trust anyone to do it and would make it incredibly awkward contrary to the company policy - but his current boss basically does trust people a lot more and follows the company line on it. They'd never fit them all in the office if they all showed up at once anyway! Plus their office is in the arse end of nowhere and after the year half of them got snowed in one evening - the email goes around to piss off and WFH at the first sighting of a snowflake these days!

It's all an annoying attitude of "what if" - "What if an urgent email comes in at 3pm Friday? What if the director wants to speak to someone? What if everyone just decides to not come in one day? What if everyone just doesn't do any work?"

They're all easy to address things that are routinely handled when people are on holiday - if your business is make or break based on one particular person being physically in the office at a particular time then you have bigger issues than flexi-time, the director can phone or email just like anyone else, the reason "core hours" are a thing is to make sure you have staff in when you really need all of them on deck, and if your managers have no way of tracking who is doing what and if its getting done then your issue is with your poor management staff.

It's such an old-fashioned attitude which is really just "look, we think we own you between these hours, we need you to travel to us, sit down, and be owned. How dare you think you could be doing our job effectively AND do other things on our time?"

The important thing should be if the person is doing 100% of the job they are paid to do, and not whether or not their bum is in your office when the clock hits 9am.

Non flexi time just reminds me of Neil dropping a customers prawns all over the floor because his shift was over in the Inbetweeners.

A good maanger knows flexibility will work both ways.

On these threads, I see many people say it’s because workers don’t actually do any work. Well, in many offices, it’s much the same. They’ll sit and mess about on social media, make tea every hour and a cigarette every hour etc. A lazy worker will be lazy wherever they are. If you cannot manage your staff, it’s on the you - the manager - to sort that out.

We are expected to WFH due to the cost of renting office space. An efficient manager, like mine, can monitor performance and manage, wherever the employee is based. It is give and take. I came in to do something urgent on my non working day last week and wouldn’t take TOIL, all because I respect and value my place of work because I feel respected and valued.

@passthecherrycoke if your work is time critical, then surely you need 24 hour cover or, at least, skeleton staff to cover out of hours.

I don’t need 24 hour cover because is not a 24 hour working environment, therefore requests don’t come in over 24 hours. As I say, 2pm on a Friday is working hours.

And I’m not treating it as I would a sick employee because it’s a regular arrangement. The only solution offered here is someone else steps in and does it for the flexible worker. Why should they? In a lean environment they’re fully occupied for their 40 hour weeks too, why should they do more so someone else can have Friday afternoons off?

so Pamela are you saying that employers should simply disregard the legislation around flexible working? Decide that there are too many piss-takers out there so this legislation needn't apply to them?

They only have to seriously consider it and may refuse such requests if there are good business reasons too. In many instances it would be harder to refuse a flexible working applicaiton of r ajob share if there are two people willing to job share than a reqest to work from home.

One of the valid reasons for refusal is if it would affect quality and performance.

I have no idea why some companies pay people upwards of £30k a year to do a job and don’t just trust them to get on with it whenever, wherever.

It’s different in a service orientated organisation of course, but even then with modern technology most phone based roles can be done from home, the beach, the coffee shop, or the office.

@Passthecherrycoke
"if your business is make or break based on one particular person being physically in the office at a particular time then you have bigger issues than flexi-time, ....the reason "core hours" are a thing is to make sure you have staff in when you really need all of them on deck"

I still feel like these things apply. Can your request not be handled by someone WFH? If your business will break if an email is unanswered at 2pm, extend your core hours until 3pm. The real issue still sounds like you resenting someone might get "Friday afternoon off, leaving others to pick up the slack" while you're ignoring the fact that they will have to have ALREADY done extra hours elsewhere in the week to save those hours up.
And who's to say that an urgent issue wouldn't come in at 6.30pm Thursday to be picked up immediately by a worker who is doing flexitime and normally wouldn't be available until the next morning?

It's all the stuck way of thinking that different hours must equal fewer hours, and that this is all a way of trying to "weasel out of doing a proper job".

A couple of reasons.

1. It puts added pressure on those few working in the office when others are at home, i.e. they have to field phone calls, deal with visitors (public and from other departments), etc. That reduces their productivity and causes stress etc due to interruptions.

1. Some people take the piss, and that not only puts more pressure on others working around them, but also means that valuable management time is then lost to try to "manage" them not to take the piss.

I worked in an office where "flexitime" was allowed, but after a couple of years, it was stopped as far too many people were claiming to work longer hours when it suited them, even if there was no/little work to do, to "bank" hours and then try to take time off at busier times. There were some who even claimed to work through lunch, but still sat at their desks munching from their lunchbox not doing any work - they thought that if they stayed at their desk, it could be classed as not stopping for lunch. Lots of howls of anguish when it was stopped, but it was a lot fairer and more productive when it was back to fixed 9-5 with an hour for lunch.

Stormtrader to be fair you’re trying to find solutions to a problem you don’t fully understand or have experience of. It’s nothing to do with core hours, we have regular office opening hours and flexitime is irrelevant this. We’re not the public sector.

there is a limited number of reasons an employer can refuse a flexible working request, and a lot of those are specific to someone wishing to reduce their hours rather than work from home. Each request must be taken on its individual merits, so unless the employer has a good reason to suspect this particular employee will be taking the piss (something that should have been dealt with already, surely?) and there are no actual business reasons then they should allow the request to go through.

lisalocketlostherpocket without being too outing, usually a contract bid for an opportunity that’s just come up.

A bid with a three hour deadline? Does not exist. That bid can wait until Monday.

My manager hates flexible working and the idea of flexi time (apart from when it suits her. She's quite the inspirational manager...)

She feels that it is a "benefit" from when wages were "not very good" and so because we are now well paid, we don't need flexi time, nor should we need to EVER work from home, because "your team needs you". Actually, I rather feel that my team are very capable (probably because I employ adults and not 9 year olds).

Embracing flexible working has proved (in other teams) that staff are more productive, more loyal and appreciate the fact that they do have the ability to work flexibly. The industry I'm in needs to get rid of narrow minded, self serving individuals and take a look into the future. Everything we do is flexible, why not work?

AnAC12UCOinanOCG Not when the auction is early the next week and the bid needs to go through a number of approval levels before sign off. Don’t tell me what does and doesn’t happen in my industry.

@passmethecherrycoke

Okay so say you were at an event/meeting between 2-5 when that 2pm email came in.

Then what would happen? Would you have to leave the urgent bid until Monday because you finish at 5?

Well it’s not me who deals with the bids, as I say, I manage them.

So if the person was supposed to be at work but wasn’t in the office, the bid team would presumably phone the team or physically come and find someone to help. In which case I, as manager would step in and assist.

But as I say, I am not stepping in to add this to my workload routinely so someone can be out of the office an afternoon a week.

I still don't understand the whole "X takes the piss when they work from home so it's best to have people in the office so I can keep an eye on them". If you know X doesn't work when they're working from home, why do you want them in your business at all?

@Passthecherrycoke Does that not also apply if someone works part time? Incidentally I also work in bids although the shortest timescales in my industry are maybe 1-2 weeks.

I agree. except , some people do take advantage. Perhaps that's their experience? It's also very difficult in small organisations, and in customer facing organisations where you need to be available when customers need you. It isn't always so straightforward. What does he do?

Presumably a 2pm urgent request on a Friday would be pretty rare though. If it’s a one off it’s just likely to happen when someone is on annual leave than taking TOIL, no? So you wouldn’t have to ‘routinely’ add it to your workload.

And if it’s not rare then obviously core hours would have to be extended or people could leave early on the understanding they log on from home if something comes up?

That’s how I see it anyway.

Nobody would be able to do the job part time- there isn’t any opportunity for part time working in my roles although a job share would be fine.

OP I’m not an idiot. Believe me when I say it wouldn’t work, and you don’t have the answer. We don’t have any TOIL. It’s not public sector

another one for people take the piss and spoil it for everyone

"Stormtrader to be fair you’re trying to find solutions to a problem you don’t fully understand or have experience of. It’s nothing to do with core hours, we have regular office opening hours and flexitime is irrelevant this. We’re not the public sector."

Well, I guess thats me told - funny how 10 years working in the private sector for huge companies that also deal with bids means I know nothing about it. You realise when you keep saying "We're not the public sector" that that's totally irrelevant, right? Most people don't work in the public sector.
As an aside, you've also spelt my username wrong. I hope you pay more attention than that to your very important bids!

My former boss trialled flexible working (hours rather than location) but quickly stopped it when he realised that people who had previously worked extra hours (unpaid) were now taking TOIL.