AIBU to think part timers should get a better deal

[Frazzledme]

I've worked part time when my kids were small but it was so s* I've gone full time now. As a job the pay tends to be crap, there are hardly any jobs to pick from and I've worked in a few teams where they could never get over that I was into my job and wanted to do well. Where I work they're quite big on inclusion and diversity but if I ever mention anything about making things better for part timers and having more flexibility it's like tumbleweeds going past. I'm ok with my hours now, but some people might want to change if they have kids etc. I'd like to use my experience to improve things for others. Is there something I'm not getting why people are so funny about it?

Also I know some people see it as a choice thing, but it's not really. If it costs more to work than not work with childcare then part time hours often make sense. No tax to pay so hourly pay goes up.

Thinking of doing an article for our group magazine to highlight how things could be better. Is this a good idea? What sort of things should I include?

Or should I just think "I'm alright jack" now I've got my cosy full time job again and people seem to like and respect me.

Our company is in the education sector, and almost every role is offered for anything between 30h pw term time only to full time all year - candidates asked to specify their preferred hours.

We have never had someone apply on those grounds. It is always a minimum 30h pw. We do have people working the minimum, but they applied under our previous full-time role offers and the option only came up in conversation.

The take home pay on the role was about 16k after pro rata'ing - which is decent enough round here for someone with no childcare costs.

I think most decent companies value their PT staff. My company always lets the new Mum's (no Dad's have applied) come back part time. Always in the same type of role. I have found I work full time hours but paid part time. That is the downside for me, but I like my job and the company.

I have a friend who is a billionaire. He has 82 different companies.

Me snd him have had extensive talks about mother’s returning to work. He hires many working mothers part time. But in school hours. He says the business are missing a best. He finds that mothers who work 9-3 are some of the hardest workers. He said they rarely call in sick (apart from sick children) he says they are on work on time snd work really well.

I’ve never understood it myself either

I worked part-time in early years and a couple of people I worked with were so resentful. One of the reasons I left was because of how they treated me. Then I had a 20 hour a week term-time job and my partner at the time seemed to think it wasn't a real job. Would be great to change this narrative.

A few years ago, I managed 6 staff, 4 were PT. My role, FT was divided about 80% dealing with tasks, 20% managing the team. 4he reality is that it took more than 50% of my time because of all the issues with the PT staff. Mainly because the work didn't stop on the days they were off, so had to be picked by others, often me because the ft staff had enough and it wasn't their role.

Of course it depends on the industry and type of roles. Ours meant that the job really couldn't be done PT but because we wanted to be seen as a flexible staff friendly employer we did any way and it made life hell to managers.

I left and took on a job managing 3 FT staff. Life was so much better. I now work PT but around the demand of the role so different days off each week.

I do agree. I’m in a half way house as I am part time in a professional role. I was full time initially before my kids.

But I’m stuck. No career progression as promotions are specifically for full timers and I receive less quality work. Part of me has some sympathy with the organisation though - I’m not in full time and the business is full time. So in some respects I know I’m lucky.

But I have received small pay rises since going part time and less than colleagues.

Must say this isn't my experience. I worked FT after university/post-grad at my company (admittedly, it's a large-ish multinational). Had worked there for 5.5 years when I left for maternity leave and had worked my way up a few roles during that time. Came back PT (4 days per week) and have continued on the same track as before and honestly, other than having annual leave pro-rata, PT working hasn't affected my work or, I believe, how I'm viewed at my workplace.

@Frazzledme I think it's worth highlighting in your article that companies who do allow career progression alongside flexibility are more likely to hang onto their good employees. I started my job FT, after less than a year reduced to 4 days and now do a combination of WFH and office (pre-COVID). I've worked there for 10 years, and am fairly senior. Lots of my colleagues, all career professionals in the pharma industry are similar, part-time/flex and as a result have stayed with the company for many years. I've been headhunted for higher paid jobs, but have stayed put as the flexibility with a young family is worth more to me than a larger salary just now.

I agree. My employer is actually great in a lot of ways so I am lucky.

However, I would say that I do the same amount of work as someone who works full time- not that they expect that but I just end up being more productive with my caseload. There’s no recognition for that though, and I find it’s always the full time people that get rewards/ etc. and I just kind of get forgotten working 3 days.

Also I haven’t been offered any opportunities to take on and learn different type of work, whereas full timers in my team have. I also feel like an outsider because I am busy working rather than taking the time to chat/ build more professional relationships.

I work from home so it’s all over teams, which is great for work/ life balance. But I can see why women would choose full time, or just go the other way and be a SAHM.

NHS here full time responsibility in part time hours. I just can't fit it all in and I'm stressed up to the eyeballs. I'm going full time in Jan so I get paid for the extra time I put in every day.

Also i had a problem with some staff because we needed a FT person, but were prepared to take two PT if one did afternoons. Nobody would commit to that so 2 people lost out and we hired one FT person.

Everyone seems to want 9-2 or whatever, but companies need to work 8-6.

I work in an organisation where almost all roles are advertised as open to both full timers and part timers. This sounds great at first and they like to point out how flexible and family friendly they are but when you stop and think about it I'm really not convinced it's such a great deal. It's not as if they recruit somebody else to do the work on the two days (for example) you aren't there, it's still the same job with the same responsibilities but you just get paid less for doing it. And if you're a conscientious person you'll end up taking the work home with you and finishing it (unpaid) at home at evenings/weekends/your days off.

If a job is going to be advertised as open to part timers I feel like there needs to be a commitment to ensuring that the responsibilities are going to be scaled back so they're actually realistic in the time available.

I feel like perceptions of part time can be very different as well. If you have young children or other caring responsibilities, I think 4 days (0.8 FTE) or compressed full time hours is still quite a stretch. That's 4 full days of nursery/breakfast and after school club every week. Better than nothing I suppose but I'm not sure it's really showing that much flexibility to offer this.

I work somewhere that is very family friendly and has lots of part time stuff. But when I requested to go down to four days I was told it wasn't possible because I do not have childcare needs.

Not sure when this was, but if it was recent they shouldn't have done this. They can only turn down a request on business reasons not because of your personal circumstances.

I think you are asking important questions OP. I have worked p/t since having my first DC 16 years ago. As a single parent, there is no way I could have managed to do this without the support of the Tax credits system and childcare funding. I am really grateful for that, but I think for the state it has been worthwhle because i have stayed in work throughout, contributing something of value (in education mostly, colleges) so I haven't 'lost' the value of the rest of my (state funded) education, am now doing an MSc and hope to go full time after that. I think shorter working hours are really valuable to families and well-being in general. It enables people to have time to cook, exercise, read and talk to their kids. These things have social value but also save the state money in the long run. With have crisis of obesity and mental health which between them will topple the NHS, reduced worker hours help address these problems. With an aging population, more people are going to need to help care for their parents, but won't want or be able to afford to leave work. It's crazy to lose them from the labour market - it is as you suggest a question of human resources. of course, it affects women more because they do most of the caring work, but we need to destigmatise p/t work so that more men do it too, and can do more of their fair share of the caring work. Push to have your article published, that naysayer person either doesn't like or understand the issues. It's important and affects everyone / all companies etc. Remember the 'costs' associated with full time work fall back on companies in terms of sick leave / poor productivity and taxation. Good luck!

Take a look at the post from Overtired above yours that clearly lays out the ways a position can be made part time.

@cdtaylornats

Part-timers cost as much to employ as a full timer.

If true, that’s a huge systemic problem that needs to be resolved, not just accepted.

Again - this is a problem. It shouldn’t be this way.

Hmm the quote function doesn’t seem to be working for me today!

I completely agree. I was told by our preferred recruitment agency that "it won't be possible to hire a part time finance person" because "they all want term-time only". Which is utter rubbish.

Most of the jobs in my team were modular and could easily have been done as a job share or part time. I tried to explain to the management and HR people in my last firm, that it was a brilliant way to hire motivated talent, as such jobs are so rarely advertised, but typically they are taken by people who have either a medical problem meaning they can't work full time, or dependents eg kids or elderly or disabled relatives- and senior management and HR are wary of employing these people who they perceive might be off work more often due to health problems or kids sick and away from school etc.

If only more job adverts said "this job could be done on a part time or job share basis" it would normalise the situation.

@Cocomarine

My large company is full of well paid people at middle levels (some at very senior, but not many) in interesting jobs, with career profession - who are part time.

What do they all have in common?

They took the time to get to that level before going part time.

This.

If you dither around in low paid “women’s” work waiting for a man to fund you, then your choices post-children will be limited.

If you focus on building a career for yourself and spend time gaining qualifications and experience, then you can carry on where you left off.

We do young girls a disservice by guiding them into “women’s work” and away from high paid careers.

“ We do young girls a disservice by guiding them into “women’s work” and away from high paid careers.”

Funny that roles traditionally filled by women tend to be low paid with no prestige, isn’t it? And that “men’s jobs” are the only ones deemed worthy of being adequately remunerated?

Yes, also funny that professions that were once male dominated, like teaching, have seen a slide in real pay and conditions as they've become female dominated. Almost like structural sexism, isn't it?

This FT Vs PT discussion is daft anyway. You actually need 60 hrs pw to do a ft teaching role decently (that's my experience, anyway, and I'm a fast worker and have been lucky not to be in schools with too much nonsense). Other jobs need someone there every week but not necessarily for that many hours, but then all hands on deck at year end (accountancy for example).

Decide what the job requires and hire accordingly - splitting roles up if that gets you better qualified and motivated staff.

And how can a part timer cost the same to employ as a full timer? National Insurance and pension are pro-rata, wages are pro-rata. Training may cost the same I suppose. But you'd have to offset that against how long workers stay with you.

I have worked part time for years and had a very different experience. I have never struggled to find part time work and even my current job i started last week i simply asked if i could work PT before applying and they said yes.

I have normally worked in the public sector and the third sector and assumed they were better. Most people i work with in the public sector seem to work part time

Never felt it limited opportunities - and i choose to work part time - i have no dependents etc which means i do not need to earn as much money.

@GhostCurry

“ We do young girls a disservice by guiding them into “women’s work” and away from high paid careers.”

Funny that roles traditionally filled by women tend to be low paid with no prestige, isn’t it? And that “men’s jobs” are the only ones deemed worthy of being adequately remunerated?

Absolutely. I'm also not convinced that it's true that low-paid jobs are usually more flexible than higher paid ones, anyway; certainly if we're talking about more informal flexibility (ability to set your own diary, for instance) then I don't think this is true at all. Things like shift work can be very family-friendly but it can also be very much not so, and with the rise in zero hours contracts etc a lot of sectors that used to allow people to arrange hours around childcare have actually lost flexibility.

My initial experience of working part time was frustrating - I was left sat with no work while others were overloaded because I wasn't there enough. I'd declined part time work with my original employer because they wanted 100% flexibility across Mon to Fri including overnight stays and evenings.

My husband was point blank refused part time.

So I left the NHS and moved to the private sector where my role is generally underpaid so I brought a level of skill and experience that made me very valuable. I was given plenty to do, fully developed and supported.

But in one role that flexibility and support only applied to those of us with a level of expertise. Staff at entry level were denied working patterns that might suit their family lives. We had huge recruitment and retention problems and it was so frustrating that we ignored an obvious solution.

My experience of part time teaching was not great.
People couldn't seem to get their heads around the fact that I only worked three days a week.
I was expected to attend events on my days off -unpaid. Glad I am out of it.