Part time hours...

[blueberry12345]

Returning to work next year, and have requested to work 3 days a week with one from home.

Work have said that 3 days a week in my role won't work, they're happy to allow me to work 3 days for the initial return to work period of 3 months but then I will need to increase to 4.

In a global company like mine I'm sure someone else must be doing my role successfully on 3 days a week. Do they have to tell me if I ask this?

Also they are being very non committal about a day at home - saying it'll be dependent on performance etc etc.

I basically feel that it's a pain in the arse for them me returning part time and they'd rather keep my (male) maternity cover on in the post (full time).

Am I being unreasonable to request that I'm made aware of any other mums in the company doing my role on 3 day weeks?

Explain the need to work from home one day a week. What are the benefits to the company and to you of that, and what interaction with colleagues might not happen as a consequence? Are others working from home?

Am I being unreasonable to request that I'm made aware of any other mums in the company doing my role on 3 day weeks? exactly the same role?

I would be surprised if your HR department would agree to this. Who’s supposed to gather the data? And how can it be done in a way that doesn’t break confidentiality of staff? Also, if you are part of a team then decisions are made in consideration of everyone not just your own wants.

I say this as someone who has also applied for reduced hours and has been turned down once and accepted once (so you have my sympathy) - isn't the onus on you to say how you think it will work? Are you saying that you can drop 40% of the full-time workload or that the whole workload can be done in 60% of the time? Or are you suggesting a job-share?

If you don't agree with the reasons as to why they have rejected your flexible working request, then you should appeal and explain why you think their decision is unreasonable.

What reason did they give for rejecting your request as maybe posters can help?

You can’t use the fact someone else works part-time to justify how it will work for your particular role. And someone else’s flexible working arrangements shouldn’t be disclosed without their consent. You need to focus on countering the business reasons your employers must provide to explain why their decision is wrong.

Is your expectation that they will employ someone to pick up the 2 days you want to drop? And does WFH suit what your employer needs from you?

Do they have valid reasons?

When I returned they created a role because my prior role just wasn’t possible part-time and I knew that - it was very clear cut.

What do you do? Are there monthly widgets it’s too hard to share out? Is jobshare and option?

Am I being unreasonable to request that I'm made aware of any other mums in the company doing my role on 3 day weeks?

YABU to do this, yes.
I speak as someone who went down to 3 days a week after dc2 was born, and have worked PT in various different jobs ever since, but
a) it isn't only "Mums" who want to work PT
b) it is none of your business what the arrangements are for people across the world.

What you need to focus on is how unreasonable they are being to turn down your request. Why can't you either just pick up 3/5 of the number of projects or clients or however you 'measure' you work, or why can't a person be employed to jobshare the role with you?

I was at risk of losing my job once because the "other half" of my PT role left and they basically CBA to try and find a replacement. I was offered the choice of going FT or redundancy (which was apparently OK because the PT role was redundant, they needed someone FT).

Anyway, when I asked for data on the number of women employed at my level in the company (which was very poor at the time) they backed right down and decided I would keep the PT role. They actually appointed a FT man to fill the gap left by my PT colleague.

I think just letting them know I wasn't going quietly was enough.

That said, you have no automatic right to have your flexible working request met, you need to show how it will work for the company (and one reason may be to retain women). Part time is still a discrimination issue because it overwhelmingly affects women.

I basically feel that it's a pain in the arse for them me returning part time and they'd rather keep my (male) maternity cover on in the post (full time).

I imagine you're right, especially if it's a full time role.

@Ubiquery

I basically feel that it's a pain in the arse for them me returning part time and they'd rather keep my (male) maternity cover on in the post (full time).

I imagine you're right, especially if it's a full time role.

I have to admit that whilst I support PT working in principle and have fought for it for myself ( as above), as the employer it can be very unsatisfactory. There aren't many posts where I work now where people have been able to persuade us 3 days works. We do quite a few school hours arrangements, but 3 days means someone's not there when you need them almost half the week.

I wouldn't agree to a day at home for a parent with a new baby unless I had cast iron assurances that reliable childcare was in place.

Unless you can put forward a clear concise argument how your role can worth on such reduced hours, then no, I don’t think they’re being
Unreasonable.
The right to request flexible working is available to all, but if the company can demonstrate your role reduction in hours is detrimental to business and the wider the they don’t have to agree at all.

Will the baby be in childcare the day you're at home?

Also agree you need to demonstrate how this will work, especially the additional layer of a day WFH. I went back on 2.5 days but had to change my job title and drop half my workload to do so. The other half was fortunately no longer essential to the business.

We do quite a few school hours arrangements, but 3 days means someone's not there when you need them almost half the week.

Unless the company employs someone to do the other 2/5 of the week, which is what I assume the OP is assuming would happen. Then you have people to cover all the work. It really isn't that strange a concept. I presume the OP isn't saying "I normally only put in about 3/5 of the effort anyway, so it wouldn't matter if I am only there 3/5 of the time". The proposal is usually to have one person paid 3/5 of a salary to do 3/5 of the role and another to be paid 2/5 of a salary to do 2/ of the role. Obviously, it depends on the role as to how that is distributed.

@Kite22

We do quite a few school hours arrangements, but 3 days means someone's not there when you need them almost half the week.

Unless the company employs someone to do the other 2/5 of the week, which is what I assume the OP is assuming would happen. Then you have people to cover all the work. It really isn't that strange a concept. I presume the OP isn't saying "I normally only put in about 3/5 of the effort anyway, so it wouldn't matter if I am only there 3/5 of the time". The proposal is usually to have one person paid 3/5 of a salary to do 3/5 of the role and another to be paid 2/5 of a salary to do 2/ of the role. Obviously, it depends on the role as to how that is distributed.

I think it's very unusual to advertise for another part timer to cover the vacancy left by a member of staff going PT but maybe some posters can tell me otherwise?

The only time I've seen that done is for a formal job share, but I don't think they're as common as they used to be and unsurprisingly. You used to have to cover each other's leave and were contractually effectively one person (so if one left you both left unless you found a new partner) . You also were responsible for finding your own suitable partner.

Well if this doesn't meet the companies rewui

@AndMatt

I wouldn't agree to a day at home for a parent with a new baby unless I had cast iron assurances that reliable childcare was in place.

This

Are you requesting to work one day at home and juggle your childcare with working because I can tell you now that it won't work. Young children and working all day at home just doesn't tally up.

You would unreasonable to request information on the other mums in the company, yes.

You're not unreasonable to ask about part time when you return, your company isn't unreasonable to deny the request if it doesn't work for your current position.
If you disagree you need to appeal, and give reasonable assurances that your job wouldn't suffer with the drop in hours, including the time you're at home.

I meant to say asking for a full time role to be cut down to two days in the office and one wfh doesnt seem feasible to me.

You can't have information about other employees hours and arrangements, absolutely none of your business.
No one has an automatic right to reduce their hours. You've asked and they've agreed. But now your shifting the goalposts again and insisting on reducing your hours in the office further? They've said no that won't work for them. There's not really much more they have to do.
Is it because of childcare you want to partly WFH?

I think it's very unusual to advertise for another part timer to cover the vacancy left by a member of staff going PT but maybe some posters can tell me otherwise?

Very normal in my line of work. I presume it is industry dependent if it isn't something you have come across. Lots of people prefer to work PT for all sorts of reasons, not just parents of small dc.

The reason 3/5 roles can be very difficult is because if the role is really a FT role it is very difficult to find someone who wants to do the remaining 2/5 role. So for many it unfortunately doesn’t work commercially for the business.

OP it’s not very clear why you think the role you previously did FT, and which has been covered FT during your leave, is actually possible to do 3/5 without any adverse impact on the business.

We have some people who work PT doing project based roles for external clients and we allow it because we want to retain those individuals in the business and we think it’s hugely important to be a flexible employer. But the reality is either they end up dealing with work stuff on some of their non work days or their team members often end up picking stuff up on those days.

We have some support roles that are PT with varying degrees of success.

The point is I think it hugely depends on the specifics of the role so difficult to say if they are being unreasonable in turning down your request, but it’s not a huge leap to see that a previous FT role could be difficult to deliver in 3 days.