To think that workplaces should be less accommodating of personal lives?

[HangryDenimBird]

I’ve noticed workplaces bending over backwards to accommodate personal lives. AIBU to think that employees should keep their personal issues separate from work?

So he never had to have time off either with the children?

It’s going to be a rare life where nothing ever comes up; illness, divorce, death. If your employees are with you for years they’re going to go through one or all three and many more plus!

I think if someone is coming in moaning every day or their behaviour affects others that’s another story. This is such a case by case question it’s so hard to say.

This feels like an essay prompt 😂

"Employees should keep their personal issues separate from work? Discuss."

Why do you ask? What’s the impact on you of this very woolly generalisation?

I've managed to hang on to some amazing employees who have complicated home lives by being flexible and understanding. And I'm staying in my current role rather than taking a much less flexible one and a pay rise of around 30% because my current employer affords me flexibility. (I recognise that I'm incredibly fortunate to be in a position to be able to make that choice.)

In an environment of largely stagnant real wage growth and tight company budgets, flexibility becomes as much a part of the employment package as annual leave or pension contributions - less tangible but very valuable to many. The trick is to ensure it works for the organisation and that the people receiving the flexibility remain productive.

Although I have to say when DH had cancer I noticed that I was treated differently to the parents that had problems. I stand by them completely being supported but the difference was very stark and I don’t feel particularly loyal now.

Think what you like (Kemi/Jacob). Most employers are finding flexibility, compassion and appreciating that employees are whole people with complex lives leads to a happier, more engaged and ultimately more productive workforce. Those that don’t adapt will ultimately find that their workforce will vote with their feet.

Don’t recognise the description of mums not being reliable employees given above, not in 25 yrs of working have I seen that stereotype, and heavily smacks of sexism.

It really depends there are people put there having serious issues in their personal lives things that you lucky have never and hopefully will never experience hence this post.

On the other hand there are people who absolutely take the piss I used to work with a young man who had a pathetic excuse ready every day for why he was late and then would act the victim constantly.

Op whatever is happening to you today- you really shouldn’t be giving employers on here the idea that it is in any way better for them to not make allowances for people’s bereavements, illnesses, caring duties (kids or wider family) family issues etc. Whenever I hear of horrible employers that aren’t sympathetic to someone taking time, I think ‘good luck to you keeping anyone longer that two days’. Have heard awful stories of people back in work the week after a close family member died for example. Treat people with respect and go above and beyond for you and they’ll go above and beyond for your company (for someone who had to leave two jobs due to total inflexibility around children)

That you had to 'pick up' is not the fault of these other working mothers – it's the fault of your employer, for not a) compensating you appropriately b) not ensuring workload is met by other means and c) not listening to your unhappiness about it if you did indeed report that that you were unhappy about it (if you didn't then that's on you). That you had a DH at home to pick up the slack also has nothing to do with these other women.

Parents are legally entitled to leave for unwell dependents, and your employers inability to cope with that without impacting you is not the women's fault. It's your employer's fault.

The OP just screams "Someone in my office just got the afternoon off for a personal issue and I didn't".

Erm? Which workplaces and in what sense?

I guess it depends.

If you want employees that will be flexible within the business in order to cover changing business needs, then you need to be flexible with them.

If you want employees that just do what is asked of them in their contract, and no more, then not taking into account personal circumstances is absolutely the way to go.

It's completely unrealistic to think personal life will never affect work, just as it is completely unrealistic to think work will never affect personal life.

It's about tolerable limits. At my work we supported a colleague through his terminal brain cancer. It was important to him to come into work, even though the standard of that work dropped. I think this was the right and human thing to do.

We did not, however, grant compassionate leave to a woman who asked for three days off because her sister's cat had died.

I agree. And you often recruit better employees by accommodating some flexibility in their working lives, when these don’t affect their ability tondi the job.

Plus I agree with another pp who points out that people tend to vote with their feet and leave jobs that don’t acknowledge that they are people with personal lives.

Many employers provide flexibility to some by giving none to others, this does not lead to a happy team. There does need to be flexibility but managers need to manage it and can't have some employees constantly covering for others ( picking up more office days as others demand constant wfh, or having difficulties getting Fridays off as no part time staff want to work Fridays)

Well exactly - like most things, it’s about balance. And there will always be some people who want to take the piss. A good manager knows the difference!

Exactly this. It's the free market at play. Employers who offer the best packages (pay, benefits, flexibility, other accommodations) will generally retain the best employees, and if they cut back on those then they'll gradually find that higher calibre staff leave to work for other companies.

However the free market works both ways, of course: if offering too many accommodations to staff starts to affect the organisation's ability to provide goods and services to its customers, then it will swing back the other way.

Every company will find its own sweet spot according to its own circumstances, or will fail. There's no moral aspect at all; no "should" or "should not".

This is basically the answer to every "my employer is forcing us back to the office" thread ever.

Also true. I wonder what some managers think they’re being paid for - you have to do the work of balancing people’s needs and treating people fairly. Not just accommodating those who shout loudest.

Plus it’s not unreasonable to say to someone who asks for part-time after interview “yes but due to business needs, your working days have to include Friday”

Very good.

I completely disagree. This attitude also affects women more than men who are more likely to have caring responsibilities. I am really happy to allow flexibility where possible to good employees. Happy people work better!