Flexi-workers under fir in The Times

[LaDiDaDi]

I wondered what mumsnetters views are on this article.

I found it very one sided and very annoyed by Minnette Marvin who is lucky enough to be able to work freelance and therefore by her owqn admission flexibly. She makes no mention of the benefits of flexible working to employers, such as employee loyalty and increased staff retention, nor does she suggest any alternatives other than working full-time and becoming a man!

Some jobs you have to be there. No-one has yet invented a way of performing an appendectomy from their spare room.

spellbound - sure, you can't walk out on your patients. And my partner does have to be in the office quite a lot of the time nonetheless . But he sets his own agenda, because he has proven himself, which is what is crucial.

Obviously, when you are younger and more junior, that is unlikely to be possible and this is one of the problems for mothers of young children - they are rarely in those positions of power and authority that let them set the agenda. So although Xenia is right in principle, I think that few people get to set their own agenda before their late 30s/early 40s. Not particulary compatible with babyhood.

but it's not always as simple as that.
When i resigned from my job after returning to work after maternity leave with DD2, i was firstly offered a 3 day week, then 3 short days, then 2 days, then 2 days based from home, just coming in for key meetings.

I was lucky, i'd been there 5 years and had proved myself before going on maternity leave (twice in 3 years ), and i would have stayed in the job if i thought it was possible to do a good job 2 days a week based from home, but i knew it wasn't. My colleagues were very relieved when i resigned when they heard what i had been offered.

I certainly found it easier at 36 working for myself having the last children than at 22/24/26 working in the City and being fairly junior but even then I think I was wanted. The last employer recruited me when I was 5 months pregnant with 2 children under 4.

one thing that gets missed out of this debate is the fact that calling 5 days full-time (and therefore the default "ideal") is totally arbitrary. once upon a time people did 7 days weeks (many still do); people have done and still do 6 day weeks; people have and still do split their time between 2 jobs or more - doing all manner of hours; people have, and still do done paid employment for much shorter periods of time combined with other work (housework; parenting, farming, selling). There is no "rule" that says 5 days a week is ideal/most efficient/the only possible way of structuring work. no rule that says you need to divide an annual work load into one person working 52 lots of 5 days.

Some jobs 9 - 5 Monday to Friday would be positively part time of course. If yo ugo back not to long ago most of us in the UK were lucky to get one weekend off a month or a Saturday morning and most people in business always worked Saturday mornings.