More parents to get fliexible working arrangements

[duchesse]

The government is planning to extend the right to request flexible working to parents of under 16s.

Haven't we always had the right to request?

It does not mean that parents are entitled to flexible working.

I don't believe a word of this, especially in these economic times

you can ask away, but in my experience you getlaughedat won't get it

I must be in the 5% that don't get their request. Originally I asked to work monday - wednesday. I actually work totally random shifts, with weekends and nights thrown in for good measure. This was considered a good compromise

The change is that before the right to request only applied to parent whose children were under 6.

Nice idea - totally unworkable.

Employees and employers have always been free to talk to one another. Woe betide that the government should have to give their permission.

I have flexible working, but then my employers are very forward thinking

I work 16hrs pw, with some element of home working

i would love to work term time only that would make my lefe so much easier with raising my 4 dc.

Its just another piece of bureaucy that actually means very little in the real world.

Scienceteacher - that was my first reaction when the law originally came in. But it has made a difference as employers can't just say bog off.

You mean they can go away for a few days to think about it, then say bog off?

Exactly science teacher!

Now they call you in for a meeting and say bog off explain how flexible working is not suitable for the business.

Like I said, it means nothing

Aaaargggh!

I just hate those miserable weasely slippery words "the right to request".

How about this Labour Govt just gets off the fence for once and protects a few worker rights as it always says it does. How about issuing the following statement:

"Parents have the right to take time off work (upaid or as holiday) if they have childcare duties and employers will be prosecuted under child protection law if they do not comply or discriminate against parents."

There thats better. Nice and simple and everyone knows where they stand.

Abetadad - small businesses would go under if that was implemented.

It isn't fair to expect those without children or those with older children to shoulder the workload. Plus there will always be people that take advantage.

My dp was given flexible working hours after he tried to put in his notice and it has transformed our lives from a very stressed family on the verge of splitting up to a very happy family. He totally organises his life around dd and as a result she is much calmer and happier.

His company are in no way forward thinking but they wanted to keep hold of a good worker. Infact it is a complete turnaround as last year he was disciplined for taking a day off to look after dd when she was sick as dd is not his biological daughter.

nancy66 - if parents took the time off as unpaid or holiday it surely would add no cost. Would that not be OK?

I know that what happens now is that parents have to pretend to be ill themselves in order to get time off and still get sick pay. What are parents supposed to do? Are women all supposed to give up work when they have kids?

What alternative is there?. Parents are not allowed to work for small business?

I am not having a go at you but just cannot see an alternative - society has to accept that kids exist and in families where both parents work there has to be some provision to allow parents to take essential time off to look after a sick child etc.

What happens if an employee requests time off and the employers says no and they have a sick child to look after? Do they resign?

I don't know what the answer is - wish I did. I just know that allowing parents to dictate their working hours isn't feasible.

The law doesn't allow parents to dictate their working hours, only to put in a request which can be declined if there are good business reasons.

Employers have to recognise the old 9-5 or whatever isn't appropriate these days. It was based on one male earner per family which no longer applies to everyone.

I invest in business for a living and and I have to say that the self serving rubbish that some business people spout is sickening at times.

Of course managers would prefer to never allow employees time off, never have to bother with flexible hours, never pay them for compulsory overtime. However, what they seem to forget is that many employees are often very flexible, often working an extra half hour here and there, not taking lunch out of the office to cover for someone who is sick on reception. Employers like that flexibility and do not pay for it but woe betide the same employee who needs a bit of flexibility in return.

Sorry, I have no patience with business people who winge about this. I know the games and the stunts they pull with employee rights. In big firms I know the corporate excesses and the jollies for senior managers, the expense account lunches and the vile lads nights out, the golf weekends, the corpotrate jets, etc. No one seems to bat an eyelid at the costs of that though. I have seen it first hand.

Flexible working can be zero cost if implemented properly and to be honest the amount of waste and inefficiency and useless management I see in business the cost of a bit of flexible working and showing basic decency to employees is the least of their worries.

Got a bit ranty there - but Govt is being pathetic on this issue.

DH has flexibleworking, its the only thing that kept him in employment when ds1's asd was atits most challenging, a change of hours (ended up working more for same money but better ones for us) meant hewas here at kick off time each day.

He's losing that now, but in the face of redundancy: in the unlikely fact he has a job in 2 weeks will be terrible hours andquite possibly mean big problems but you have to work if you can. It may mean I have to send ds1 away to weekly sepcialist school but I do hope not (hours will mean the he sleeps when boys at school so they won't see him on- fri, we have 4- a toddler, 2 asd boys and one with suspected adhd).

Flexible working also kept me in a job between ds1 and ds3's birth, and us off benefits.
Which is ltimately the point isn't it? A lot of parents wont just say Oh OK I'll work what you want then- they'll say 'sorry here's my notice then'..... and when that happens income tac receipts dip and benefits payments rise, as well as having a knock on in the service sector- nurseries / childcare, cleaners etc. It's a hard balance toa chieve between employers rights and employee's especially in a recession but it's an important challenge I think.

You can get time off without pulling a sickie but only unpaid: it is there though. The big problem is when you need predictable time off- for examle the clinic ds3 is seen at needs him there at 9am, with a parent but we cant take the other boys. There's no wrap around care and nobody else to do a school run for us. So one parent has to be with the other boys, one at clinic (If you cancel an appointment you go back onto the waiting list for 6 months).So we can't claim emergency parental leave, DH's work holiday system usually means most Mondays are booked up immediately they become available (more staff than holiday dates available- a naughty cop oput but better than the old and illegal system). So- what? ytou lie, what else can you do? Or you cancel the appt. Stuffed either way.

ABetaDad, if only all employers had your compassion and understanding. Actually it's not even compassion is it? It's common sense. People have to have children, unless you write off about 40% of the workforce to stay at home and look after the next generation you have to accept that it will reflect in their working lives, sometimes. But you're so right to say that employers are quick to benefit from their employees flexibility but not offer it back to them.

HeadFairy - to be absolutley honest I actually think there are sizeable proportion of employers would really like to sack every worker that gets ill or has a child as a way of dealing with recession. That is how bad it is in some firms right now.

As an investor in business I can tell you I have deliberately refused to invest in several businesses where I found out they were treating workers unfairly. I am not talking about breaking the law or sweat shops I am talking about big supposedly respected businesses that you will know well. I invest in all kinds of supposedly unethical business like tobacco, guns, alcoholic beverages as wel as ones that emit millions of tonnes of carbon so I am no wooly liberal but have no patience with useless maangers that make up for their deficiency by treating workers, suppliers and customers badly.

The bottom line is a business that treats workers poorly is not sustainable, does not have a loyal workforce and will almost blow up one day. It is a sign of bad managament.

The best example of this is the City banks that have caused such a chaotic mess - look at their employment practices. The two things are very very closely connected. Grossly overpaid and terrible management are to blame for the credit crunch and poor employment practices.

I'm sure that many employers complaining about how flexible working hours damage their business, also worry about the stories in the news that highlight how badly behaved some children are. Bet they think 'blame the parents'.
Wonder if they've ever realised that one way to help this country bring up a nation of well-adjusted young people is to allow parents to have more flexibility and set their kids a good example.

Before you shout - I'm not trying to blame employers for the unruly behaviour of some teens, but I think we all have to share some responsibility for bringing up the next generation, whether we're parents or not.

Trouble is the Govt can't really legislate to enforce sense. My boss is very sensible - she was horrified that I was using up all my holidays for the dc's sickness and insisted that I started "working from home" even tho I wasn't doing anything like a proper day, just firefighting and getting my secretary to run around telling other people what to do! But to have a right for this to have happened would have been virtually impossible to draft. I think it is largely a cultural thing and if people like AbetaDad (are you a VCT or something?) refuse to invest in non-sensible businesses, this is certainly going to help.

I was just reading on another thread about older female colleagues not showing solidarity. We could do with all showing a bit of solidarity with colleagues - the three Mums and two non-Mums in my group are great - but there's one who's a real PITA. Such people should be told about Life's Little Realities...

Abetadad... I work for a very well known company, known throughout the world. We get paid 20% extra on top of our salary to work flexibly (that's their definition ie no predictable shift pattern, shifts can be changed at 24 hours notice etc etc). If you are a working parent and can't work under these conditions you have to accept earning 20% less. I couldn't afford to take that pay cut so I have to accept that sometimes I have to swap shifts at short notice, often less than 24 hours.

I couldn not do my job as a single parent. The hours are too long for any childcare, I'd have to have a live in nanny as my shifts finish at 10.30pm (there are no alternative shifts available) and I do nights, and there is no way I could afford a full time live in nanny on £35k a year. It effectively discriminates against any single parents. There are none in my department (of nearly 100)