Refused job share due to additional costs to the company?

[selte]

I had applied to go back to work 2.5 days a week, and suggested that a job share would resolve any customer availability issues. The company have said that they would be unable to accommodate this due to increased costs to the company of having two employees on payroll at 2.5 days each over having one full time employee. They have suggested an alternative flexible working option, which is not viable for me (5 shorter days per week).

Is this a valid reason for refusing a job share? I know that flexible working can be refused due to "the burden of additional costs", but surely the cost burden involved in a job share is minimal? Do I have a valid case for appeal?

Have they said what the increased costs are? I would ask them to spell out what the extra costs will be. Assuming you are both being paid half a full time wage it must surely just be admin.

If they are minimal (eg having to send 2 letters occasionally rather than 1) then perhaps you could offer a minimal salary reduction (say £100 a year) to cover this?

Is there someone you know of who would want to do the job share with you? If not then I can see an extra cost to them as they would have to recruit someone specifically.

They said there would be increased payroll costs due to having two heads rather than one, but no clarification further than that (I assume that costs for salary, NI, HR, would be higher for the company for two part time roles vs. one full time role?).

You could point out the advantages to them too - e.g. holiday cover, flexibility - perhaps you & your jobshare partner would be prepared to cover each other's sick leave and/or hols.

We have recently made a job share role redundant and replaced it with a full time position purely because the job share was a nightmare.

Will you be able to cover your job share when they go on holiday or at short notice sick leave?

I don't see why salary and NI costs would be any higher assuming you are both taking half pay. HR costs yes slightly higher but marginal.

Pissy is that legal? can you make them redundant if you are still offering the same job?

I can't see how the OP could offer to cover her partner's sick days and holiday days, as she won't have childcare for those days. unless the firm offered to pay for ad hoc childcare.

I know teachers who cover each other's sick leave, being able to tell their head she was nearly guaranteed 100% cover for the year was a strong factor in getting the pattern of split they wanted. But yes, emergency childcare a necessity. (They rely on a favours/bartering system with a group of mutual friends, works v well for them.)

Further to this - I asked for further information on the increased costs to the company of a job share and offered to take a reduction in salary to help mitigate these costs, but I was told that there had been a decision not to increase headcount any further so it was out of the question. I have asked for this in writing anyway so I can see if there is a possiblity of appeal.