Is it fair for employer to make me do 5 days worth of work in 4 days?

[AnnaP99]

Hello - I've never posted on Mumsnet before so hope this is the right place, etc.

I'm wondering if anyone has personal experience / advice to offer - I'm due back at work in two months' time, when my baby girl will be 10 months old.

I requested to go back 4 days a week instead of 5, and they said this was fine. I assumed this meant they would reallocate 20% of my work, but apparently I will just "become better organised" and do the same amount of work.

So I'm expected to cope with the same workload, in less time, for less money and less holiday entitlement.

Is this right / normal?!

Thanks,
Anna

I think this is fairly standard. Most people I know who have gone part time end up doing the same amount of work they did 5 days a week. Most say they end up working smarter. I certainly seem to.

I work 4 days a week and seem to manage to get a similar amount of work done compared to my full time colleagues.

How would you know if you met the required work amount for the week? Some jobs may be quantifiable but others are not. Would they really know if you had done 5 days worth of work in 4 days?

It is nitpick. People don't bloody think! They focus on the VIP parts or parts they like and don't look at responding to emails. Answering phones. Picking up voicemail. Opening mail. I've had people in tears because of it. But that's the detail that needs thought as otherwise Mary bob and Joanne pick up the stuff and that's absolutely not fair.

In response to your forms didn't look like that I'm not suggesting anything that isn't standard.

www.gov.uk/flexible-working/making-a-statutory-application

If you didn't figure out (quote) "give details about how they want to work flexibly and when they want to start
explain how they think flexible working might affect the business and how this could be dealt with (eg if they’re not at work on certain days)" I'm at a loss as to what you thought might happen. It's pretty clear....?

Reginald, our sectors expect similar. Nothing looks weird in your writing. Id consider all normal in private sphere.

Reg, when selling a project in, those selling it should be aware of staff availability, whether that's cos Mary is on holiday, bob works a four day week, Rita is still finishing that last project etc - surely?

I don't think there's any legal right to attend GP appointments in work time.

Snatch To a point, they are, but I suppose staff availability is pretty cut and dry... Either you're on holiday, or you're available. We work as a team and have pretty definite deadlines, so it's quite rare that one person would still be working on the last project when a new one starts, and only two people are allowed to be on holiday at the same time while on a project, so it doesn't affect the sales part of it too much. Like I said, we don't have anyone who works part-time, so that doesn't factor in either.

A big problem is the client expectations, tbh. They come to us with what would normally be a two month project, a month before they need something done, and rather than say no, the sales team fall all over themselves to get the contract, and we're then contractually obligated to deliver a two-month project in one month. So it has to be done.

Yy I have been there! But I think the sales team selling something that needs a period of 10-12 hour days from the project team should be able to accommodate someone doing four 10-12 hour days rather than five, IYSWIM, and if you did have part timers, that's what would happen, eventually...

I get what you're saying in and I agree in theory, but in practice, I just don't see it happening. If there was a job-share or part-timer on the project, it would just be too much hassle to try to update them on what's been done or changed on the project in the last two days since they were there, and I think it would cause some real grumbling amongst the team, if someone was only there a couple of days a week, and not working the rest of the time, when the rest of us are working 5+ days a week, for 10-12 hrs/day iykwim?

I suppose, really, the sales team should be selling reasonable projects from the beginning, that would actually allow us to accommodate part-timers, and work reasonable hours... But doubt that would ever happen

I know but if any parent ever requests it then your company will have to give it consideration...

"someone was only there a couple of days a week, "

And that person would only be paid for that time, of course...

Reginald, actually of course it could be done by p/t. It just requires the will. A decent manager. A good communications strategy.

And a dose of imagination. Too many people just say nope can't be done. The onus is on the employee to do everything but frankly IMO employers are blooming lazy. It's the only reason more office type roles aren't approved. It's rare for an office type role to really not work. Just takes thought.

Well yes, of course they'd only be paid for the hours worked, but from the work load perspective, that doesn't really matter much.

I know if a parent requested it, we'd have to consider it, but to be honest, we have very few parents in our team, mainly because it's not very family-friendly. Most of them transfer into sales or into admin or something less time-demanding. They're not forced to, and they're obviously allowed to stay if they want, but there's only one parent on our team, and his kids are mid-teens, so they're not as hands-on as younger ones.

Are you in IT by any chance Reginald?

In IT support if a system goes down.. think bank or phone network, twitter/media is baying for blood, in those circumstances... you work, everyone works...

Minnie I know it could be done by p/t, but if it doesn't have to be, then it's easier to not have to deal with it, and just have everyone as a contracted, f/t employee who is fully involved every step of the way.

Again, there isn't a ban on p/t workers, and there are plenty in other areas of the company, but it just doesn't mesh well in our specific area.

Eve I am

We're not so much on the support side (though others in the company are), but because things move so quickly, there's not really a margin for delay or error in what we do.

Then anyone making a flexible working request in your area would probably be turned down with good business reason and that would be the end of it. It wouldn't be OK to say "yes, we agree to pay you 80% but still do 100% of the work including the extras that others do"

Snatch Which is why I said at the beginning, I don't know what the employers are legally required to go along with and accommodate. We've never had a request like this put forward, and as I said, I'm not HR, so I don't know if we're allowed to turn down the requests or not. But as a Manager, if I was faced with this situation, I wouldn't be happy about it, nor would anyone else on the team.

Again, as I've said, this is in my industry. No idea what OP does, so don't know if it's applicable to her or not. Just gave my two cents, and received an almighty flaming for it.

negotiate. Say you'll do an extra hour each of the four days / reduce lunch break and remain on full salary for doing the same job. It's usually perfectly possible though depends on what your role is and how your productivity is measured. Agree that in many cases, process can be streamlined and productivity significantly improved. In my organisation, I've seen it repeatedly over the years where people aren't replaced when they leave and overall workload has probably doubled for most people - but we get it done. We still have a job, we have less time for lunches and beers at the desk on a Friday but we're in work and the job's being done. Makes me realise how slack we were for years. It does however depend entirely on what the company is / what the role is.

(also - can you do a couple of hours from home in the evening? that way you get home to see your child / do bedtime etc, but keep the work under control & get your one day off).

I'm staggered by some of the replies on here.

Of course you should only be allocated 80% of your previous workload, if they've agreed to you working 80% of the time, for 80% of the pay - it just goes without saying!
They don't have to agree you can work for 80% of the time, if they don't think they can get someone else to pick up the other 20% (and you'd be surprised how many people would love 1 day a week's work) - it's going to depend on what your job is, to a greater extent as to how easy/difficult that would be.

"it just goes without saying".... yup, but in the real world... you are aware that employing someone for one day a week costs more than the 20% of a full time person's salary? for a small business it's hard to administer. That's why it's so very difficult for all those people who'd love to do just one day's work to find it. Job shares are incredibly disruptive in many roles and it's hard to reach the same level of efficiency across two people that one would provide (in terms of communication / contact / being up to speed) - I very rarely see it working and am frequently left frustrated by it when it's on the other side. It does depend very much on the role and level of seniority.

That's why I was clear in saying that the employer doesn't have to accept it. unless I've missed it the OP hasn't said what she does or anything about the size of the organisation, so it's got to be generalisations when we all chip in.

YY to everything SpringBreak said!

yes, I would stay fulltime and ask for compressed hours.