Can they make her work F/T?

[Clarinet60]

My friend returns from 6 months Mat leave next week. She wants to return p/t but they've told her she must work f/t. Does this depend on her contract, or is everyone entitled to p/t?

what was she working before she went on mat leave?

She was working f/t

She's in educational administration

She's entitle to "ask" for flexible working, and they have to give it proper consideration, but the answer is no, I'm afraid. They do not have to give her what she wants.

ok, thanks

She must "ask" in writing & they must reply giving the reasons why

She needs to show how the operation need could be met if she reduced her hours

If she worked 9-5 but wanted to work 10-2 they could say no becaues they wouldn't get anyone 9-10 & 3-5

But if she dropped to 2 days they could (if they wanted) get someone 3 days

At least I think that's how it works

they will need to provide her with good business reasons if they say no. reasons that prove her intended hours would be detrimental to the business.
hopefully she is a member of the union and if they say no, they can argue her case for her.

Depends on the job as well. THey can argue that job-sharing doesn't suit the position. The whole thing with the guidelines the gov't give is that giving someone the right to ask for something is pointless unless the employers have considerable obligations to try very hard to accommodate you as well.

The legislation is there to balance the rights of the employee and the employer, so that's why each case needs to be viewed on its own merits. In some jobs it's easier to be flexible than in others. I'm a teacher and know some teachers who have been granted flexible working and others who haven't, for various reasons: eg, one friend wanted to do 3 days but was turned down because it would have meant splitting all the classes she taught with another teacher which wasn't in the interests of the pupils. She WAS offered reduced hours if she taught fewer classes but came in whenever they were timetabled. She turned it down though because it would have meant coming to work for just two lessons split across the day sometimes. Another friend of mine in primary teaching IS allowed to job share - she does 3 days , but on the condition that the extra liaison needed with the other 2 day teacher is done in their own time. They meet up for a couple of hours after school each week to plan together. It means a bit of extra work, but my friend felt it was worth it to get a deal which suits her.

Thanks for such fast responses. Mumsnet is brilliant.

I used to work in educational administration and I can't - on the face of it - see why that wouldn't be possible p-t. They certainly need to put a bit more effort into it than just "no, you can't".

The only person I know who has been refused p-t working is a friend of mine who is a specialist paediatric consultant. There are probably 12 of them in the whole country. So finding another one who wanted to work p-t in that area was just going to be a non-starter. She's still very upset about it, mind you.

Gosh that's fairly impressive tribpot if you only know one person who has been refused. I know quite a few. tbh, I can see both sides. A lot of mums (it usually is the mother) want to go P/T and I can understand why. But in some cases it's just not going to work for the employer - like with my teacher friend, where all her classes would have ended up being taught by 2 teachers and probably a lot of parents would have felt provision was being compromised. Also, if flexible working is going to affect other employees in a negative way then that would be a reason why it could be refused. It's a tricky one - on the surface a lot of jobs look like they could be part time, but I suppose the employer has to look at all aspects.

Thanks for this link.

They can only turn her down under 8 different headings, they have to explain/justify the business grounds for sayinig no.

additional costs to the business;
detrimental effect on the ability to meet customer demand;
inability to reorganise the work among existing staff and/or an inability to recruit additional staff;
detrimental impact on the quality and/or on performance;
insufficiency of work during the periods you propose to work; and
planned structural changes to the business.

It will be interesting to see which (if any) of those they come up with.

If its not one of those reasons (or it is but they haven't justified it) she has grounds for appeal

In most cases you can be required to go back full time or not at all. Most employers in the UK are small employers and most work cannot be done by part timers so the simple answer is they can. Actually it probably helps her long term to work full time anyway and helps ensure she has equality at home, doesn't reduce her earning power which would help her if her husband disappears abroad and helps reduce sexism in the UK too.

There is a right to request flexible working but no right to demand it.

It is possible educational administration could be done by two part timers. The employers need to follow the proper procedure. There is a lot on the DTI web site on this but I think full time work is better anyway for all kinds of reasons so she should see this as doing her a long term favour actually! Why not get her husband to make a part time working request instead or do they have a rather sexist marriage?

Xenia - Working full time won't necessarily help anyone long term if they don't want to be away from their family for 5 full days per week. Given the long hours culture in many organisations full time workers often have a poor work life balance. That in itself can cause stress, lack of motivation and committment etc.

What percentage of fathers for example have decent quality time with their children during the 'normal' working week? Most I know leave the house before the kids are up and don't get home until early evening when the children are often in bed. This doesn't benefit the father or the children in question - however much he earns or how powerful he is.

Sexism won't be eradicated or even probably reduced in our lifetime. Its nothing to do with whether females work or not.

I don't agree with your comment about having equality in the home if she works. Again, whether you work or not shouldn't have a bearing on that. Equality to me is about committment to one another, the way you treat each other, how much you care etc - NOT about how many hours you work or how much you earn!

If you want to work full time and feel that the benefits of the money you earn and the status it gives you in the home far outweigh the effects of not being the main carer for your children thats a personal choice which no one should knock.

I agree that more men should apply for flexible working rather than the women. It happens in my organisation but there is a stigma attached to it that needs to change for many employers.

Don't try and make it into a crusade about equality for women. Finally, the comment about doing yourself a favour in the long term by working full time is a bit patronising. Not everyone has a choice - many women have to work full time and be away from their children when they don't want to so how can that be doing them a favour (apart from paying the bills)?

I'm saying they should do it without guilty and indeed with a pat on their own back because they're benefiting their children's future life/helping reduce sexism etc. It's good to hear all points of view. Plenty of men disappear after divorce and the children sit there saying mummy we have no money and it's all your fault because you gave up work and trusted someone who shouldn't have been trusted. It's a huge risk to put all your eggs in the basket of a husband who might subsequently abscond particularly as I think children of parents who both work do better anyway.

is Xenia for real?

Sounds like a lot of personal experiences coming out from Xenia.

Ok, how many children would say 'mummy we have no money and its your fault'. I would like to think that a child would be more balanced than that and appreciate the good things they do have like a loving parent who has been there for them, spent loads of time for them etc, an extended family, a safe environment.

"Children of parents who both work do better"

Xenia - do better in what? Thats a massive generalisation/assumption to make.

PS: Do you wear satin tights?

Some do. It's a risk you take if you try to ride on the back of male earnings rather than earning your own money which is more satisfying anyway.

Children of working parents doing better... there was a press report on that the other week, children in nursery school/nursery or or something doing better and also if the family is better off often the children od better. Nothing a sronger indication of how children will do than poverty, sadly. You can almost predict child outcomes based on poverty or otherwise. Also better example to girls if mummy works and more fun for mummy instead of being stuck at home doing in essence dull domestic boring childcare, cleaning, servicing of the male - weird old fashioned model of life most people have chosen to leave behind.

EllieK - no she can't be. Or if she is she must be about 103!

Servicing the male eh - let some women do that if they want to and enjoy it (as well as staying at home doing the boring dull childcare).

I'm at home now on a years maternity leave and my husband does all the ironing, cooks about 3 times a week, does the sandwiches, baths and plays with the kids as well as car washing and mowing the lawn. We have mutual love and respect for each other. There is no assumption that i should do everything in the home just because i don't currently work.

Prior to the sin of all sins of me going part time and doing a job well beneath my abilities I earned more than double my husbands salary but who cares, it wasn't an issue to us then or now that his career has taken off and he earns more than me. My career and earnings was satisfying but I'm not hung up on it, I can live without it to be honest. Riding on the back of his salary - he still has a bit of catching up to do!!!

Children doing better if parents both working full time - quite a feeble response there. Poverty is a big indicator in how well a child will do generally in life but don't think someone can't still be poor if both parents are working and that children from poor backgrounds can't excel and do well for themselves in the future

I could work f/t if I wanted to......but I'd have to pay someone else to look after my children after school, so I'd be no better off (I currently work 25 hours and can manage that) PLUS I actually want to be around for them after school most days (DH does the honours, shifts permitting).

DH could apply for p/t working (and would probably get it) but his rate of pay is such that it would make a huge difference, not only in his wage, but also to overtime (not that he works masses, but it is a given that sometimes he has to).

And even though he works f/t and does overtime (plus increased travelling at the moment) he still does more than his fair share around the home.

Some of us just don't want to work full-time, for many and various reasons. As a family we may fall into some perceived stereotype, but it's what works for us.