Part time work request rejected

[waaaaah]

Hi, any advice on this would be much appreciated. I'm due back from maternity leave this year. I work for a large organisation that is known for being very family friendly and allows lots of staff in other roles to work part time/flexible hours. I was full time before but I've applied to go back part time and my request has been rejected, the reasons they've said is because my role was funded by another company and they only have funding for x amount of staff and can't afford to take on another member of part time staff to make up my hours. I find this hard to believe as both companies have thousands of staff members and I can't see how it would cost that much more to have 2 part time members of staff instead of 1 full time. I am going to appeal this. Could they get away with this or should they offer me another suitable alternative role at the company? TIA

It does cost more to employ 2 people - it’s the cost to the employer in extra NI, pension contributions etc. They can turn it down because of additional cost to the business.

www.acas.org.uk/making-a-flexible-working-request/if-your-request-is-turned-down

Did you ask to be very part time? They might be more inclined to agree if you increase your offer time wise so that another person is not necessary and you can do the role in that time.

"they only have funding for x amount of staff and can't afford to take on another member of part time staff to make up my hours."

I don't like this argument. Or rather, it's a weak argument.
Yes it costs more to have 2 employees. A tiny tiny amount.

"Costs from handovers, payroll runs, running 2 employee HR files, internal accounting procedures. "

But, these are minimal.

What employees can do / should do is sell it to the boss not in cost grounds but on the benefit of business continuity , eg where one can step in if other goes sick, etc.

I would at least question it. And put forward solutions.

You have a right to request flexible hours
Your employers can refuse for one of the specified reasons
Additional costs is one of the reasons
You should have a right of appeal?

It’s not really a case of them getting away with it,I would try not to think about it like that,instead explore with them whether there is any flexibility
If not you have to either go back full time or quit

Are you permitted to take annual leave as single days? You'll have accrued a lot on maternity. Enough to take Friday off every week for the next 4-5 months for example?

@Oblomov21

"they only have funding for x amount of staff and can't afford to take on another member of part time staff to make up my hours."

I don't like this argument. Or rather, it's a weak argument.
Yes it costs more to have 2 employees. A tiny tiny amount.

"Costs from handovers, payroll runs, running 2 employee HR files, internal accounting procedures. "

But, these are minimal.

What employees can do / should do is sell it to the boss not in cost grounds but on the benefit of business continuity , eg where one can step in if other goes sick, etc.

I would at least question it. And put forward solutions.

You're right and often it's cheaper in terms of direct costs. On 25k,in average this costs an employer £27,695.54. On 50k its £56,895.54. So that's 6,895.54 on top of salary. So when moving into the higher tax threshold it actually is cheaper to have 2 employees on the cheaper salary.

30k costs £33,535.54. 3535.54 more than salary.
15k costs £16,015.54. 1015.54 more than salary. So 2 salaries still cost less.

It's often the indirect costs though. Double the recruitment costs, double the hr and payroll commitments, double the staff to have to provide for and meet their needs etc.

I don't think that they're unreasonable @waaaaah depending on the funding stream criteria for staff appointments and for how long this continues to be awarded.

It maybe preferable to try and work out alternatives you can counter with, such as compressed hours, reneging on some responsibilities and salary as a result, ways to make your suggestions to work, look at how other PT employees flexible working is managed.

Thank you for the replies 💐. It's just frustrating as there's so many employees in every other role there I can think of who are allowed part time/flexible working. I'm going to suggest I transfer to another similar role where I know people work part time as it doesn't seem like they will budge in my role due to the funding reason