My full time colleagues can WFH but I'm not allowed

[Zazaz]

My employer has agreed that I can return to work after maternity leave for 3 days a week. However they have said that I need to do all 3 days in the office, despite full time employees being allowed to work from home for 2 days a week. This doesn't seem fair to me - surely WFH should be pro-rata'd?

I don't want to come across as grabby and ungrateful as I'm pleased they've allowed me to drop to 3 days but at the same time it seems discrimatory.

Am I being unreasonable?

Should I challenge it?

Any suggestions of how I can politely word it without being accusatory, whilst firmly pointing out that it seems unfair?

Thanks in advance

"If it's 3 days in office and 2 days wfh for everyone that's how it is, and based on needs in service. Your colleagues are still working full hours those days. You don't really have a case as you're not working at all for 2 days, so no."

@Butterfly44
I completely disagree with this. There could be grounds. Depends what job OP does. She could very well work 1 in office, 2 at home, or 2 in office, 1 at home, possibly.

Yes. I would politely challenge it / enquire as to if that is policy?

I think your employer may be being somewhat short sighted here as clearly FT employees have a right to work at home for 40% but must be present in the office for 60%. Whilst there are clearly benefits of everyone being in the office - team meetings, learning, collaboration, training etc, some jobs can be effectively done at home.
Given FT employees have the right to work at home for 2 days a week, then it suggests that your job can be done effectively on a hybrid basis.
Is everyone going to the office on the same 3 days - I am assuming not, in which case your argument for WFH 1 day a week is stronger.
I wonder if your employer 1) has a lease for expensive office space which they want to get the most out of 2) does not trust its employees to be as productive at home as in the office (well if they are part time ).

Haven’t read the whole thread but at my work (higher education setting) it’s 2 days at home for 5 day a week and it’s 1 day at home if you work 3 days. Think it’s based on ours worked so I work 50 per cent of the full week so I get 50 per cent of the wfh allowance

My company had the policy that you could work from home 50% of the time but no less than 3 days had to be in the office, so your situation exactly was what our 3 day a week staff had.
The justification was that a minimum amount of “team togetherness” was the purpose of the office days.

You do get the benefit of less commute, because you are not commuting on your non working days.

You can ask, but I don’t think it is inherently unfair.

I would be annoyed in your situation. I think just pointing out to them that it's seems unfair is the way to go. If they don't budget then put in a flexible working request. I work 3 days a week aswell and all my colleagues work 5. They get 2 days wfh and I get 1 day wfh. I would be really pissed off if I was the only 1 who wasn't allowed to wfh.

Are they concerned about childcare? Can you reassure them you have adequate childcare on days you want to work from home?

Could this not be indirect discrimination, though, on the grounds that far more women work part time than men, and that women are therefore being treated unequally under this policy?

I guess it's down to the employers appetite for risk of attrition. They are not obliged to let anyone work from home at all, so there is a risk that if people start calling this discrimination they might just say sod this, everyone's in the office full time, and accept they will lose a few people as a result.

We need to go back 2/5ths of our working week so part time staff will be pro-rat'd

I had this, full time employees are allowed to WFH up to 2 days a week (so 40% of their allocated time in the office). I’m employed 4 days a week so asked if I could do 3 days a fortnight WFH so it’s broadly equivalent and was told no, I’d need to be in 3 days like everyone else.

I’ve since gone on maternity leave so haven’t pushed it, but it does reduce the financial value of my working day compared to FT colleagues - I’m being paid 80% of the salary of a FTE but paying 100% of their commuting costs. Not my work’s problem necessarily but it’s an example of their rigidity.

It pissed me off as my DH’s place expresses PT benefits as percentages of FTE in all circumstances, whereas mine does it as absolutes... It does feel broadly unfair but as it’s just one element of why I don’t feel valued and once I’m back from maternity I plan to vote with my feet.

I got it put into my contract. Your prorata suggestion sounds good. Another way of asking is for every 5 days they work they get 2 days wfh so you should get the same. Even if its taken at a time to suit the business.

You do get the benefit of less commute, because you are not commuting on your non working days. but what OP does on her non working days are completely irrelevant.

It’s relevant to use her non working days in this as she is not paid for these days and working 3 days is not a ‘benefit’.
On that basis you would need to factor in the weekends for the other employees

*not relevant 🙄

This does seem unfair. I went back to work 3 days a week after maternity leave (pre-pandemic) and I work two of those from home. Can you put in a formal work-life balance request?

You’re right OP, part time employees are legally protected.

I would ask them why you need to be in everyday, and explain why these reasons are not relevant.

Preferably get it in writing, if they’re stupid enough to say it’s because of childcare or similar that’s most likely indirect sex discrimination.

Is there any sort of precedent with other part time employees?

Exactly. Her Non working days don't count as days off on holiday.

Really interesting to read people's responses - thank you. There is no precedent as I am the first person to go part time and it is only since the pandemic that hybrid working has been a thing.

I am in equal measures grateful (for them allowing me to work 3 days) and frustrated for them saying I have to be office based all 3.

I'm now back to erring towards asking them if I can work one day a week at home and getting this agreed before starting back.

But aside from writing - this is unfair, I need to think how to word it. Any suggestions gratefully received.

If you are going to do this then you really need to know your companies reason for asking for 3 days.

Since there is no legal right to work from home it is all left up to company policy. Every companies will have different policies. Every company will have different tolerances as well.

Since you are the first ‘issue’ they have had with part time working and working from home it will be very difficult to predict their reaction to your request.

It could be a case that you request it, they say of course, and that’s that. However, it’s also possible that it causes all sorts of issues.

This is why really you need to know why they have settled on 3 days and basically the overall attitude to working from home and flexibility around their rules and policies.

You have been describing it as the 'right' of full time colleagues to work from home for two days a week but I would more think of it from the perspective of the obligation it be in the office three days. It will definitely be the number they feel is needed for team connectivity/ bonding (same number as my workplace) and you need to feel as connected with the team too despite being part time.

I think if your part time
ie: your not getting paid for none working days . Then you should not have to work in the office the whole 3 days if full timers do not have to work all their days in office.