Flexible working request (suggested a job share) rejected. Am appealing - any advice?

[Nancy2]

Hi -I am new to this forum but have recently been reading it avidly!

I would be grateful to hear if anyone's had a similar experience and for any advice on trying to get an employer to change their mind?

I'm still on ML (DD is 10 mths) and trying to negotiate my return. I've worked for the past 10 years in a legal position at a major PLC. I requested 3 days for me and to recruit someone else on a job share basis to do the other 2 days but my boss has turned it down, saying they believe a job share just won't work for a 'senior role' such as mine (their words). I don't think they are even prepared to try it on a trial basis as I did suggest this at our recent meeting but felt this suggestion was swiftly sidetracked! He's quoted 2 of the 8 reasons they are allowed to give as to why they have refused ('detrimental effect on performance and reduced ability to meet demands' etc) and then gone into detail on each. My boss is also head of HR so all roads lead to him!

I am going to appeal but just wondered if anyone else has done this and what happened? I would really like to keep my job going 3 days a week whilst my DD is still little, even though I will have an hour's commute each way into London - I think for 3 days a week this would be manageable. Before I had DD I worked long hours and was always available as the job is quite reactive and urgent queries come in at any time etc, but they have now only offered me 5 days in the office or nothing (no working at home or any alternative position). Any thoughts?

Bump

Mine didn't get turned down, but by way of a 'bump' I'll tell you what works in our company.

They made it clear that I was never going to get anywhere with proposing a job share, as like you I have a senior management role. What I did in practice was go back on FT contract (had 3 dc so 3 lots of mat leave, obv) but use two - or whatever suited me - days of holiday each week. I also insisted that the person immediately below me, as assistant manager, was kept on a suitable responsibility point to cover the time I was on mat leave; none of this in the first instance with any involvement from FW or other proposals.
At the point where I had done this for around three months, and had a good idea of how the job could work in practical terms, then i put the whole lot into a flexible working application, with the complete proposal of how I would meet the demands of my role, support staff and so on, also with the final "blow" of saying "and I've been doing it for three months so I can prove to you that this works" [ner ner na ner ner etc]
It did work - all three times. I had a fantastically supportive line manager, who I had discussed it all through with first, and also made it clear to him that if I would be willing to go back to FT at the end of my year's worth of FW. Which i did each time - if only to be back on full pay to get the best deal out of the next lot of mat leave

Also wondered about working from home, but I see you've tried that. Did you make it clear exactly what duties you would be undertaking whilst at home - the detail is what appears to matter from where I'm looking at it.

Thanks Gigglewitch - that sounds a very good solution and a great way to prove that flexible working can work.

Unfortunately my boss's main concern is that someone other than just him is in the office at all times (i.e me)as he explained he would otherwise get all incoming queries which he wouldn't have time to deal with personally. That's why I suggested a job share but I feel that me and him will be going round in circles on this point! He also said he is unable to recruit anyone extra for the dept at the moment so that closes that route off too. As for working from home I explained that I could work on specific projects without any interruption or distractions but he again felt that my physical absence from the office would just mean more unnecessary work for him. I'll just have to see how my appeal goes!

How did they cover your maternity leave?

they covered it with a full time person on a temporary contract

I personally don't think it's reasonable to say that senior positions can't do a job share. I have known very senior people share jobs very successfully.

However, it wasn't technically a job share, as there had to be an overlap to hand over and sometimes there were meetings both had to attend, decisions to be made, that kind of thing. So it worked really well, partly because the individuals concerned worked well together, but it did involve an overall cost to the organisation of about 45 hours a week on that salary rather than 37.5.

The trouble is that for very obvious reasons it's more or less impossible to effectively trial a job share.

A comment on the working at home thing - you say your job is quite reactive and you get queries coming in all the time. How does that tally with you working at home, which would work best with project/written work? Is your boss absolutely right to be concerned about you not being in the office if the nature of your job means things happening there and then and having to deal with them? That sounds like a fairly reasonable concern to me.

When he said he is unable to recruit anyone else, is that because of a recruitment freeze? Recruitment does cost a significant chunk of money as I'm sure you know, in terms of advertising/agency fees, management time, loss of productivity, all that stuff.

I'm not saying he is right to turn it down, as I said I have seen it work, but it did involve compromises and extra costs on the part of the organisation. It sounds like you would be heavily reliant on a positive attitude, willingness to compromise and desire to make it work from your boss to make this happen, and it doesn't sound as though you have that.

What do you think his reaction would be if you resigned as a result? How keen is he to keep you?

Sorry for late reply as your comments were very helpful Flowery.

Re your questions on resignation and how keen he is to keep me - I might be wrong but I feel that he'd probably be happier with someone without childcare commitments as then he'd have the (supposed) certainty of their being available at all times. I just believe he feels it's harder for the person with the main childcare responsibilties to be able to work as I was before I had a child.

When he said he'd find it hard to recruit someone to do the remainder of the week he meant that he didn't believe there were suitable candidates out there (from research he'd done). My main issue is that they aren't prepared to advertise the position in the first place - that would be the real test to see whether there are candidates or not. There is no recruitment freeze either. Effectively I feel that I'm being pushed out as they are only offering me 5 days and no option for anything else.