Help me make a case to colleagues/employers why scheduling core activities between 5-7pm is not family-friendly and may even be indirect gender discrimination?

[LlamaFarmerKarmaHarmer]

I work in a pretty flexible job. Employers are thinking of rescheduling some activities which mean that we could be asked to work 5-7 regularly at short notice. Our contract (being professional) says 'work whatever hours as determined by your line manager'.

Am making case (as is union) that this should be voluntary and goodwill as negotiated (but with proper protection for carers) but employers are pursuing the idea that parents/carers should have to make a 'flexible working request' in order NOT to to these evening activities. This is a change to the 'expected' terms and conditions in my view, though the contract is open. But because some people don't mind, the concerns of parents seem to be going unheard.

I am just not going to do it, nor do I think I should have to apply for flexible working in order not to.

It seems like it could be clear indirect gender discrimination to me. But what other arguments should be marshalled here?

Thanks for your help. Back later.

[am a regular but recently changed name BTW]

Regardless of what your contract says, how different would working regularly between 5 and 7 be to the current situation?

I do it only very occasionally and on a voluntary basis. For example, in the last 4 years, I have been responsible for 1 or 2 sessions after 5pm. Other colleagues however do it more regularly (eg every week) so there is no real pattern.

WE also sometimes work at weekends at things that we must do, but these are done on a rota basis so no-one is particularly burdened.

So the answer would be for me it would be quite different. I usually am picking up the kids by 5.30 at the latest (though I often and frequently work at home in the evenings and weekends, but that is different work: the 5-7 bit is, ahem, customer focused and thus would be something I would potentially have no choice about if it were scheduled at this time, other than rengotiating for special treatment with my line manager.

Are you still about flowerybeanbag?

Yes single parents that I know have already told me they just won't be able to (this change affects many of us).

And even those of us who aren't single parents will find it both very difficult and very undesirable. It pretty much assumes 'someone else at home to pick up the slack' doesn't it? Which is not really for employers to assume.

I imagine though they think because our job is pretty flexible anyway that it doesn't matter when we do core activities.

But as I am constantly banging on to my colleagues, because of my childcare responsibilities, I would prefer to have a job I could do properly within the 9-5 hours, instead one that spreads to fill the time available...

But this is a bit different: it is not just managing workload; it is actual scheduled activities.

I once successfully argued that a planned relocation meant that I wouldn't be able to do my contracted hours and travel to and from the new location within the time frame that most childminders operate (8-6). At the time dh was doing shift-work so we couldn't agree to take it in turns with drop-off and pick-up. My point was accepted by the company...

One of the key things will be determining whether this would be a change in your terms and conditions (regardless of what the contract says) or not. If you occasionally work those hours but are not expected to, or it's only rare, and suddenly they want you doing it all the time, you'd argue that they were changing the terms and conditions under which you are working, which they cannot easily do without your consent.

It could possibly be indirect sex discrimination, yes, if it disproportionately affects women more than men.

Have you thought about the alternative? If these customer focused activities in the evenings are a business requirement and will be ongoing, are you/the union proposing any alternative?

The reason I ask is that, although they need your consent to change your terms and conditions, the absolute bottom line is that if this is a genuine business requirement and they jump through all the necessary hoops of consultation/looking at alternatives, if they really need to push it through, it might be difficult to do a lot about it.

Thanks fbb,

What kind of things would count as a business requirement?

For example, if it involved a change to scheduling of activities that appear to offer greater choice to customers but is not strictly speaking 'necessary' (for example there is one period of normal working time that is excluded from this rescheduling, and many of us believe this is the sensible alternative, but different interest groups, including the 'customers' may well object to this)

And btw I don't object to the idea that some activities could be scheduled at this time - there are many staff for whom it would be a good thing. But I think it ought to be voluntary with appropriate protection for staff who can't (and not singling them out as a 'special case')

I think that I have guessed your job and I think it would make it easier for those who could help you to explain what it is although I won't declare it unless you do.

Well it's difficult to say without knowing more about the business and the situation, but for example if there is a service being provided to customers and there is a demand from customers for that service at those times, meaning that failure to provide that service would have an impact on the bottom line, then that could well be a business requirement.

It's all ifs and buts though without knowing the situation properly. It doesn't mean it's pointless to resist it - you should do so, but if providing a service at those times is something the business needs to do, particularly in this economic climate where businesses are often struggling, it might make it more difficult to refuse altogether.

Have a read here about changing terms and conditions and here about what happens if you disagree. Make sure you keep the pressure up on the union to do their job, resisting unacceptable changes and making it as difficult as possible for your employer to enforce them. As I say, it doesn't mean it won't happen eventually, but having a union representing you and others can certainly help slow the situation down and address it where at all possible.

I know. I have just namechanged as feeling a bit exposed on this board and got the horrors that all the HR officers are breathing down my neck monitoring my usage and scandalous comments anyhow...

I am CATable though...

Oh sod it. I've exposed myself enough times under my old name anyhow and HR/management will know soon enough about my objections...

I am a lecturer and the college is proposing making 5-7 a regular timetabled teaching slot. The 'customers' ie students wish for more choice and the rescheduling is because of a new module structure. In theory this major change to degree structures has been driven through to provide greater choice and flexibility for students.

There is some teaching at these times already but it is certainly neither 'normal' nor often desirable. Jeez, it can be difficult enough getting the buggers to attend anything after 3pm let alone 5.

The question of consultation is interesting. It is fair to say that I think management and HR were hoping no-one would notice and so the usual top-down consultation has occurred: presenting to line managers and admin managers rather breezily as 'no problem, everyone will be happy'. Yet a number of academic staff (and not just me!) have picked this up and are asking for clarification. No one can get a straight answer on the implications and nothing is really in writing except that the timetabling unit have sent the timetable round as if this is happening...

The other issues are that nothing is scheduled on Weds afternoons because of student sport and, um, senior 'meetings'. When we historically have suggested teaching on wednesdays and scheduling management meetings or sport out of hours, it doesn't go down too well. The students (perhaps rightly) defend this time. But equally, the Students Union don't appear too aware of this proposal and I can't imagine their own equality policies fit with this idea.

Finally, the university itself has developed all kinds of family friendly policies and strategies for developing and monitoring gender equality. No one seems to be even vaguely concerned that this might challenge these policies.

I would be grateful for any advice but oh god may have to namechange AGAIN

surely it can't be that popular a slot as there are many more mature student with the same childcare issues than there are 'traditional' students now.

I totally understand the protected wednesdays but can't remember any lectures at such a late time.

Thanks laurie,

It certainly won't be popular with many students. Although we have actually suffered a decline in mature students with kids since the introduction of fees, nevertheless there are still quite a few. This very week the NUS has published its survey of student parents citing difficulties with childcare as one of the major barriers to successful study.

Leaving that aside, we don't find evening or late afternoon slots ever to be popular, not least because they're knackered and/or need to work at their part-time jobs at these times.

Now that I've spilled the beans on my identity and job, is anyone able to advise more specifically? Thanks.

Ok, so not strictly necessary and presumably not affecting revenue. It sounds to me as though you need to prod the union a bit more to get more involved and to formally present the potential difficulties if this change is implemented. Any chance of collaboration with the SU if you think this change won't be popular with students either?

I think I'd emphasise the difficulties it would cause for students with children as well as staff - may well be able to get the SU on side with this, and it sounds more pc... personally i had a nightmare when I was a mature student with any classes that didn't fit within the times offered by the university nursery. Quote 'widening participation' at them!