|
›› Guided Tour of the Wardman Wire ›› Our Feeds and Websites ›› Buttons and Banners |
›› Oink the Water Buffalo is on CCTV
›› Ad Agency Slogans + Blog Slogans ›› Watching You: Surveillance Society |
Flexible Working
Flexible working is a good thing. It enables people to balance work and life - especially when they have children - and allows firms to keep talent and experience in the workplace.
But this new “right” over flexible working is nothing of the sort:
The right to request flexible working is to be extended to about 4.5 million parents of children aged up to 16.
Under the current rules the opportunity is limited to parents whose children are under six or disabled. (BBC)
“The right to request flexible working is to be extended.” How is this anything new? I already have the right to request flexible working from my employer. I can ask all I like, and they have the right to say “no” to me. Just as they still will be able to say no to these 4.5 million parents included under these proposals.
So it is just a gimmick, designed to grab a few headlines and make Brown look “family friendly”. It’s certainly not a serious proposal, as it does bugger-all.
Of course, had they gone any further and said that anyone has the right to work flexibly that would have been even worse. Though it is undoubtedly how many will read or assume it is meant to be read. Firms must have the ability to say no to requests for flexible working if it will harm them or make it hard for the rest of the team/business to do it’s job.
So this announcement is just a load of hot air - especially when “more than 90% of requests for flexible working were approved by employers last year,” meaning that employers are taking on their responsibilities already, without the government doing anything. So the government should stay out of it.
I think, what they’re trying to do, is to slowly change the culture of work - to be more family friendly, without appearing too anti-business. A tricky position, for sure.
Also, I understood that businesses had to demonstrate that alternative hours was impossible. In my experience in the manufacturing industry (I take on occasional temp. contracts as I’m an experienced Production Manager), businesses generally try and do what they can to accommodate working parents. In line with the legislation.
Aaron Heaths last blog post..+++ BREAKING NEWS: DRINK DRIVING GUIDO FAWKES GETS THREE MONTH 9PM - 6AM CURFEW ORDER AND ELECTRONIC TAG +++
There is an extension of a real “right”, here.
The point about Parental Leave as it stood (this flexible working for parents of under-6s and disabled children) was that the employer had to have a good reason to refuse permission. It’s not simply the case that they can turn you down because they can’t be bothered. You have to be involved in some crucial process, and they have to suggest a later date, if they are going to refuse Parental Leave. What they’re doing now is extending this to more parents.
I do still think Parental Leave sucks though. Having children is a lifestyle choice and there are plenty of other lifestyle choices one could make which would require or be enabled one to have more unpaid leave. I think the rules around unpaid leave should be extended so that we can all have a go at it, within reason, if we want to, once in a while.
Bob Churchills last blog post..George Cowley returns!
Bob, it’s not an extension of a “right”. We all have that “right” anyway. But I certainly don’t object to parents working fewer hours or from home. For one thing, it means that there children should benefit from better/more attentive parenting anf hopefully frow up to be better human beings and support me in my old age. We all do have the right to ask for upaid leave already. And only a poor employer would routinely refuse or not supply good reasons when doing so.