Menu
Timewise Foundation Logo

Shouldn’t frontline staff get to attend school assemblies too?

Ad-hoc flexibility is harder to achieve in frontline and shift-based roles – but for the sake of fairness, employers need to try and make it work. Here are some pointers.

parents and carers in a hall watching a school play

By Amy Butterworth, Consultancy Director

It’s no secret that frontline and shift-based jobs are harder to make flexible than office-based ones. From the obvious barriers around working from home to the requirement to have a balance of skills on a shift or site, there’s just less room to manoeuvre when a frontline employee needs flexibility.

Here at Timewise, we see this as a challenge, not a barrier; we’re working with employers across the frontline, including NHS trusts, construction companies, schools and retailers, to level the flexible playing field.

But although the dial is starting to shift on access to formal flexible arrangements, most frontline staff are still missing out on something else that many office-based workers take for granted – ad-hoc flexibility.

Not all flexibility can be planned in

Sometimes, life happens in a way that requires flex at short notice; an hour here, or a morning there, in a way that can’t be planned in. It might be a child’s school assembly, or an elderly relative’s doctor’s appointment; it might be something as seemingly trivial as a tiny window in which to book tickets for a favourite band’s farewell tour.

Faced with these scenarios, most office-based workers would simply come in late, or take a bit of time out, and make it up later; but for a frontline employee, that’s not an option. Rosters are often created months in advance, and while colleagues might be willing to swap shifts or cover for each other, it’s not a given – and puts the onus on the employee to call in a favour. So as well as exploring more formal flexible arrangements, proactive employers are also looking at ways to give their frontline and shift-based staff access to this more informal, ad-hoc flexibility.

Ever since the final lockdown ended, some business leaders – and even government ministers – have been popping up to insist that the WFH era is over.  From the Goldman Sachs CEO who described WFH as ‘an aberration that we’re going to correct as quickly as possible’ way back in May 2021, to the June 2023 announcement by Google that they will be tracking in-office attendance, the sense from the media is that employers want everyone back in for the majority of the week.

And the narrative around employees’ views seems to suggest that they’re in the opposite camp – that they are determined to hang on to their WFH arrangements and, as with 30,000 Amazon USA employees, fighting back when employers try to change them.

The impression given by all this coverage is one of employers and employees being poles apart; of companies having to get tough to get what they want, and employees digging their heels in. But is internal warfare around WFH and hybrid really inevitable – or is there a way to make these arrangements work for everyone?

Challenges versus benefits of WFH

The first thing to note is that WFH is neither all good or all bad; it creates challenges and benefits for both employers and employees. The lack of commute and home environment can boost wellbeing for some, but leave others feel isolated. Having peace and quiet to get your head down can be beneficial, but the accompanying email overload less so.

Similarly, while WFH allows companies to recruit employees from a wider geographic area, or employ great candidates with health conditions that require them to stay at home, it also makes it harder to create connections and build relationships.

But, as all organisational leaders know, change happens in stages, and involves careful management of the transition from old to new; ‘It’s too hard’ isn’t a reason to stop trying. And going back to the pre-pandemic, ‘everyone in’ approach just won’t wash in today’s tight jobs market.

In a June 2023 CIPD report, 53% of employees said remote working is key when looking for a new role, and 46% of employers said the number of people wanting to WFH has increased over the last 12 months. The same report also noted that 38% of organisations say that more home/hybrid working has increased productivity (compared to 13% who say that it has decreased) and that 38% of employees think that working from home or in a hybrid way makes people more productive.

The implication is clear; offering the option to work from home, for at least part of the week, is likely to encourage people to join your company, stay there longer and thrive while they’re there. But these benefits will only materialise if you get the implementation right. And for that to happen you need to avoid the battles, and go for a balanced, team-led approach that brings everyone with you.

Collaboration and focus are key to successful WFH and hybrid arrangements

The starting point is to remember that any arrangements have to work for both the individual and the team. It’s not realistic to try and give everyone exactly what they want – and that’s OK. Instead, prioritise collaboration; setting some company-wide principles, and then devolving implementation to individual teams, is more likely to create workable solutions.

Additionally, as we identified in our research, Beyond the Hype of Hybrid, there are three core areas that organisations should focus on when exploring WFH and hybrid options: upskilling leaders and managers; enabling connections and cultural cohesion; and ensuring fairness and inclusion. Getting these right is critical – and will help you make sure that employees get the choice and autonomy they want, within a framework that works for the organisation.

And it’s important not to take some of the myths that are floating around at face value; for example, the concept that all new joiners want to work in the office and all parents want to WFH, or that the office is the only place where creativity can thrive. Be clear about what the office is for, and use this as your base to work out how and when people should use it.

Ignore the narrative, and do what’s right for your organisation

All of this makes sense, of course; but it can still be hard to stand out against a prevailing narrative. For example, if you’re in a sector like finance, in which some loud voices are calling for an end to WFH, it can feel all the harder to go your own way. But that is exactly what one of our clients, Phoenix Group, the UK’s largest long-term savings and retirement business, has decided to do.

Having implemented homeworking during the pandemic, and subsequently taken part in our Flex Positive Programme, the leadership team are adamant about continuing with a hybrid approach as part of ‘Phoenix Flex’ approach. They want to support a truly inclusive workforce, enabling people to work in a way that allows each colleague to perform to their best. With an approach that puts customers and colleagues at the heart of all flexible working patterns, Phoenix believe that it’s a framework for flexibility that looks at where, when and how you work, and offers everyone the best possible experience and balance. They are proud of their approach and are working to increase flexibility further.

Or to put it in their words, “We’re paddling our own canoe.”

And that, in a nutshell, is what needs to happen. Instead of getting overexcited about the brilliance or awfulness of WFH, employers and employees need to work collaboratively to explore the options, and find ways of working that work for everyone. In today’s environment, going backwards isn’t really an option; the answer is to go forwards, together.

Published July 2023

New legislation, which includes the right to ask for flexible working from day one in a new job (informally known as Day One Flex), is likely to come into play in early 2024. And while common sense suggests that this will be a popular change, and we and other campaigners have long believed that it’s necessary, there’s not really been the data to back this up – until now. As part of a substantial new programme of research to better understand workers’ attitudes towards part-time, we have partnered with Opinium to survey 4,000 workers. And among the questions around access to flexible working in general, we asked if they knew about the new legislation and if they’d take advantage of it – whether in a new role or in their current one.

Half of respondents would consider asking for flex from day one When asked whether they would consider taking advantage of the new Day One Flex rights in a new role, almost half of our 4,000 respondents (49%) said yes. Additionally, 30% said they weren’t sure – which may partly be because over two-thirds of respondents weren’t aware of the change in the rules before taking our survey. And only 21% said no.

The research also dug into the detail of who would be most likely to consider using the new rights, and this threw up some significant variations, with three determining factors emerging:

  • Ethnicity: 71% of respondents from a black ethnic background said yes, in comparison to 48% of workers from a white ethnic background.  
  • Age: Younger workers were also more likely to say yes than older workers (54% aged 18-34 versus 39% among those over 50).
  • Caring responsibilities: Parents and carers were also more likely to answer yes (53%, compared to 45% of those without such responsibilities).

What does the new legislation involve?

The government has confirmed that the right to request flexible working should be a day-one right for all employees. The legislation also:

  • Enables employees to make two flexible working requests in a 12-month period, instead of the one currently allowed.

  • Removes the requirement for employees to explain how their proposed arrangement could be implemented.

  • Requires employers to consult with the employee and consider alternative options before refusing an application.

  • Reduces the timeframe to process requests from three months to two.

Interestingly, and unusually for the flexible working arena, one area in which there isn’t a sizeable discrepancy is gender, with 51% of women answering yes compared to 48% of men.

We’re undertaking further research to deepen our understanding of the variations among different groups, and will be exploring the intersection of a number of factors, especially ethnicity, age, class and caring responsibilities. We’ll be launching our report in the autumn.

Remember – this isn’t just about new hires

While this part of the legislation focuses on the right to request being available from the first day in a new job, it’s important to remember that it won’t just affect new recruits. Currently, the right to ask only kicks in at 26 weeks, so the change would directly affect anyone who has joined more recently than that.

And while respondents were more likely to use the new rights in a new role than in a current one, our findings also show a strong interest in using them to change existing working arrangements, especially among those who are less comfortable having informal conversations about flexibility with their manager. 40% of all workers said they would consider using the new rights in an existing role, in comparison to 29% who wouldn’t. And again, this figure rises among workers who are from a black ethnic background, young (aged 18-34) or have caring responsibilities.  

It’s also worth noting that, despite all the talk about the pandemic driving a shift in flexible working, our research shows that this hasn’t been the case for the majority of workers – especially those in routine occupations. 41% of workers in managerial and professional occupations gained flexible working during the crisis and say they have maintained those arrangements, whereas only 9% of those in routine occupations said the same. So in many organisations, there is likely to be a pool of employees who will want to take advantage of the new right to request.

What does this mean for employers?

So if this is what the data is telling us, what should you do about it? It’s simple really; you need to be prepared to manage an increase in flexible working requests, and to respond to them fairly and consistently.

This means building capability within your organisation on the different types of flexibility that are available, and evaluating how they could be incorporated into different roles. It means equipping your line managers to respond to requests in a constructive way, which balances the needs of the individual with those of their team and your organisation.

It also means taking a proactive approach to ensure that open and transparent conversations about flexible working are possible for all workers, regardless of their role, and that the onus isn’t on the individual to have the confidence to request, whether formally or informally. We’ve explored seven ways that employers can get ready for Day One Flex here.

But as well as creating requirements for employers, the new legislation also creates opportunities. Yes, you need to comply with the legislation – but a much more powerful option would be to embrace it fully, and shift to a proactive approach.

One example would be to offer flexible working for all new candidates, and say so openly in your job adverts. As our previous research has shown, doing so is likely to widen the pool of candidates both numerically and from a diversity perspective, which would in turn have a positive impact on your organisational culture and employer brand. Of course, this will need to be backed up by flexible options for existing staff too.

So are you ready? The data says you need to be, and the clock is ticking; it’s time to get started. If you’re not sure how, we can help; feel free to get in touch.

Published June 2023

Group of people sitting as an audience, one person has their hand up to ask a question

By Claire Campbell, Consultancy Director

There’s no question that the four-day week is a hot topic right now. Every time we host a webinar, or meet a client, it’s one of the first things we’re asked about – and apparently, many employees are asking about it too. And as an organisation focused on how flexibility can help people thrive in their work and home lives, we’re very much on board with the concept.

But it’s becoming clearer with every conversation that there is a lot of uncertainty around the four-day week; firstly, about what it actually looks like in practice, and secondly, about the best way to implement it.  So we thought it would be helpful to share some of the questions that we’re being asked, and our suggestions for how to answer them.

Is the four-day week just a ‘free’ day off?

One of the most common questions people have about the four-day week is what it actually is – and this is important, because it’s not what many people think. Specifically, it doesn’t mean employees just get a free day off each week with no impact on the other four days. The leaders of the 4 Day Week Global campaign have worked hard to clarify this, but the misconception remains.

So if it isn’t that, what is it?

At a basic level, it’s a pattern that expects employees to do 100% of their job, in 80% of the time, for 100% of their pay. How? Essentially, by being more efficient; by improving productivity in a way that allows them to achieve the same in less time. So it’s about reducing your hours, but not your outputs.

So how do companies make it work? How can the same job be done in less time?

This is another big question – and the answer is, it depends on the organisation. If you are considering implementing the four-day week, you will need to work with your teams to explore how they can deliver the same levels of service or productivity more efficiently.

Examples that are often cited include reducing unnecessary meetings, automating certain processes and redesigning others to involve fewer people. There was also a suggestion from the UK pilot programme that some people picked up their working pace – 62% of employees who took part said it increased, with 36% saying it stayed the same. And a couple of the participant companies took strategic decisions to reduce overall workload – such as letting go of minor clients or cancelling a couple of non-core projects.

The key point is that there isn’t a one-size-fits all solution for this. Your teams will need to work collaboratively to identify where efficiencies can be made, and then design working arrangements that work within the new parameters.

That might mean everyone gets a full day off each week, or it might mean people working five shorter days, or even an annualised arrangement. The ideal scenario would be to offer your employees options on how they spread their 80% of hours across the week, so they can find a pattern that fits with the rest of their lives.

What about frontline roles? How is it possible to make these more efficient?

It’s much harder to see how the four-day week can be made to work through efficiencies within roles in which there is a really strong correlation between the hours worked and the service provided, such as patient-facing, customer-facing and contact centre roles. So organisations with these roles, who believe in the concept, may have to invest in making it happen, on the basis that this will have a positive impact over time.

That’s certainly the approach taken by Citizens Advice in Gateshead, who took part in the UK pilot. Their solution was to hire extra staff to cover the extra hours, in the hope that the investment will be offset by a reduction in recruitment, retention and sickness costs; at the time of writing, this is a work in progress.

There is also an argument that, for industries that rely on agency staff, hiring more permanent staff to allow everyone to work fewer hours for the same pay could be offset by the savings on both agency costs and sickness absence. One to watch is South Cambridgeshire District Council, who took part in the initial UK pilot, and is now trialling a four-day week for refuse loaders and drivers. This will cost £339,000 extra over two years in increased staff and new lorries, but the council believe savings will be made through using fewer agency workers, as well as rationalising bin routes to reduce wasted time.

Right now, the ‘payback’ data on frontline four-day weeks is limited, although our own research has highlighted a more general correlation between flexible working and people taking fewer sick days. But companies with some frontline staff will need to give some thought to how they make it work for their roles, to avoid exacerbating the gap between flex haves and have-nots.

How does it work with other types of flexible working, such as part-time or compressed hours?

This is another real challenge thrown up by the four-day week, and one which organisations with part-time employees are working to tackle. During a discussion about the pilot, South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Liz Watts noted that “In terms of part-time hours, this was the trickiest bit.”

One solution is to reduce the part-timers’ hours in line with the reduction for full-time staff, but it’s arguably a stretch for someone who is working less than a full week to compress their hours even further without affecting outputs. This is particularly true if their part-time job was never properly designed to match the decreased hours – we know anecdotally that many part-timers are already squeezing a full-time job into fewer days.

As with turning a five-day job into a four-day one, the answer lies in collaborative discussion and job design; exploring what efficiencies can be made and looking at how to make the role and its outputs achievable within the available time. It’s certainly not a good idea to expect the part-time or compressed hours employee to continue on the same hours for the same pay while everyone else around them is seeing their hours reduced.

Will offering the four-day week help us attract more candidates?

The short answer to this is yes – and if it’s implemented well, it’s likely to help you keep the staff you have, too. Why wouldn’t it? But there are a couple of things to be aware of here.

Firstly, if you think that offering a four-day week will help you recruit great people, you’ll need to tell candidates about it; there’s anecdotal evidence of companies not wanting to promote this working pattern in case it attracts ‘the wrong kind of candidates’. This is based on an (outdated, in our view) assumption that only slackers want to work fewer hours, and it doesn’t really make sense; you certainly won’t be able to attract candidates through the four-day week if you keep it quiet.

And secondly, if you’re recruiting at a time when you’re piloting the four-day week, you’ll need to make that clear – otherwise, if you decide to revert to a more traditional working week, you’re highly likely to lose your new recruits.

Will the benefits stick?

This is a great question – and one we don’t feel qualified to answer, yet. The recency of the four-day week pilots, and the lack of large organisations taking part, mean that the data is in its infancy, and it’s just too early to call.

It’s certainly fair to say that there’s a risk of increases in individual productivity and retention reversing if people start to slip back into old habits. But it’s equally possible that the long-term health and wellbeing impact of working fewer days could lead to sustainable and quantifiable benefits for companies.

So we hope that the organisations which are piloting and implementing the four-day week have robust tracking in place, and are willing to share the outcomes, so we can all learn what the real impact of this new working pattern is.

Published June 2023

Background

New legislation giving employees the right to request flexible working from the first day in a new job (informally known as Day One Flex) will be in place from next year. It is a sign of huge progress for those of us who have long championed flexible working, and is set to shake up HR practices across the jobs market.

However, it’s important to reflect that the legislation is in some ways just the start of the journey. The changes it ushers in will be made tangible by the way that employers respond. And it’s becoming clear from conversations we’re having that many employers – and particularly those with frontline employees – feel they will need more support to both implement these changes and access their potential benefits.

With this in mind, we hosted a Timewise expert panel discussion to explore the Day One Flex questions that many employers are currently asking. Our speakers were:

  • Kevin Hollinrake MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department for Business and Trade (Minister for Enterprise, Markets and Small Business)
  • Dr Anne Sammon, Partner at Pinsent Masons
  • Louise Tait, Head of HR, OD and Talent at Wickes
  • Steve Collinson, Chief HR Officer at Zurich UK

Over 200 people attended the webinar, and before we began we sense-checked their views by asking two questions:

  • Do you feel your organisation is ready for Day One Flex?
    Yes:  41%
    No: 20%
    Maybe: 39%
  • What do you intend to do about the legislation?
    We want to actively go above and beyond: 45%
    We want to be compliant – nothing more: 18%
    Not sure – somewhere between the two: 37%

Introduction

The session began with an address from Minister Hollinrake. He began by saying his 30 years of experience as an employer before becoming an MP have led him to believe that having good relationships with employees, as well as open dialogue and a considerate approach to the rest of their lives, is good for workplaces and so for employers.

He also noted that flexible working is a high priority for people who are thinking of returning to the workforce, and that with 8.7 million people of working age currently economically inactive, and business representatives desperate for skills and labour, increasing access to flexible working is a key focus of his department.

As he clarified, the change is a right to request, not a right to insist; and it is important to consider the needs of businesses and customers as well as of individuals. But the expectation is that an extra 2.2 million people will be brought into the scope of the legislation, which is an extremely positive development in today’s tight labour market.

A key aim of the legislation is to promote conversations between employers and employees, and other changes being introduced at the same time will improve this process. For example, making the employer responsible for consulting on the request before rejecting it will create space for a conversation about alternatives to take place.

Similarly, allowing two requests in a year instead of one, reducing the timescale for employers to respond to the request from three to two months, and removing the requirement for employees to set out the potential impact of their request, should all make the process easier to navigate.

Employers do still have the right to refuse a Day One Flex request. But the legislation prioritises quality conversation and consideration and aims to make the process fairer and to support best practice.

A lawyer’s view

Dr Anne Sammon, a partner at Pinsent Masons, has many years of experience working with employers on the existing legislation in this area. She explored what the changes will mean in practice, and what employers should be thinking about.

Moving the right to request from 26 weeks to the first day in a new job is good for employees for many reasons. For example, in practice, candidates who are currently working flexibly may feel nervous about having to wait for 26 weeks into a new job to find out whether they will get the flexibility they want or need, and worry that putting in a request may disadvantage them.

It also brings clarity to employers; for example, with regard to issues around indirect discrimination. For example, not considering a request for flexible working from a working mother could count as indirect discrimination; so this legislation, with its requirement that the request is considered, could avoid issues of that kind.

A big change for employers will be the reduction in the time they can take to consider a request. Employers will need to look at how long their current processes are taking, and see whether this may cause any issues once the period is shortened from three months to two. It is possible for both parties to agree to a longer consideration period, but employers must make sure they are not pressuring employees to agree to one.

It’s also worth remembering that the quality of the reason for refusing a request can make a real difference. If an employee feels that the rationale they are given is fair, they are less likely to appeal. So the hope is that the new legislation will encourage employers to explain carefully why the request doesn’t work for the business, and engage with the issues at the heart of the request. Clarity and transparency will be vital.

Finally, while the legislation allows for two requests in a year, employers should be aiming to have conversations that balance the employee’s needs with those of the business, so they can find a compromise that works for both and avoids repeated requests.

A frontline view

Louise Tait leads an HR team which has spent the last few years working out what flexible working means at Wickes, and how it can be adapted for frontline employees. She believes the changes in legislation are welcome, but noted that challenges remain in terms of how to enable line managers to have better, open and transparent conversations about flexible working outside of a formal process, and to work out how to provide flexible options for all workers, including those on the frontline.

The majority of Wickes’ 8000 employees are in operational warehouse roles or customer-facing ones. The labour market within retail is highly competitive, and this has been exacerbated by the pandemic, with many women and people aged over 50 leaving the sector. Additionally, while 40% of Wickes’ employees are women, and 40% work part-time, these numbers drop significantly as people move through the leadership layers. So flexible working is seen to be a key way to attract, retain and progress talent across the organisation.

Having successfully adopted flexible working for office workers, Wickes have been working with Timewise to explore how to implement it for store leadership teams, and are currently embarking on a new approach within distribution centres. These experiences have provided four key learnings:

  • Change mindsets for flexible working from traditional to modern. Although Wickes already had a clear diversity and inclusion strategy, of which flexible working was a key component, there was still work to do to get line managers to think about the art of the possible, and recognise that flexible working can be for everyone, not just mothers.

    This required open and honest conversations about people’s fears and challenges. For example, Wickes used their annual manager conference, attended by 500 leaders, to ask: ‘If flexible working was going to be in place for all staff from tomorrow, what would you need to do to make that happen?’ This prompted some excellent, open conversations about thinking very differently.
  • Define what flexible working really means for your organisation. It’s easy for line managers to connect with rational arguments about flexible working, but that doesn’t always help them work out what it means in practice, or encourage them to say yes rather than no.

    Wickes therefore established a clear set of principles that described what flexible working means for them – and also what it doesn’t mean. This involved a lengthy discussion at team leader and executive level to ensure that everyone was aligned.

    The definition included an understanding that Wickes could not have a one-size-fits-all solution, because different approaches are needed at a functional business unit level. It also gave senior leaders decision-making autonomy, allowing them to make decisions based on the needs of the business, their function and the individual.
  • Listen, pilot and measure (and then listen, pilot and measure again). This stopped line managers from making assumptions about what their colleagues would value from flexible working, helped them identify potential problems and gave them the confidence that it would work.

    For example, for distribution colleagues, flexibility meant having fixed shifts to help them plan more effectively, with half-hour breaks between morning and afternoon shifts so that colleagues who share care of their children could hand over to each other.

    Similarly, piloting flexible options showed that there was work to do regarding job design and routines for store managers, and that operations managers who report into store managers would need much more training. None of these would have been identified without listening to staff.

    And measuring the impact of the pilots revealed that they had no downside effects on productivity or business performance. In fact, they boosted employee engagement and also raised line managers’ confidence that they could put these measures in place and still get the balance right between the needs of the business and individuals.
  • Create tools and toolkits for line managers to help them have good conversations and make good decisions. These included clear principles, guidelines, and examples of great flexible working, flexible hiring and wellbeing conversations, as well as practical tools to help them access the right tech and make changes to routines in stores.

Aside from the obvious and proven business case, the pilot has thrown up powerful stories from colleagues who took part about the benefits that being able to work flexibly have had on their personal lives.

You can read more about how Timewise is supporting Wickes on their journey here.

A finance sector view

Zurich is known within the flexible sphere for taking a new approach to flexible hiring with transformative results. They support the new legislation around Day One Flex, but have already started having these conversations earlier in the hiring process. Steve Collinson, their UK Chief HR Officer, shared his experiences of increasing access to flexible working and hiring.

In 2017, the company was approached by the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) via the Cabinet Office, to explore whether a lack of access to specific flexible options was holding women back in their careers and contributing to the gender pay gap. The work involved using nudge psychology to deploy interventions derived from data, and then track the impact of these over time.

Using their own data, and working with psychologists and statisticians, Zurich created a hypothesis that a lack of consistent, explicit access to part-time and job share opportunities meant that fewer women were applying for promotions, or to join the firm, than might otherwise be the case.

BIT responded by asking them to switch their default to advertising all roles (internal and external) on a part-time, job share or full-time with flexibility basis, with the theory being that this would widen the pool of applicants. And the results speak for themselves: since switching their default advertising position:

  • The number of applicants to each Zurich vacancy more or less doubled
  • There was a 95% year-on-year increase in female part-time workers hired at Zurich in 2022
  • The number of part-time hires has increased fivefold since 2019
  • Around 45% more women were hired into senior roles in 2022 compared to 2019, and the number of part-time male workers tripled over the same period
  • And overall five times more female part-time workers were hired in 2022 than in 2019

The changes meant that Zurich reached a talent pool that they hadn’t previously been able to appeal to; they also discovered that people were starting to apply to them because their approach to flexibility gave a positive insight into their culture. Additionally, their gender pay gap has been reduced by 10% and they were placed in Glassdoor’s top 50 places to work in the UK.

Steve concluded by sharing four things to think about:

  • Listen to what your employees tell you they need, rather than focusing on what you think they need
  • Stop making it about cost – if people really are your greatest asset, prove it
  • Trust and open conversations are key
  • And when it comes to flexible working: if not now, when?

A few final questions and answers

We ended the session by asking attendees to reflect on what they’d heard and how it would affect their approach going forwards:

  • 64% thought managers would need training and guidance to get ready for Day One Flex
  • 70% say they would need to change their hiring practices

Our panel then answered the following questions raised during the session:

Are you able to give us any more detail on when the legislation is likely to take effect?
Minister Hollinrake replied that the legislation should take full effect in 2024. This takes into account the parliamentary process that it needs to go through to become law, and also gives businesses time to prepare.

When you talk about ‘Day One Flex’, what exactly does that mean?
In terms of an official definition, the Minister noted that his department is drafting guidance to set this out clearly, and will be able to share this in the weeks ahead. And Anne agreed that having a specific definition of what Day One Flex means will be absolutely critical.

What would you like to see this legislation deliver for businesses and employees across the UK?
Anne referenced the hope that it will provide employers with the opportunity to move beyond the Day One right and look at building conversations about flexible working into the recruitment process. This will in turn help employers market themselves as flexible and allow candidates to be open and transparent during the interviews.

Steve agreed, explaining that at Zurich managers are encouraged to have conversations about flexible working during the hiring process, so there are no surprises later on. He believes that the legislation will create an expectation that employers will have a more open mindset, and that when they are able to be explicit about being open to a conversation before an employee joins the company, it will benefit everyone.

Louise noted that Wickes’ line managers are also encouraged to have these conversations at the point of hire. She hopes that, going forward, employers will shift their mindset further than the remit of the legislation and instead ask ‘What’s the right thing to do’ in terms of having conversations as early as possible.

Minister Hollinrake concluded by noting that work has changed dramatically from the old 9-5 model, and that the culture of work needs to change accordingly. There is a lot of talent locked up in people who can’t follow a traditional working pattern, and employers should not lock them out of their workplaces.

All members of the panel agreed that this is the future of the world of work, and that we are all on the change journey together.

Next steps for employers
If this panel discussion has raised questions about how your organisation will implement the new legislation, or inspired you to start thinking about offering flexible working even before Day One, we can help. You can find out more about the support we can provide on our website, including a diagnostic review of your readiness for the legislation, training for your HR teams and line managers, and an introduction to our team at Timewise Jobs, who are experts on flexible hiring.


Watch the Timewise Day One Flex webinar below:

Published June 2023

With a standard working day of 11 hours, and crew increasingly work back to back on productions because of escalating demand for new film and TV shows, the sector is under immense strain. The drain of skilled and experienced people (especially women) in mid-career is endemic, as the long and unpredictable hours are incompatible with raising a family.

Our action research project explored potential opportunities to improve flexible working – the underlying goals being to reduce long hours, enhance health and wellbeing, and enable productions to attract and retain talent.

We identified several tactical ways to introduce flexibility to some roles within the constraints of the current working model. Alongside our report, we have therefore produced a checklist of practical actions for production teams to consider.

However, there is no getting away from it: the biggest challenge is the length of the standard 11-hour day. The majority of crew and producers we spoke to believe that fundamentally tackling this is the way to change the industry, increase retention and minimise burn out.  Piloting a model for a shorter working day is therefore the key recommendation of our research report.

Published March 2023

By Emma Stewart, Co-Founder

The crisis in social care is well-known – and is something that we should all be worrying about. Demand is growing as the population ages, but care worker numbers are going in the opposite direction. Local authorities are finding it harder than ever to recruit and retain staff; job centres send candidates through without giving them any sense of what the job actually involves, with the knock-on effect that few stay the distance.

As a result, there are over 100,000 unfilled care worker vacancies in the UK right now. And while there has been much hand-wringing and many column inches on the subject, much of which has understandably been focused on pay, scant attention has been paid to working patterns or work-life balance.

Given that the existing care workforce is primarily women with their own caring responsibilities, this is a massive oversight. It’s not a huge leap to suspect that for this group, having some control over their working patterns could be a gamechanger. But there has been little attempt to ask existing care workers what THEY think could make a difference. At least, until our new action research project, Building the Social Care Workforce of the Future.

Tackling staff shortages by exploring what care workers need

Social care isn’t a new sector for us; our previous report, Caring by Design, explored whether a geographical, team-based approach to scheduling could tackle issues such as unpredictable rotas, unsociable hours and long travel times (the short answer – yes it can).  

But this time, we wanted to get in on the ground, to gain the clearest possible understanding of the challenges domiciliary care workers are facing and their views on how to overcome them. We also wanted to work with the commissioning teams to ensure that any changes we recommended could become a reality. So we teamed up with London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (LBBD) and a number of providers in their area, to do exactly that.

Over a six-month period, we shadowed a team of care workers, going with them from appointment to appointment, on buses, in cars and walking the streets, to get under the skin of how their days work (and how they made them work for them). We also spoke to managers and HR teams within social care providers, to understand the challenges they face, and the solutions they put in place to overcome them.

What we learned from our six months of research

Now clearly, the social care sector is not something that can be completely fixed from the ground up. There is absolutely a role for government to play, and we, like everyone else in this country, are hoping that policymakers will intervene to address the overarching issues that affect recruitment and retention, critically around pay.

 However, we did learn that there are a number of practical changes that don’t require major policy reforms; relatively small quick wins that could have a transformational impact. For example:

  • Being more transparent about how the rotas work up front can avoid new recruits leaving

The first few weeks in a social care role are particularly unpredictable, because the care worker doesn’t yet have a rota of regular clients. This can mean they don’t have enough guaranteed hours, or are offered work at times they can’t fulfil. Being open about this from the start, and reassuring new recruits that it will settle down, can help avoid knee-jerk resignations.

  • Being clear about what flexibility is available will make sure suitable candidates apply

While most candidates are aware of the nature of tasks in care work, they may not understand that the timing of slots may not fit around their caring responsibilities. Setting this out up front could both cut down on wasted applications and the cost of training applicants who might not stay the distance.

  • Building strong team relationships creates better understanding, trust and loyalty

When team members feel connected, they are more likely to support each other, whether that’s helping newcomers to settle into the role, sharing hints and tips or being willing to swap shifts.

Similarly, team members who feel supported by their field supervisors are more likely to accept unforeseen scheduling changes. And they’ll feel trusted enough to report back on problems that, if left unchecked, might force them to leave (such as under-estimated time slots, issues around travel time or pressure to work more hours than they can manage).

The resources we created to bring these changes about

So, having gained these insights into what needed to change, we created a suite of resources to help candidates, employees, managers and providers to put them into practice:

  • A detailed report, setting out what we did, what we learned and our recommendations for service providers and local authorities.
  • A video designed to raise awareness among service providers about how they can benefit from offering flexible working.
  • A flexible job design guide for managers, to help them create and schedule flexible arrangements that will encourage people to join and stay.
  • And a ‘best friend’s guide for people considering a career in social care, to explain what the role entails, what flexibility they can expect and how to get more input and control over their shifts.

No resources like this have previously existed within the social care sector, and they have been well-received by employees and providers alike. They’re now being rolled out across LBBD and neighbouring boroughs by providers, local authorities and wider networks, with the help of Skills for Care and Care Providers Voice.

It’s a good starting point – but more needs to be done

This research project has made it clear that exploring worker preferences, and giving them more input and control into how they work, are good places to start tackling the social care crisis. This is at the heart of everything we do at Timewise, for a simple reason; you can’t create change without understanding what could make a difference on the ground.

So we hope that care commissioners will start taking a whole systems approach to workforce planning, which includes supporting providers with job design skills, and insisting that they cover travel time and expenses (with funding to back this up). And we hope that local authorities and providers across the UK will start using these resources so that they can attract and keep people for whom social care is a viable career.

And above all, we hope that the government listens to everyone who is telling them that investment is needed in social care; not just to increase wages, but also to provide the financial support to commissioners and providers that will make the kind of changes we are suggesting a reality.

This project has been supported by Trust for London. Published February 2023.

Four day week

By Claire Campbell, Consultancy Director

The six-month UK pilot of the four-day working week saw 61 companies trialling the concept, with a meaningful reduction in work time and no loss of pay. It finished in December, the results are now in – and it’s an incredibly positive picture.

Here at Timewise, we’ve been following the 4-Day Week movement since the start. It’s been brilliant to see so many companies willing to challenge existing norms, and step up to try to improve their staff’s working lives and well-being. And we welcome the positive debates about working hours and productivity which have been amplified by the pilot – and will no doubt be discussed with increasing intensity following the publication of its outcomes.

The demand for less-than-full-time roles is certainly there; our recent research in partnership with the JRF indicated that over 8 million people in the UK are either working part-time, or would prefer to. And our previous research suggested that 1 in 4 full-time workers would choose to work fewer hours, provided they didn’t have to lower their hourly pay rate or damage their career progression.

We also know that widening access to part-time opportunities is a great way to help key groups of people enter and stay in the workplace – particularly parents, carers, people with health issues and older workers. And given the twin pressures of the cost-of-living crisis and a tight labour market, as well as the upcoming right to ask for flex from day one, it’s something all employers should consider.

Positive outcomes from the 61 pilot companies

So the results from the four-day week pilot are landing at a good time – and the headline findings show how positive the experience has been, for both the companies involved and their employees:

  • 56 of the 61 companies are continuing with the four-day week, with 18 confirming that it is a permanent change.
  • Over the trial period the companies’ revenue stayed broadly the same, and the number of staff leaving dropped by 57% .
  • Before and after data showed that 39% of employees were less stressed, and 71% had reduced levels of burnout, at the end of the trial.
  • 60% of employees found it easier to combine paid work with caring responsibilities and 62% to combine work with their social lives.
  • And interestingly, 15% of employees said that no amount of money would induce them to accept a five-day schedule over a four-day working week.

Why a one-size-fits-all approach isn’t the answer

Clearly, this is excellent news for the companies involved, and for others who might be considering something similar. And it’s also providing some useful learnings that apply more generally to flexible working.

It’s particularly telling that the pilot was based on a flexible approach to how the companies involved interpreted the four-day week. The organisers rejected a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, stipulating only that companies should maintain pay at 100% alongside a ‘meaningful reduction’ in work time.

So while some chose to shut down operations on the same day each week, others asked staff to alternate days off, to maintain five-day coverage. Some used a combination of the two, matched to each department’s specific needs. And others were more flexible still, such as the restaurant that trialled an annualised arrangement, in which staff had a 32 hour average working week, but with shorter opening hours in winter and longer in summer.

Some organisations need to take an even more flexible approach

This is important, because a rigid four-day, 32-hour working week won’t necessarily work for all organisations, or for everyone in an organisation. While office-based staff may be able to reduce their hours by getting their work done more efficiently, this can’t be achieved in the same way in organisations which employ some or all frontline employees. And it’s hard to see where productivity savings could be found in cost-constrained, shift-based, service-based or production roles.

So leaders who want to offer their staff the chance to work less, but can’t necessarily offer this kind of four-day week, need to take an even more flexible approach, and develop bespoke arrangements that match the needs of the organisation and its staff. This could include offering more traditional part-time, compressed hours and annualised options, as well as exploring ways to give shift-based employees more input into and control over their rotas.

We’re currently working with a number of companies to explore the viability of a four-day week – as well as continuing to support companies from all sectors to consider the full range of flexible working options. If you would like to discuss how we could help you get the right flexible working in place for your organisation, please get in touch.

Published February 2023

By Emma Stewart, Co-Founder

I’ve lost count over the last decade of the number of times I’ve written about how good flexible work is a social necessity. And while I’m delighted with how much more mainstream flexible working has become, there are some battles we still need to fight if we’re going to make our society a more equitable one.

We all know how devastating the impact of the current cost of living crisis is going to be, particularly for people on low incomes; you don’t need me to explain that to you. We also know that the economy is being held back by the fall in the number of people in the workforce, as Andy Haldane recently noted

But what may have been forgotten is that the single thread that can pull these issues together, and make this current crisis more manageable for many people, is offering good quality part-time jobs.

Part-time and flexible jobs unlock the market for key groups

We’ve recently produced a report, in partnership with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which explores this issue in more detail. We’ve also analysed the flexible jobs market in our latest Flexible Jobs Index. Together, these leave us in no doubt about the lack of good quality flexible jobs – and the potential impact that creating more of them could have:

  • Only 30% of job adverts offer flexible working – and only 12% offer part-time.
  • This is despite the huge demand: 87% of people say they want to work flexibly, and there are four people currently chasing every part-time job, bucking labour market trends.
  • This lack of flexible jobs at the point of hire traps many people in priority groups out of work – specifically, parents, older workers, and people with disabilities.
  • Part-time jobs are concentrated at the lower end of the market, with 22% of jobs below £20,000 FTE advertised as part-time, compared to 6% of roles paying over £60,000 FTE.
  • As a result, people who need to work part-time (who are often members of these priority groups) are particularly likely to be trading skilled jobs for part-time work at lower pay.

So, creating more, better quality part-time and flexible jobs, and offering them at the point of hire, could open up opportunities for people in our priority groups (and others who also need flexibility to work) to access the workplace. It would also allow them to progress their careers, and boost their household incomes accordingly.

This would not only benefit the individuals concerned, and society as a whole, but would also help tackle the recruitment issues that so many employers are facing.

Employers aren’t against flexible working – but they need help to deliver it

So why isn’t this happening? Well, as our report also highlights, employers don’t tend to be ideologically opposed to flexible working. But some clear barriers are holding them back, including inertia and a lack of motivation, a lack of understanding, and fear and a lack of trust.

Yet, as the IES recently reported, helping employees through the current crisis is the highest priority for employers right now. So given that flexible working is a key way to do so, they need to overcome these barriers – and they need supporting to do so.

The good news is that the government has now published its response to the consultation on the right to request flexible working, and confirmed that it will be bringing forward new regulations to give employees this right from their first day in a job. It’s likely that the regulations will find their way onto the statute book in Spring 2023, which means the new rules could be in force by as early as the autumn.

This important change is also accompanied by government support for wider measures, which will be brought forward via a private members bill, and include allowing employees to make two flexible working requests in a year, and requiring employers to respond more quickly.

However, although these are a hugely positive steps, they aren’t yet the gamechanger we need, as this day one right still puts the onus on the employee to ask. So, while we hope that this legislation will increase the number of employers advertising roles flexibly, we doubt it will fully deliver the change in hiring practices and job design that employees and our economy need.

To give the legislation its best chance of success, we also need the infrastructure in place that will support employers to make flexible jobs available from the point of hire, including:

  • Providing support to intermediaries, such as employment services, employability agencies, business enterprise agencies and recruiters. This would help companies understand how flexible working can help tackle their business and social impact goals, and help candidates navigate the request process more successfully.
  • Testing, trialling and training through fully-funded government programmes, such as a BEIS- sponsored flexible job design training module, and DWP-funded flexible hiring pilots. This would help employers build capability and provide examples and case studies of what works.
  • Commissioning analysis of the positive financial return of investing in flexible hiring.

Here at Timewise, we are already carrying out some of this work:

If you would like to find out more about what we’ve done, and what we have learned from it, please get in touch.

But we are just one organisation; and the task of fixing the jobs market, so that people who need to work flexibly can access well-paid, good quality jobs, is one that we can’t tackle alone. It’s my hope that the current labour supply crisis will be the catalyst that encourages policymakers and organisations to take this issue seriously, and that I won’t still be talking about this in a few years’ time. I can promise you that I won’t stop until it’s fixed.

Published December 2022

By Nicola Smith, Director of Development and Innovation

There’s been much discussion in recent months about increasing numbers of older workers leaving the workplace. The ONS figures back this up, showing that over 200,000 people aged 50-65 have left the jobs market over the last two years. Commentators, including the Resolution Foundation and the Institute for Employment Studies, have also concluded that post-pandemic shifts in labour supply have largely been driven by falling numbers of people aged 50 and over looking for and available to work.

So it follows that a key way to fill the high number of vacant roles would be to encourage and support older workers to stay in their roles, or come back into the workforce. And the good news is, flexible working can help make this happen.

Why older workers want and need flexible working

It’s worth noting that ‘over 50s’ is a very wide category. As a result the health status, caring responsibilities, skills and incomes are probably more varied within this group than those of people in any other commonly used age bracket.

And while it’s relatively well understood that flexible working can support those with ill health and disabilities to remain in or return to the workplace, that’s not the only factor. There are other reasons why members of this group are leaving employment – and for which flexible working can also be part of the solution.

Recent ONS analysis gives some particularly useful insight into the varied experiences of older workers who have left the jobs market since the pandemic begun. Findings include:

  • Some people are taking early retirement – particularly those in their 60s. This group are less likely to be in debt and more likely to be confident they have sufficient provision for their retirement. But the ability to work flexibly could offer a pathway to ease into retirement more slowly – or come back to work.
  • Caring responsibilities play a role, with 12% of those in their early 50s giving this as a reason for leaving work. This will almost certainly be higher for women than for men. Flexible working would allow them to balance their jobs with their personal commitments, and allow their employers to retain their experience and expertise.
  • Less than 20% of the group say that they don’t want to work anymore – suggesting that 80% might consider returning to work in the right job.

Crucially, the figures also show that, among those who would consider returning to work, a third said the most important factor was flexible hours. Good pay came second (at 23%), followed by being able to work from home (12%) and work that fits around caring responsibilities (10%), both of which are linked to flexibility.

Employers need to offer the roles that older workers want

Clearly, then, offering flexible working is a critical part of the answer to employers’ retention and hiring woes. By helping to overcome the medical, personal or financial reasons why older workers are leaving the workplace, it could encourage them to stay for longer, or encourage those who have already left to come back.

Our work with the Centre for Ageing Better set out how and why employers can use good flexible working to boost the retention of older workers. And when it comes to supporting them back in, the answer is clear: employers need to advertise flexible roles from the point of hire. In both cases, this means going through a job design process that explores when, where and in how much time the role can best be fulfilled.

Today’s data make an even more compelling case for why everyone needs to act – and is a pertinent reminder of the benefits that more, good flexible working at the point of hire could bring for business and workers alike. We know that many employers are already doing this well, and that many others recognise that they need to make the shift; if you need support with this, we’re here to help.

In the meantime, keep an eye out for our new Flexible Jobs Index, launching later this month, which will highlight how far we still have to go in terms of making flexible jobs available from day one. It will be published alongside a new study, undertaken in partnership with the IES and supported by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which explores the challenges employers face and the actions needed to widen access to good flexible roles.

Published November 2022

Share
FacebookTwitterLinkedIn