Pilots allow organisations to test and develop innovative workplace solutions in a low-risk way, before committing to roll out more widely.
There should be more, not less.
By Claire Campbell, CEO
The decision by South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC) to trial a four-day working week during 2023, and to extend it to include refuse workers, has created a flurry of comment – not all of it positive. Critics including the TaxPayers’ Alliance have blasted it as “simply unacceptable”, and the local government minister, Lee Rowley, backed by Michael Gove, has asked the council to “end your experiment immediately.”
So, are they right? Unsurprisingly, we don’t think so.
As we’ve noted previously the four-day working week is a hot topic in the flexible working sphere. 4-Day Week Global’s six-month UK pilot involved 61 companies, and produced encouraging results. And we know from our discussions that other organisations, including other councils, have been considering their own trials.
However, the media attention SCDC have received is likely to make some organisations wary of following suit. And that’s a shame, not least because what makes their pilot particularly interesting to those of us with a social agenda as well as a business one, is that it involves frontline employees – a group who have been largely left out of the remote working revolution, and are at risk of becoming ‘flex have-nots’ as a result.
What some of the more negative commentators appear to be missing is that SCDC aren’t just implementing this way of working on a whim; they’re piloting it and assessing the results before deciding whether to take it further.
The data from the initial trial, which involved 450 mainly desk-based workers, indicated that there are concrete benefits to be had, such as recruiting into hard-to-fill roles and reducing agency worker spend (by around £550,000 at September this year). And it is only after evaluating this data, which was independently reviewed, that SCDC decided to expand it.
And that, surely, is the point of a pilot. It allows you to take an innovative concept – which reducing people’s working hours with no change in pay certainly is – and test what works, and what doesn’t, on a small scale. As a result, you can keep the good stuff, fix any flaws, and generally refine your plans before rolling them out more widely.
It’s certainly a model we believe in here at Timewise; our Innovation Unit has carried out pilots in a range of sectors including construction, nursing, retail and teaching. And we have also shown that the changes required to make flexible working more widely available can pay for themselves in just a few years, through reduced sickness absence and improved staff retention.
Additionally, while some outcomes might be expected – such as a four-day working week boosting retention – pilots can also reveal less predictable benefits.
For example, an employment services provider we have spoken to has found that neurodiverse jobseekers are much more comfortable coming into the office for interviews on Mondays and Fridays, when only half the staff team are in, and the office is quieter. And a retailer we have worked with, who is trialling a four-day week, has watched their deputy managers step up and develop confidence and skills on the days they are solely responsible for the store, strengthening their succession pipeline.
It’s not just the businesses who are experiencing these unexpected benefits, either. Flexible working pilots have revealed a range of positive societal outcomes, from older employees using their extra time off to look after their grandchildren, and parents enjoying admin-free quality time at the weekends, to millennials using their fifth weekday to volunteer at, or set up, community projects.
A pilot’s impact can therefore stretch way beyond the organisation to the community, in ways that may not have been factored in from the beginning, but are likely to continue once it’s over.
For all of these reasons, we believe that well-researched, well-scoped pilots are a vital tool for those of us who want to change workplaces for the better. So we’ll continue to widen access to flexible options by trialling new ways of working, and sharing what we’ve learned so that others can benefit.
And we’ll keep championing those organisations who have the vision to explore, test and refine innovative solutions to their workforce challenges – and are willing to speak up and widen the debate.
Published November 2023
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.
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.
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:
The government has confirmed that the right to request flexible working should be a day-one right for all employees. The legislation also:
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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:
Over 200 people attended the webinar, and before we began we sense-checked their views by asking two questions:
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.
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.
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:
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.
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 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:
We ended the session by asking attendees to reflect on what they’d heard and how it would affect their approach going forwards:
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
By Emma Stewart, Co-Founder
Full disclosure: this time it’s personal. I used to work in TV production, and left 17 years ago when I found it impossible to juggle the job and my family. So I’ve long been keen to take everything I’ve learned through my years at Timewise and apply it to the film and TV industry.
And right now is most definitely the right time. Why? Because the industry is facing a perfect storm. It has some of the longest working hours in the UK, and 86% of people in film and TV are experiencing poor mental health. The resulting burnout, exacerbated by the rush to production after the Covid-enforced hiatus, has led to real skills shortages, with large numbers of crew leaving, and production companies struggling to replace them.
So, last year, we joined forces with BECTU Vision to explore how flexible working could be used to improve work-life balance within drama productions. And today, we’ve published a report on the first phase of the project.
It’s worth noting up front that introducing flexible working into the film and TV industry is far from straightforward. Schedules are historically built around long days, and budgeted in the number of weeks a project will take. So making them shorter means making the project longer, which in turn has implications for budgets and talent availability.
However, here at Timewise, we thrive on bringing flexibility into hard-to-flex sectors – as our work in construction, nursing and retail demonstrates. And there are positive examples out there – it’s said, for example, that Clint Eastwood’s projects are run on a 9-5 basis. But there’s been no evidence or learnings about what works – which is why we decided to get involved.
We began with a six-month research phase, to explore the barriers and opportunities around introducing flexible working within scripted drama productions. This research, funded by Screen Scotland, included interviews with crew, commissioners and production leads, as well as desk research. And here’s what we found:
The second phase of the project starts in April, and will see us going on set to explore whether productions based on shorter days could be commercially viable, and how they could work in practice.
We’ll be shadowing two live BBC productions in Scotland, both of which are running on a standard schedule and working day. We’ll be capturing and stress-testing crew preferences, using the fact that they are ‘in the zone’ to explore their thoughts on how shoots could be done differently. We’ll then use these insights to build a blueprint for an alternative production schedule and budget, based on a shorter working day, that’s steeped in the reality of life on set.
We’ll also be producing guidance on how to implement this new model, which we’ll ask crew to feed back on and help us refine. And we’ll be working with industry experts to review any previous modelling that could support our approach.
This phase of the project is being supported by Screen Scotland, the BBC and the Film & TV Charity in collaboration with BBC Drama.
Of course, the best way to get buy-in for fundamental change is to prove that it’s possible. So, our plan is to use these insights to have an informed discussion with a range of industry commissioners and production companies about how viable our blueprint is. It’s our hope that this will lead to the development and piloting of a live shorter-working-hours drama production – and with it, the game-changing example that the industry needs.
In the meantime, we have set out a number of recommendations and potential opportunities for industry stakeholders in our report, such as capturing and sharing existing good practice, building leadership capabilities on flexible working, and undertaking cost-benefit analysis to model the impact of shorter working days.
We need all parts of the industry to come together and support this; bringing about this level of change will require industry-wide attention (and funding), as well as an acceptance that there is likely to be a financial cost.
But the cost of doing nothing is also high; if we want a healthy film and TV industry, we need to pull together to make it happen. Seventeen years ago, the flexibility I needed wasn’t there; let’s make sure that won’t be true for much longer.
Published March 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 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:
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
The place-based rise in flexible working that evolved during the pandemic has passed frontline workers by. Whilst most office-based employees were, and still are, able to work from home, those who have to be based at a specific location didn’t have that flexibility. And the hype around ‘hybrid working’, and its conflation with ‘flexible working’, have taken attention and resources away from other kinds of flexible arrangement.
The figures are pretty stark: frontline and place-based workers, a category which includes roles as diverse as medical staff, transport workers, teachers, cleaners, retail assistants and construction workers, make up almost half of all UK employees. And yet just 3% of shift workers, which many frontline employees are, have any flexibility in their role.
The result is the risk of a two-tier workforce, split into flex haves and have-nots, in which those who can work in a hybrid way have easy access to flexibility, while those who work in frontline and placed-based roles (which are more challenging to make flexible) are left to struggle on without it. And this is increasingly having a knock-on effect on recruitment and retention, as people who want or need flexibility seek it elsewhere.
But here at Timewise, we know that it IS possible to make place-based and frontline roles more flexible. We’ve carried out pilots in teaching, construction, nursing and retail that explored how innovative job design can create some flexibility around when and how much people work. And we have also shown that investing in flexible working in frontline sectors pays for itself within just a few years, through improved retention and sickness absence. We invited leaders from a range of frontline sectors to come together to talk and learn from each other, discussing the challenges they are facing, the actions they have taken and the outcomes they have achieved. Here are the key themes that came out of our discussion.
Aside from the obvious logistical challenge that remote working is rarely an option for place-based roles, there are some other key issues and barriers that our attendees noted:
The battle for talent against more attractive roles elsewhere
Many frontline industries are struggling with staff shortages – from nursing and care work to construction and engineering. And the reasons why are varied, including rates of pay and unsociable hours or shifts. These both prevent people from wanting to join the industries, and make them more likely to leave.
However, offering some kind of flexible working can help mitigate the ‘brain drain’. It’s been shown, for example, that many teachers who leave for another profession reduce their hours. So making time-based flexibility available within these roles could encourage them to stay on, delay their retirement or join in the first place.
The impossibility of offering the same flex to everyone
Clearly, someone working in an on-site role can’t spend their entire time working from home. So organisations which have a combination of office-based and frontline roles won’t be able to offer everyone the same arrangement. This can be hard when employees look at the flexibility others are getting and want the same.
Some organisations are dealing with this by trying to bring their hybrid employees back into the office, for the sake of solidarity with their colleagues. We’d argue this isn’t the right approach, and only makes sense if it would benefit the on-site colleagues and make a real difference to the team as a whole. Instead, the key is to look at what flexibility CAN be offered within the frontline roles.
‘We’ve always done it this way’
The status quo can be a real barrier to innovation. Sometimes there are structures and processes within an organisation that seem set in stone, without anyone having asked why, or what else could be done instead.
One example cited by an attendee was a local authority’s bin collection service, which had always started at 6am. No one knew why it was scheduled so early, or could think of a good reason why it should stay that way, so they changed it to allow flexibility around start times. Levels of service were unchanged and there were no complaints from residents or employees.
The role of clients and the supply chain
Another factor that frontline organisations have to consider is the demands of clients, customers and the supply chain. For example, if clients expect on-site teams to be available at all hours, or suppliers feel they can deliver whenever they like, it can make it harder to facilitate time-based flexibility.
It’s true that these are factors that need to be worked around, but it can be done. Setting clear expectations with clients at the beginning of a project, for example, makes it possible to move away from industry norms.
The need for industry-wide change
Underpinning this point, as, one attendee noted, is that that some leaders, managers, suppliers and clients have such entrenched mindsets that it will take an industry-level shift to overcome them. We agree, which is why we make a point of carrying out projects and pilots across an industry, usually in partnership with four or five organisations and supported by industry bodies.
For example, we rallied four construction pioneers to work with us on an action research project, supported by Build UK. This allowed us to research, test and trial new approaches for on-site staff, and share our learnings widely. We’ve carried out similar projects in teaching, retail and the NHS.
So, with the above challenges in mind, how can frontline organisations get better at flexible working? Here are some things to consider.
Involve your staff in the process
Begin by exploring what flexible working means to the people in your organisation. While they may understand more common arrangements like part-time and hybrid working, they may not be aware of what else could be possible for their role.
Finding out what the main outcomes they want to achieve from flexible working is a good place to start. It could be as simple as being able to drop off or pick up a school-aged child, a broader issue around work-life balance, or something else entirely.
For example, one of our attendees realised that a top focus area for their employees was career progression and development. They therefore developed a model that included two hours a week from home to achieve this.
Another attendee spoke about running workshops for employees to discuss their needs and wants, which resulted in staff being given one day in every 20 off, and the establishment of core hours outside which people were not expected to respond to emails.
The process is almost as important as the outcome, because involving your employees in the discussions will ensure they feel heard, understand what can and can’t be done, and feel ownership of the solutions.
Invest in job design to explore viable options
Once you know why people want to have more flexibility, you can then look at how to match the flex you can offer to their needs and role. At Timewise, we have developed a ‘Shift-Life Balance’ model which helps frontline employers explore issues around input, stability and advance notice to develop appropriate workloads and patterns.
It’s worth remembering that sometimes, a small change is all it takes to achieve the better balance an employee is seeking. One attendee noted that allowing employees to start just one or two hours later was enough. Another highlighted the feeling of ownership and fairness that employees gained from having input into the rosta, rather than having it imposed upon them.
We ourselves found in our construction pilot that simple changes such as altering the timings of site briefings, and developing a pattern of rotating shifts, made a surprisingly big difference.
Look at changing practices to boost productivity
If you’re willing to move on from ‘we’ve always done it this way’, it’s possible to rework your processes and practices to achieve the same in less time. One attendee described a unit who are paid on the number of jobs they fulfil in a day. They make their own choices about how best to achieve that target and have become more productive as a result.
Another noted that, having introduced some flexibility, “There has definitely been a positive impact on productivity. Morale is much better, and the guys are working harder.”
Upskill managers and embed a culture of trust
Finally, none of these measures will land unless you have established a culture in which people’s lives outside work are respected, and they are trusted to do their best work. And they won’t work in practice unless line managers are trained and encouraged to see them through.
So it’s vital that your leaders set the tone that flexible working is good for the organisation, and should be championed at every level. And it’s worth investing in upskilling your managers to design and advertise flexible roles, and manage flexible teams. This doesn’t mean saying yes to every request; but it does mean creating a collaborative process in which all the options can be explored so that some kind of flexibility is available in every role.
As one of our attendees noted, the talent challenges within frontline roles mean that organisations are going to need to be brave, strike out and do things differently and lead the way for others to follow. If that sounds like you, we’re right behind you; do get in touch if you’d like our help.
By Nicola Smith, Director of Development and Innovation
The government consultation into ‘Making flexible working the default’, launched in September 2021, was widely welcomed. Today, the government has confirmed that it will be taking action in response, finally concluding that the right to request flexible work should be a day one right for all employees.
This is an important success for all of us who have made the case for a fairer, stronger jobs market – and is also a ‘win-win’ for employers and their (current and potential) workforces.
Along with government support for Yasmin Qureshi MP’s Private Member’s Bill (the means by which much new legislation will be introduced), today’s announcement means important new flexible working rights are coming. Alongside day one rights to request flexible work, wider positive changes that will now be introduced include:
We don’t yet know when these changes will take effect, but with committee stage on the bill taking place later this week, new legislation could hit the statute book in early 2023. In practice, these new requirements could be in place by as early as next Autumn.
Giving employees the right to ask for a flexible role from the moment they join an organisation – rather than waiting 26 weeks – is certainly a step forward. And in today’s tight labour market, it makes real business sense. With four people currently chasing every part-time job, there’s no doubt that the demand is there; if ever there was a time to advertise flex at the point of hire, it’s right now.
But we believe there is still much more to do to properly widen access to flexible working from day one. Why? Because this arrangement still puts all the onus on the employee to ask.
Our 2022 Flexible Jobs Index© shows that only 30% of jobs are advertised with any flexible working options, and research also shows that this stops people who need flex from ever applying. And when candidates do ask, employers have often not thought about what might be possible, and aren’t equipped to respond. As a result, all those people who need flex to fit work around their wider lives lose out – and employers can’t get the candidates they need.
So although we’re hopeful that the day one right to request will increase the number of employers advertising roles flexibly, we doubt it will fully deliver the step change in hiring practice and job design that our economy desperately needs.
The government could have taken this opportunity to take things a step further.
We think employers should be required to consider whether a job can be made flexible, and if they feel it can’t, to explain why not. And critically, if it can be done flexibly, employers should be required to state the flexibility on offer up front in the recruitment process.
How else will applicants know when they apply for work whether they will actually be able to do the job? We believe few people would feel comfortable accepting a new position and then a few weeks later, bringing up the need for a new working pattern on day one.
Of course not every role can offer flex in where, when or how a job is done – but as our Innovation Unit pilots continue to show, far more is possible across so many roles.
At Timewise, we also know that legislative change alone is not enough. We continue to call on government to provide a package of support for employers, to help them create and implement flexible jobs and behaviours, to sit alongside this new legislation.
This needs to include training managers in how to design flexible jobs, and manage flexible teams. And in some sectors, in which flexibility is more complex to achieve, it should involve supporting them to test and pilot different approaches.
If this support becomes available, employers will be able to get to a position where fully considering whether a job can be made flexible, and what options are the most suitable, happens before the recruitment process. Where hiring managers proactively think this through. And where doing so is seen as an opportunity to attract the best talent, rather than a problem to be solved.
More work also needs to be done to help those who engage and bargain with employers – for example Jobcentre Plus and welfare to work providers, recruiters and trade unions – to act as change agents for better flexible work.
In Scotland, we’ve worked with labour market intermediaries to improve access to fair flexible work; we now need to see widespread action like this across the UK. There is huge potential for DWP and its provider network to do more in this space – with employers struggling to fill full-time vacancies and so many potential applicants in need of flexible work, action here must be a priority.
Our previous work with DWP has shown that specialist support for job brokerage teams works to get people who are out of work into better paying flexible jobs. We’ve recently been working with Restart providers, supporting them to work with employers to identify opportunities for more flexible jobs, and can see how much potential there is to do more.
It’s also worth taking a moment to remember that those who won’t benefit at all from the right to request are people who don’t have an employee contract. The Living Wage Campaign’s Living Hours ask speaks to this challenge – calling on employers to make sure that their entire workforces have decent notices of shifts and a basic guaranteed minimum of hours.
The fact that exclusivity clauses will be banned for the lowest paid is a positive move, but doesn’t go far enough to give people the security over hours that’s needed. Wider changes in employer practice and legislation remain necessary here, to make sure that our jobs market has more of the good flex that employers and employees urgently need, and less of the extreme low-wage insecure work that is bad for everyone.
Today’s announcement is an important and exciting step forward in acknowledging how widespread the need for good flexibility is – whether that is in how, where or when people work. It opens the door to a real shift in access to good flexible jobs. But we know that this legislation is only the first stage. Employers now need support to design flexible jobs fairly and consistently across their workforces, and ultimately we need to ensure good flexibility is on offer from the point a job advert is posted.
Published December 2022
