The press reported last week that David Cameron and Nick Clegg will be adopting ‘flexible times’ for Cabinet meetings so the two fathers can take their children to school. Mr Clegg said this was symbolic of the ‘new politics’ and added that he tries to finish early a few times a week so he can put his children to bed too. Whether or not it’s the new politics, this unprecedented behaviour by senior politicians certainly symbolises the widespread belief that childcare is for fathers too.
This can be regarded as one of the more benign legacies of the last Government, which introduced the statutory right to request flexible working. It subsequently chose to extend the right on a piecemeal basis, claiming credit for each fresh addition to the group of employees affected. This never made sense in the workplace, where employers rapidly concluded they should treat all or most employees similarly on grounds of fairness.
A recent PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) survey found that flexible working was the most valued benefit for UK employees, ahead of material perks such as bonuses. Why should flexible working have such a powerful effect on employee attitudes? Psychologists would say it’s because workers seek autonomy and control over their working environment.
But now the new government has announced its intention to apply the statutory right to all employees, we should perhaps be generous enough to recognise the ethical dimension to the selective approach preferred by their predecessors. Maybe they were not wrong to give preferential treatment to those who could claim a higher social value for their time off, by caring for children or older people, rather than simply watching football or playing golf. Now flexible working is likely to be a key feature of employers’ response to removal of the default retirement age too.
It comes down in the end to employees’ enthusiasm for getting a better work-life balance. This unwieldy phrase stands for the aspiration, that feels like a fundamental part of the human condition, to have a life within which people’s needs for financial security, social support and personal growth are all met. Given the pressures on both home and working life, this aspiration must often be disappointed. However the opportunity to adjust working patterns at least allows people to make their own judgements as to what will suit them best.
CIPD research suggests that flexible workers are more engaged, which benefits both them and their employer. In which case, it makes good sense for employers to ask whether they can offer a wider range of vacancies on a flexible working basis. It begins to look as if flexible working may be part of the process by which capitalism evolves and adapts to resist the charges of alienation and anonymity.
Mike Emmott, CIPD Employee Relations Adviser
http://www.cipd.co.uk/pressoffice/_experts/MikeEmmott.htm
Comments