Usefully Employed

The news has been full of this - new BERR Secretary Lord Mandelson (go on, admit you missed him) was reported to be reconsidering the government’s previous announcement in November that the right to apply for flexible working would be extended to all employees who cared for children under the age of 16. Currently the right only exists for carers of children aged under six, a registered disabled child under 18, or (in certain circumstances) a vulnerable person of any age.

Even back in May the CBI said that they strongly opposed reform:

“Now is not the time to be placing extra burdens on British business, and people increasingly see this. We already have one of the most generous flexible working systems in Europe, and the Government is already committed to giving more parents the right to request flexible working. Any plans that would hamper our companies as they compete in the global economy should concern us all.”

…so we can’t expect their opposition to be any less strong now that we are officially in a recession. Small businesses in particular record their dissatisfaction with flexible working, as they feel any absence by employees during their core hours has the potential to cause greater problems as there are often no other staff to cover. By contrast the Chief Executive of the Equality & Human Rights Commission said, in response to Mandelson’s comments:

Genuinely flexible working is part of the solution, not part of the problem. Flexibility provides business opportunities to deal with turbulent times.

The EHRC is disappointed to see the old-fashioned argument being made that flexibility has to be a burden, instead of a potential way to increase productivity in Britain. It need not be a business cost. It can be a business opportunity.

For what my opinion’s worth, the most worrying factor to small businesses is the belief that they have to grant all applications for flexible working. This is contributed to by there being no freestanding remedy for refusing an application, unless the refusal constitutes indirect discrimination. This leads to a lack of certainly for an employer to assess his obligations.