Top Employers for working families
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Top Employers for working families Benchmark report 2014
Working Families
Working Families is the UK’s leading work-life balance organisation. We help working parents and
carers and their employers find a better balance between responsibilities at home and work.
Our groundbreaking research and campaigns seek to change the way we live and work. To that end,
we also work with employers to support them in creating workplaces which encourage work-life
balance for everyone.
By operating in the real world of pragmatic advice and practical solutions, we are making our vision a
reality.
IES
The Institute for Employment Studies (IES) is an independent, apolitical, international centre of
research and consultancy in public employment policy and organisational human resource issues.
For over 40 years the Institute has been a focus of knowledge and practical experience in
employment and training policy, the operation of labour markets, and human resource planning and
development.
Acknowledgements
The authors are indebted to all of the organisations who took part in the Top Employers for Working
Families benchmark survey.
Institute for Employment Studies Working Families
Sovereign House Cambridge House
Church Street 1 Addington Square
Brighton BN1 1UJ London SE5 0HF
Telephone: +44 (0)1273 763400 Telephone: +44 (0)20 7253 7243
Email: askies@employment-studies.co.uk Email:benchmark@workingfamilies.org.uk
Website: www.employment-studies.co.uk Website: www.workingfamilies.org.uk
Copyright © 2014 Working Families
Registered Charity No 1099808
Registered Company No 04727690
1Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark report
The Top Employers Benchmark is now in its fifth year, and continues to provide participating
employers with the most comprehensive and detailed insights into their flexible working and work
life integration policies and practices, affording them the opportunity to see how they measure up
against other organisations. Over 100 organisations have now completed the benchmark,
representing well over one million employees and covering a wide range of sectors. Engagement
with the benchmark remains high; with a number of new companies participating for the first time in
2014, and many others returning to it again as they seek to refine and improve their work life
strategies and activities, and establish their reputation as the go-to places to work. Some
organisations benchmark annually, others are working to a longer business cycle, benchmarking
every two or three years; they are still able to qualify for the Top 30 this year if they have achieved a
sufficiently high score in a previous year.
The Working Families Benchmark Top Employers 2014
The Top 10 Ranking 11-30
In alphabetical order: In alphabetical order:
American Express Baker & McKenzie LLP
Barclays plc Bank of England
Centrica Capital One
Citi Chelsea & Westminster
Deloitte Hospital NHS Foundation
EY Trust
KPMG LLP DWF
Northern Trust Hogan Lovells International
Southdown Housing LLP
Association iCrossing
The London School of Lloyds Banking Group
Economics Ministry of Justice
and Political Science National Assembly for Wales
National Grid
Olswang
RBS
Royal Mail
Santander
Simmons & Simmons
State Street
UBS
University of Portsmouth
Wales & West Housing
2Contents
Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark report ........................................................................ 2
The Working Families Benchmark Top Employers 2014......................................................................... 2
The 2014 Top Employers Benchmark: key themes ............................................................................. 2
Attitude and support....................................................................................................................... 2
Building in flexibility ........................................................................................................................ 3
Evidence and statistics .................................................................................................................... 5
Maternity and paternity leave ........................................................................................................ 6
The findings in detail ........................................................................................................................... 7
Culture and attitudes to flexibility .................................................................................................. 8
Barriers and opportunities ............................................................................................................ 11
Policy provision ............................................................................................................................. 13
Flexible working ............................................................................................................................ 16
Wellbeing and support.................................................................................................................. 18
Ensuring consistent practice ......................................................................................................... 20
Policy implementation .................................................................................................................. 22
Monitoring and ensuring consistency........................................................................................... 24
Performance, assessment and manager training ......................................................................... 26
Measurements and statistics ........................................................................................................ 27
Engagement and satisfaction ........................................................................................................ 31
Final observations ......................................................................................................................... 33
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................... 34
Are you Happy to Talk Flexible Working?............................................................................................. 34
Try our new strapline for job adverts ............................................................................................... 34
Need more help? .......................................................................................................................... 34
Further information and support.......................................................................................................... 35The 2014 Top Employers Benchmark: key themes The benchmark in 2014 showed many employers steadily building on an already solid policy base to support and spread flexible and high performance working throughout their organisations. While there is some variability in what different employers make available at the policy level, policy coverage across workforces is now widespread. Parents and carers enjoy good support; and so, increasingly, do other workers. No doubt the extension of the right to request flexible working has driven some of this expansion, but it looks as if employers have largely been adopting this approach anyway. Policy, for many of them, appears to be moving in a direction that encourages supporting people while managing work requirements. But as many employers know, having the same policy provision does not guarantee employees will experience similar outcomes. Culture, attitude and skills all affect the implementation and uptake of flexibility. Attitude and support Most organisations report a high level of sponsorship for the development of a high performance and flexible culture, with 85 per cent deriving support from their main board. Senior commitment is therefore strong, although the senior supporters are still often drawn from HR. However, fewer than half of organisations are combining senior support with explicitly stating their commitment in their values. Values, mission statements and organisational visions do not reflect the level of internal support that flexible and family-friendly working has. Ninety-two per cent of organisations report that their internal senior support is proactive, but if organisations are hesitant about incorporating this support explicitly into their values and vision, it may be perceived by employees as a lack of real endorsement of flexibility. The importance of aligning values to reinforce policy is vital, if organisations are serious about driving flexible behaviours. Support is particularly crucial for line managers, who implement and manage formal policy and also agree the informal arrangements that are widespread. But nearly half (48 per cent) of organisations identified lack of line manager skills and knowledge as a barrier to flexible and high performance working in 2014, and 28 per cent reported a lack of support among line managers for flexible working too. This is a significant issue, and points to a disconnect between the efforts and activities coming from the top in terms of sponsorship and advocacy, and the actual reality on the ground. Without training and support, line managers will remain uncertain of their skills to manage flexible workers effectively, and will struggle to build high-performing flexible teams. Training for line managers is uneven. More than 20 per cent of organisations do not train their managers in managing flexible and high performance teams, and only 50 per cent of organisations that do provide training make it compulsory. Addressing the acknowledged barrier of lack of line manager skills through more and improved training is something that employers need to seriously consider. The excerpt below illustrates a successful approach. Line manager training: Centrica (Winner, The National Grid Best for Flexible Working Award 2014) Centrica has a decade of experience of flexible working, but is striving to embed flexibility right across its business. A Policy Steering Group has therefore been established with senior sponsorship to 2
examine how flexible working can be shown to have tangible business benefits, and not just viewed as an employee benefit. Line manager workshops were developed to support the flexibility required by employees with caring responsibilities. The workshops included: an introduction to an evidence-based toolkit to identify the flexible options in any role, top tips for leading high-performing flexible teams, demonstrating how engaging carers and a flexible approach to work maximise engagement, drive performance, optimise assets and increase innovation and customer service. Organisations report positive cultural attitudes towards flexibility, work life balance and family- friendly working practices, but they need to be sure that the underlying reality matches intention and aspiration. Sixty per cent say that the economic climate is a real barrier, and more than a third say lack of resources is a problem. The business case is now well established in terms of both performance and the benefits of agility that flexibility brings. But there remains a reality gap between the positive beliefs about family-friendly working and the persistent financial barriers that are inhibiting the development of further flexibility. The benefits of work life integration working methods should be positioned as a way to help resolve organisational economic challenges. Building in flexibility The majority of organisations (86 per cent) offer employees access to the Right to Request flexible working from day one. They are ahead of legislation in this regard, and it is a very positive indication that for many organisations flexibility is not viewed as a privilege to be earned but a business-as- usual option. Those organisations that continue to insist on a minimum period of service risk looking anachronistic. However, the Right to Request still operates at an individual level, and usually involves an employee changing from ’standard’ to ‘non-standard’ working patterns. It also reinforces the ‘employee need’ perception, where flexibility is primarily, an employee issue resolved on a case-by-case basis. Driving flexible working arrangements (and building agility) depends on removing barriers to all kinds of working arrangements, and on a basis that is more than responsive. There are a couple of opportunities here for employers. Firstly, they can look at how employees join the workforce, and whether they expand their recruitment activities to incorporate more upfront flexibility. Fifty-seven per cent of employers say that they show their commitment to flexible and family-friendly working in their recruitment campaigns, and this is welcome. However, fewer actually specify that a role can be worked flexibly on a job-by-job basis, and even before this stage only slightly more than a third routinely analyse a job for the potential for flexibility before advertising it. A quarter of employers ask a hiring manager to justify a full-time working pattern for vacancies. Work design, an integral component of an effective workplace, is yet to gain real purchase. This is confirmed by the findings around job advertising. Only 21 per cent of employers always identify how flexible a position could be (hours, location and time) to their own workforce in internal adverts; for external adverts, the figure falls to 18 per cent. Details of the Working Families strapline that employers can use to signal their openness to talking about flexible working at the recruitment stage are at the end of this report. With the expansion of the Right to Request flexible working to all from 30 June 2014, the concept is more mainstream than ever. The pool of workers who would like to work flexibly is large and is predicted to grow as a result of social and demographic change. But the way that jobs are configured 3
and offered does not meet this demand, despite the advantages for recruitment a flexible approach confers. Signalling a willingness to discuss different potential arrangements does not compel an employer to offer all jobs on a flexible basis; but it does begin the conversation in an adult-adult way about how work might be done. Advocates of this approach point to the high quality of candidates that a flexible offer attracts, and many employers can attest to the benefits when it comes to retention and talent pipelines. Employers might want to think about setting targets for the proportion of jobs for which they would consider flexible working when recruiting, and look for an annual percentage increase here. Two successful approaches are highlighted below. Flexibility in internal jobs at the Scottish Government (Winner, The DTCC Best for Innovation Award 2014) A key initiative has been the development of ‘location neutral’, a policy that brings with it a substantial change in culture. Applicants for advertised internal posts can be based in a location remote from the business office and still fulfil the duties of the role. This policy can also apply where business restructuring is taking place and the work is moving from one location to another. Another approach taken by some organisations is to build into the process of recruitment and induction a formal discussion about different ways of working, and how this might play out over an employee’s lifecycle. This does two things: it demonstrates a commitment to supporting employees through changing circumstances; and it promotes the idea that working flexibly is just one way of working within the organisation. A day one approach at Barclays plc (Winner, The Citymothers Best for All Stages of Motherhood Award 2014) Barclays offers flexible working opportunities from day one, with all roles eligible for flexible working (for both current and prospective employees). Barclays’ own careers site showcases the variety of locations, environments and job styles on offer. Resourcing teams proactively engage with their external recruitment partners to ensure they fully understand the inclusive ethos and act as they would expect when sourcing candidates, enabling the bank to recruit from an expanded pool. Only a quarter of respondents thought that flexible working was a way of addressing structural social inequalities. At a time when work balance is becoming part of the diversity strategy in organisations, the positive effect that a flexible and family-friendly approach can have on gender equality, and, increasingly, on age is one that they reflect in their policy activities. However, linking these directly to social responsibility outside of the organisation does not seem to have taken hold, as organisations generally focus inwards. Employers could perhaps address these inequalities by making more explicit the offer of good quality, flexible work. A noteworthy development has been seen in the public sector. Among the entries to the Top Employers Awards were organisations that showed that they were aligning their carers policies to support not only their internal staff, but those in the wider community who used their services. These examples of a joined-up approach to organising work in a way that benefits local people, including staff members , should encourage other employers (not just those in the public sector) to think about how they could adapt their work practices to support their local communities. 4
The case studies for Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust (in 2013) and Islington Council (in 2014) both illustrate this approach, and are available at www.topemployersforworkingfamilies.org.uk. Evidence and statistics This year’s benchmark has revealed a new focus on evidence and statistics from employers, with more employers able to provide more detailed reporting than in previous years. This is a welcome development and reflects the increasing importance of being able to demonstrate the benefits of the policies, practices and investments that organisations have made around flexible and family- friendly working. It is necessary to have an evidence base when explaining the benefits to the wider business. Although they do not tell the whole story, data and management information are vital components in shaping strategy and ensuring that positive attitudes towards flexible working are realised in tangible commitments. American Express: a pilot approach to understanding formal and informal flex (Winner, The E.ON Best for Engagement Award 2014) In January 2014, American Express reviewed its flexible working agreement process, which is open to all employees. Although a clear policy and process had been developed, it wanted to improve consistency across the organisation. A selected pilot group – one of the customer service centres, made up of 300 employees – was analysed to see what flexible working agreements were in place, both formally and informally. In particular, the study looked at how these flexible working agreements were benefiting both the employees and the organisation. The results showed that one- third of employees in the pilot group had a flexible working arrangement, and of that number, 65 per cent had the arrangement in order to care for children or grandchildren, 11 per cent for adult dependent care and 24 per cent for medical and disability reasons. What was also apparent was how beneficial these flexible working arrangements were to the business, as well as to the employees – just under half of the employees were on shifts that enabled the business to operate more efficiently and successfully. The 2014 benchmark has seen improvements in the recording of the various flexible patterns being worked, as well as their effects on aspects like retention and seniority. However, collecting information is not without issues and a number of organisations pointed to factors that prevented them from supplying detailed measurements and statistics. The main issues raised by employers were, broadly: the organisation is too large and does not have systems that allow it to collect information; the organisation does not wish to jeopardise informal flexible working arrangements by recording them and sending the signal that they are formally monitored; and that the development of a flexible culture meant that flexible arrangements are the norm, are available to all, and so are not recorded. Paradoxically, the success of embedding flexible working practices within these organisations means that they are not scrutinised in detail. This presents a challenge for all organisations who want to create a truly agile culture, and is something that the benchmark is bringing into sharper focus each year. Arguments in favour of measurements are that they can, as outlined above, help organisations develop their understanding of the benefits, what works best, and what the real gains are. If high performance is to be linked with flexible working practices, for example, then some evidence that connects the two is necessary. There is also the issue, especially for larger organisations, of identifying problems and hotspots. Is flexible working really distributed evenly throughout the organisation? Are some line managers 5
better than others? How are high-performing teams working, precisely? And what about equality? Is flexible working hampering people’s career prospects or performance assessments? But mechanisms for measuring the spread and informal use of flexible and family-friendly working practices are not widespread yet. Organisations that are measuring are doing so in a variety of ways. One approach is to survey staff about working arrangements; another is to capture this information at line manager or team leader level. There is scope for employers to make more use of their staff survey(s) to monitor the effects and use of informal practices, which may be a route for a light touch approach that addresses concerns about discouraging individual employees from working flexibly. The 2014 data shows that there are areas that are directly related to work life and flexible working that are widely examined. For example, control of working life, a key indicator of wellbeing and work life fit, is only considered by 39 per cent of organisations, and fewer (21 per cent) break this down by working arrangement. Organisations cite a culture of flexibility as a reason that they do not monitor informal arrangements, but only 25 per cent of organisations are measuring staff satisfaction with the workplace culture surrounding flexibility. Using staff surveys to measure outcomes of flexible working across a variety of arrangements is, as yet, an underused potentially beneficial resource. Maternity and paternity leave The 2014 benchmark is the penultimate one before the new Shared Parental Leave regulations (SPL) come into place. Data submitted in the benchmark showed that maternity leave is, in 36 per cent of organisations, paid at full pay for 26 weeks. Only two organisations did not enhance to full pay for any period. Ordinary Paternity Leave (OPL) was enhanced to full pay in 79 per cent of respondents, but Additional Paternity Leave (APL) was enhanced (either to full or part pay) in just 16 per cent. Enhancement ranged from two weeks through to 16 weeks. It will be interesting to review, in future benchmarks, the impact of SPL on maternity and paternity pay and take-up. Additional Parental Leave at Citi (Commended, The Cityfathers Best for All Stages of Fatherhood Award 2014) When the government introduced APL, Citi reviewed the policy on enhanced discretionary pay. It has always offered enhanced pay for ordinary paternity leave, while the ordinary maternity leave (OML) period is paid at full pay for the first 26 weeks. When Citi introduced its own internal APL policy, it offered the same terms as for OML. As APL can start when the baby is 20 weeks old, Citi enhances to full pay for the remaining six weeks of the OML period. In 2013 seven fathers took APL, up from three fathers in 2012. Their experiences have been tracked carefully, through consultations with both employees and managers. Citi is keen to learn from fathers’ experiences: of registering for APL, of their leave in terms of connectivity with work and at home, and of their return to work. 6
The approach by Citi is noteworthy in the close attention it is paying to the experience of fathers who have taken APL, and it is gathering vital insights into what happens and how best to manage men taking extended leave for parental reasons. Organisations where provision is largely focussed on maternity need to start to think about how they will configure leave and pay for fathers and mothers from 2015. Discrepancies and flexibilities around paternity leave (both Ordinary and Additional) are, in 2014, closing: 61 per cent of organisations now allow additional flexibility in how OPL can be taken, and most organisations match the same phasing on return from APL as they do from maternity leave. International evidence suggests that for fathers to take up paternity leave for extended periods then it must be paid at near-salary replacement rates, and for organisations that are keen to increase their take up of paternal leave, pay and a supportive culture are crucial. Paternity leave at the London School of Economics (LSE) (Winner, The Cityfathers Best for All Stages of Fatherhood Award 2014) A very strong suite of policies and support is available, and a major initiative is the commitment to pay fathers up to 16 weeks APL at full pay, providing a real incentive for couples to share time off. This commitment to full pay is key as it recognises that one of the main barriers to fathers taking extended periods of paternity leave is financial. This is part of the LSE’s wider strategy, which aims to ensure that it treats fathers and mothers equally, deliberately building a reputation as a diverse, fair and flexible employer that attracts and retains the best people. The findings in detail About the benchmark entrants In 2014, 28 organisations completed the benchmark, representing over half a million employees, of which 59 per cent were male (61 per cent Full Time Equivalent (FTE)). The majority came from the financial, legal and professional services sector and the majority of roles reported on can be described as white collar. Most of the entrants were large organisations and the majority (64 per cent) did not identify themselves as having a particular location or area of operation, defining themselves instead as UK wide. 7
Culture and attitudes to flexibility
Organisations were asked to report on how they communicated their commitment to creating a
workplace where flexible working was supported. The results are in Figure 1.
How does your organisation espouse its
desire to create a high performance,
flexible and family-friendly work
environment?
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Implied in Explicitly Explicitly Explicitly Explicitly Other
organisation stated in stated in stated in stated in
vision and/or organisation organisational recruitment product
mission vision and/or values campaigns marketing
statement mission campaigns
n=28
statement
Figure 1 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Recruitment campaigns were the most frequently selected option, while few employers espoused
their commitment in their product marketing. There may be scope for expansion here, especially for
those organisations in the professional services, legal and financial sectors. Interest in sustainable
working practices, and what supports them, is increasing; organisations that can demonstrate that
their working practices foster better performance and service stand to gain. The belief that clients
and customers are a barrier to adopting flexible working practices is not reflected in the experience
of organisations entering the benchmark (see Figure 2). The claim that clients do not like flexible
working because it disrupts continuity of service does not have much traction with the majority of
benchmarking organisations. Linking enhanced performance to flexible and agile working might, in
fact, be having the opposite effect.
8Customers/clients demand full time
roles
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
n=20
0%
Not at all Low Moderate High Core 1
Figure 2 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Support for flexible and family-friendly working comes from the main board in 85 per cent of
companies, and is proactive in 92 per cent of them. Many organisations also have a steering group to
guide the development of a flexible culture, which meets monthly or quarterly. A welcome spread of
functions make up the membership of this steering group (Figure 3).
Steering group membership
Chief executive
HR
IT
Facilities / property
senior management
Finance
Operational business
area
Other
n=20
Figure 3 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
1
Core indicates the most strongly held level belief or viewpoint
9There are generally high levels of support for flexible working (Figure 4). Eighty-one per cent of
employers believe that it is the organisation’s role, via its managers, to proactively support
employees through work life balance and other wellbeing measures. As Figure 6 shows, though, line
managers are seen as something of a barrier. Organisations need to ensure that good intentions do
not founder when it comes to practice.
Positive attitudes towards flexibility
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
Homeworking can Coming in People can be Flexible working
be the most early/staying late trusted to work improves
effective way to doesn't equal remotely operational
n=27 work commitment effectiveness
Figure 4 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Only 15 per cent of organisations said that flexible working was perceived to be only for specific
groups of employees (Figure 5). This is positive, and demonstrates that many organisations have
effectively been ahead of the expansion of the Right to Request in not constraining flexibility. With
the expansion of the right it will be important to monitor not only the outcomes of requests, but also
attitudes towards flexibility resulting from the possibility of conflicting requests from a wider group
of employees. The experience of employers who have long had ‘flexible working for all’ policies in
place is that this hasn’t been a problem: nonetheless, employers should remain aware of the
potential for attitudes to harden around hierarchies of ‘worthiness’ of requests.
10Flexible working is for specific groups
60%
only
n=27
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Not at all Low Moderate High Core
Figure 5 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Barriers and opportunities
Organisations were asked to identify what barriers they faced in 2014 (Figure 6). As in previous
years, financial pressures and lack of line manager skills are the biggest barriers. This remains a
complex area, as the positive effects of work-life balance measures on the balance sheet and on
performance are becoming more established. In addition, the benefits of flexibility, in particular in
helping organisations navigate economic turbulence, mean that there is a positive story to tell about
family-friendly working which should find an eager audience among organisations where financial
concerns are still in the foreground. Line managers are a pressure point. They are likely to feel the
lack of resources and financial pressures keenly; the temptation to resist flexibility and stick with
tried and tested working practices can understandably be strong. If organisations want line
managers to acquire the skills they need around flexibility and high performance, they will have to
make the space and time for them to do so. Line managers are less likely to be enthusiastic about
flexible working arrangements if they are not themselves confident in administering different ways
of working and trained to manage them effectively.
11Barriers in 2014
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
n=25
Figure 6 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Organisations were able to identify opportunities for work life balance in 2014. Relocation was an
opportunity for 30 per cent of organisations, and IT upgrades for 63 per cent. The ability of
technology to continually rewrite the rules on how and where work is done appears to be driving
organisations at all stages of their flexible working journey: some are adopting remote working for
the first time, while others are using it to redesign work itself. A third of organisations said that a
change in leadership was an opportunity, demonstrating how important senior buy-in and support
are. It is also worth noting that, where lack of senior commitment may inhibit the growth of
flexibility or the departure of supportive leadership might pose a risk to existing flexible and family-
friendly gains, information and evidence are invaluable in restating the rationale for continued
investment and effort into establishing workplace flexibility. Reasons given as ‘Other’ were mostly in
two main areas: expansion and development of remote and agile working technology to allow
people to work away from an office; and wellbeing and diversity programmes to expand the use of
flexibility across the organisation. Organisations’ commitment to these changes is demonstrated by
the way they are incorporating flexibility and family-friendly working into their strategic plans.
Seventy per cent formally integrate it with their property strategy, and 71 per cent with their IT
strategy.
12Opportunities for flexible working
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Planned relocation Change in IT upgrade Other
n=27 leadership
Figure 7 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Policy provision
Maternity and paternity leave and pay
Maternity and paternity leave and pay remain largely unchanged from 2013. Most organisations
enhance maternity pay to full pay (Figure 8), with 36 per cent enhancing to 26 weeks. In 79 per cent
of organisations there are conditions attached to receiving enhanced maternity benefits.
Maternity leave full pay
50
45
40
35
30
% 25
20
15
10
5
0
0 4 6 7 8 10 12 13 14 16 18 20 26
weeks
n=28
Figure 8 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Seventy-nine per cent of employers enhance OPL to full pay, and 11 per cent enhance pay for APL. In
64 per cent of organisations receiving enhanced benefits for OPL is conditional. Sixty-one per cent of
organisations also enhance the flexibility of OPL, allowing for it to be taken later than 56 days after
the birth of the child and to be split. Although any flexibility around paternity leave is welcome, it is
fairly low impact as it is confined to OPL. The lack of enhancement for APL suggests that fathers are
not really considered to be likely to take time off. The effect of the introduction of SPL will be
13interesting to monitor: are organisational policies for fathers shaped by a pragmatic understanding
of what they want? Or are they acting as a brake on fathers taking more time off?
How parents return from leave (apart from OPL) is shown in Figure 9. More organisations in the
2014 benchmark are defining in policy a period of part-time working. The benefits of defining a fixed
period in policy are that it ensures a consistent experience for employees, allows advanced planning
for managers and establishes a procedure for return that relieves employees from having to
negotiate individualised arrangements while on leave.
Return from maternity/APL
11
We encourage employees
to use Keeping in Touch
days and accrued holidays
22 to create a phased start.
A period of part-time
working is supported. This
is defined in policy.
67 A period of part-time
working is supported at
the line manager's
discretion.
n=28
Figure 9 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Parental leave and other time off
Parental leave, although on offer, is mostly unpaid: only two entrants pay it (at two weeks at full
pay). Three-quarters of employers restrict parental leave to its statutory minimum, although there is
more flexibility available in the way that it can be taken, and by whom (Figure 10).
14Flexibility in parental leave
50
45
40
35
% 30
25
20
15
10
5
0
n=28
Figure 10 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Extending the flexibility of parental leave increases its usefulness; although, being unpaid, it is not a
realistic option for many working parents. Allowing parental leave to be taken in shorter chunks is
useful for parents who may find that time of for dependant leave is not sufficient for their needs.
Time off for dependants was available in a variety of circumstances: sickness of the dependant,
planned medical appointments and sickness of the dependant’s usual carer were the most
frequently cited options. Time off for dependants was paid in half of organisations, and extending
dependant care beyond the statutory minimum was defined in policy in 64 per cent of workplaces.
Short-term flexible working, although not a leave scheme, is also widely available. Seventy-five per
cent of entrants said that they would allow short-term flexible working, not tied to any specific
reason, at request. This was specified in policy in 61 per cent of organisations. As with any element
of managerial discretion around control and access to leave polices, employers should ensure that
employees are being treated fairly and consistently. The interplay between parental leave,
dependant leave and short-term flexibility means that in many instances employees are able to take
a break from work if they need to. This, coupled with planned time off for family occasions (provided
by 79 per cent of employers), shows evidence of a responsive, family-friendly ethos. Moving these
15benefits to policy and away from managerial discretion is a significant step for organisations looking
to embed a flexible mindset.
Flexible working
Sixty-four per cent of organisations plan their workforce in FTEs. This is almost identical to 2013, and
as noted then, FTE planning allows organisations to use different combinations of flexible and part-
time that best meet the needs of the business and its employees within an overall budget: using
headcount as a starting point is more restrictive, and can make it difficult to move away from the
full-time default.
Many employers are thinking about flexibility from the beginning. As noted in the introduction, this
includes being open to talking about flexibility at recruitment, to sitting down with new employees
to discuss flexible options and possibilities that they might want to use in the future. A critical aspect
of building a flexible workplace is job design, and recruitment offers an opportunity to examine roles
to see if they might be reshaped. The majority of employers are doing this for at least some of their
jobs, as shown in Figure 12. Hiring managers do not have to justify a flexible working pattern for
vacancies in 75 per cent of organisations; this figure drops to 50 per cent for full-time vacancies. To
drive flexibility, getting managers to at least discuss why a full-time role is necessary for a new hire
would allow the potential benefits to be assessed. With 89 per cent of organisations analysing at
least some of their roles prior to recruitment, asking managers to put their case for a non-flexible
working pattern is an achievable step that has real potential to stimulate new thinking about how
work is organised.
Are all vacancies analysed for
flexible potential before being
advertised?
11%
36% No
Some
Yes
54%
n=28
Figure 11 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
There is not a significant difference in the way that organisations are communicating flexibility
internally and externally in their recruitment advertising (Figure 13).
16Do you require adverts to identify
how flexible a position could be (i.e.
% location, hours, time)?
50
45
40
35
30
25 internal ads
20
15 external ads
10
5
0 n=28
No Some Yes
Figure 12 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Some employers said that they used an overall statement in their recruitment activities (for example
on a web-based jobs portal) that demonstrated their openness to flexibility, instead of specifying
whether or not flexibility was an option for each particular vacancy. In future, it might be worth
considering a twin-track approach to ensure that the openness to flexibility is clearly communicated
since it is not yet the general expectation of potential employees
Organisations offered a wide range of flexible working opportunities, shown in Figure 14.
Availability of working patterns
Self-rostering
Shift swapping
Zero hours contract
Any-time working
Permanent remote working
Annualised hours
Anywhere working
Compressed hours or days
Ad hoc remote working restricted by function
Term-time working open to all
TOIL (time off in lieu)
Core hours
Sabbatical / career break
Job-share
Part-time or voluntarily reduced hours
n=28 0 50 100 150
%
Figure 13 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
17The two most widely available options with fewest restrictions on use were job sharing and part- time working (open to all staff in 93 per cent and 96 per cent of organisations respectively). As in 2013, self-rostering was least open to all staff, available in just 25 per cent of organisations. Zero- hours contracts was also only open to all in 25 per cent. Although zero-hours can be useful for employers and employees alike, their use needs to be carefully monitored as this type of flexibility is not synonymous with family-friendly working. Generally, the forms of flexible working that provide a predictable or fixed pattern (like job shares, part-time, sabbaticals and core-hours schemes) were more open to staff and had fewer restrictions than those that encourage an outputs-not-hours or line-of-sight approach (anywhere working, any- time working, self-rostering, ad hoc homeworking). This may be due to line managers’ lack of skills: for some fixed-hours arrangements may be easier to manage. Wellbeing and support As would be expected, employers take employee wellbeing seriously. Sixty-nine per cent of organisations train their managers in supporting employee wellbeing. As an important indicator of resilience and performance, supporting wellbeing is a core skill for line managers. Organisations who do not currently train their managers could consider a formalised training programme demonstrating the organisational business case and benefits of proactively supporting wellbeing, and providing practical techniques to assist them in the implementation. Setting clear objectives for staff, and supporting them with resources (such as online tools, employee assistance programmes and exercise and relaxations classes) to help them deal with stress, were key features within most organisations. Support around the transition to parent or carer status showed that there was still some opportunity for some employers to improve practice. For example, 89 per cent of employers allow partners of pregnant women paid time off to attend antenatal appointments. This is a relatively low-cost benefit, and one that employers should seriously consider offering if they can. The benefits of demonstrating to expectant partners that the business recognises that their circumstances are changing and supports them are well worth it in terms of employee goodwill and engagement. However, almost half of organisations (48 per cent) leave this at the line manager’s discretion: as ever, consistent and fair practice is vital, especially when it comes to issues that employees will feel strongly about. Figure 15 shows the support offered to parents and carers as they transition to caring or parenting responsibilities. 18
Support available through transition
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40% carers
30%
fathers
20%
10% mothers
0%
Counselling Coaching for Mentoring / Workshops for Employee
for employees employees buddying for employees guide book /
(e.g. employees web pages
employee
assistance n=26
programme)
Figure 14 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Although there is still a variation in the level of support, with mothers being the best supported
through the transition to caring, the gap between mothers, fathers and carers has narrowed
compared to 2013. This reflects improved support for fathers and carers. As there is more
legislation around maternity, and historically maternity has been the main focus of employer policy
and support, provision for mothers is always likely to be slightly ahead. The introduction of SPL next
year provides an opportunity to improve support still further for fathers. For carers, the visibility and
self-identification issues that can impede the development of policy provision could be addressed
through the creation of carer-specific networks and communications. An ageing workforce, longer
working lives and an ageing population all point to a near future where employees who are also
carers will become more numerous. Employers who have policies in place to support carers see
improved service delivery, cost savings and increased productivity.
Most (95 per cent) of employers provided employee networks, shown in Figure 16.
19Types of employee network
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Working Flexible Working Working Working Working Women's Other
fathers workers mothers carers families parents network
network network network network network network n=26
Figure 15 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Common in the ‘Other’ category were networks for LGBT employees, ethnic minority employees and
different faith groups. The number of fathers and mothers networks aimed at family friendliness and
work life fit was low, reflecting a move away from a specific gender focus around parenting which
was also evident in 2012 and 2013. As the objective of networks was, in 90 per cent of organisations,
to provide a voice and demonstrate commitment to specific employee groups, it is probably worth
considering network provision in tandem with any programmes of culture or policy change for
harder to reach groups of employees.
Ensuring consistent practice
The communication and implementation of flexible working practices is essential for the
development of a high performance, flexible working culture. Effective communication shows the
organisational commitment to family-friendly working practices, and should reassure employees
that flexibility is supported and is no barrier to career success. It should also align with values and
behaviours that the organisation wants to encourage, and be backed up through practice. Clear,
open and fair procedures, consistently applied, are essential.
Communication
Senior support for flexibility and family-friendly working is high, as the benchmark results revealed
(Figure 3). Getting senior managers and leaders to talk about flexibility and its benefits (and their
own personal commitment, too) is a good way of demonstrating that support reaches all the way to
the very top and that flex is no impediment to a successful career. All participating organisations
used senior people to spread the message in some way. Eighty-six per cent of respondents used
speeches from their senior staff to promote work life balance, with 63 per cent doing this on at least
a quarterly basis. Seventy-nine per cent also used broadcast emails and newsletter articles from
senior leaders. However, senior leaders were not the only channel of communication, as shown in
Figure 17.
20Who is responsible for promoting
flexible, family-friendly working?
95%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
Flexible Other Senior Line managers
working/diversity managers/division
champions heads n=28
Figure 16 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
The most frequently cited groups in ‘Other’ were HR, D&I and employee relations teams. Many
organisations also said that their employee networks were a core component of their
communication activities, often led by a network champion.
The different types of interactive communication, and the frequency with which they are used, are
shown in Figure 18.
Interactive communication
80%
70%
60%
50%
Weekly
40%
Monthly
30%
Quarterly
20%
Annually
10%
0%
Lunch and Road shows Seminars Webinars Facilitated
learn team
n=27
development
Figure 17 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
The subjects covered (Figure 19) show that communications were more focussed on individuals
(being a father, mother or carer) than on managers, with the exception of managing flexible teams,
which was one of the top five subjects. This may be because managerial training is carried out
separately. However, organisations should beware of unintentionally sending signals about flexibility
21being an individual problem if they lean too far in the direction of addressing communications to
employees and not to the people who manage them.
Interactive communication: subjects covered
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
n=27
Figure 18 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Policy implementation
Organisations are open about the criteria used to assess flexible working requests, and most (85 per
cent) publish them alongside their flexible working policy so that they are easy for employees to see.
The criteria used to assess requests are shown in Figure 20.
22Criteria used to assess requests for flexible
working
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
n=28
Figure 19 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
All employers said that they use the business case to assess requests. Within the business case, as
set out in the Right To Request, there are sufficient measures by which individual requests can be
assessed and these encompass issues such as costs and ability to find replacement staff. They do not
include things like the reason for the request, or the competence of the manager: these are not
valid business under the legislation, which give eight possible reasons for rejection. The expansion,
in 2014, of the Right to Request to all employees is an opportunity for employers to review policy.
Creating a hierarchy based on subjective judgements about the worthiness of individual reasons
risks accusations of unfairness. A principle fpr good practice is a reason neutral approach to
ensure equity of treatment; but managers should also be aware of employee life responsibilities
and, where appropriate, be prepared to offer support via flex working even when a rejection might
be possible under the eight business reasons. There might be occasions where although there is a
business reason for saying no, it is not proportionate to do so and managers should bear in mind the
requirements of the Equality Act. Employers also need to be careful about using suitability of the
role as a reason for accepting or rejecting a request. If they are considering this they need to ensure
23that it is within the business case and on an individual basis; prohibiting certain roles or jobs from
flexible working is not good policy.
Employers were best at telling mothers about their opportunities for flexible working, and not so
good at informing fathers and carers. Figure 21 shows when employees were reminded about their
opportunities for flexibility.
When do you remind employees of their rights
and opportunities to request flexible working?
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
On return from On notification On notification Through On notification On return to
paternity leave of requirement of intention to proactive of intention to work from
to take time off take paternity promotion of take maternity maternity leave
to care for a leave flexible working leave
dependant or to all employees
when caring
responsibility
n=28
becomes
apparent
Figure 20 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
It is a relatively simple matter to remind employees of their opportunities, and for employers who
are taking a lifecycles approach to flexible working it is essential to recognise the different events
that might trigger the need for a change to working arrangements. Organisations who are trying to
ensure that mothers are not the main focus and audience for work life efforts should ensure that
fathers and carers have similar provisions to mothers, for example paternity and carers packs and
information about retirement planning. With the introduction of SPL, employers will need to provide
new information for employees, and this is an opportunity to bring in consistency across all groups.
Being more conscientious about reminding only one particular type of employee sends out strong
signals about who the organisation really thinks flexible working is for.
Monitoring and ensuring consistency
The way that organisations record how flexibility is being managed is important. It can show where
policy is working, and give a clearer view of whether bias is affecting decisions. It can also reveal ‘hot
spots’ that need to be addressed, and determine whether training is needed for certain managers or
within certain business areas. There was some variability is how requests and their outcomes were
monitored, shown in Figure 22.
24Approval of flexible requests in practice
The approval rates of requests are monitored
by approver
The approval rates of requests are monitored
by division
The approval rates of requests are monitored
by grade
The approval rates of requests are monitored
by gender
No
Approvers are trained in the role of
unconscious bias and how this may affect Yes
their views of flexible working requests
Approvers are trained in the business case for
flexible working
A consistent level of approval is required
A consistent set of criteria is used to assess
formal requests for flexible working
n=26
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Figure 21 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
There is good consistency of practice in the use of criteria, the level of approval, in understanding
the business case for flexible working and in training in unconscious bias. However, organisations are
not monitoring approval rates by level of employee, division and gender to the same extent that
they are monitoring by approver. Developing a flexible culture depends on being able to
demonstrate to employees that flexibility is no impediment to a successful career. Many
organisations are also trying to build up their talent pipelines, and to ensure equality of opportunity.
Additional recording of the outcomes of requests by gender, grade and division can provide useful
indicators of where additional training or policy adjustment is required.
Line managers, often in conjunction with HR and division heads, assessed flexible working requests
in most organisations. There was also good data around training for approvers in the business case
for flexible working and in understanding the role of unconscious bias. It should be noted, though,
that 36 per cent (for the business case) and 32 per cent (for unconscious bias) had trained fewer
than a quarter of their approvers.
25Performance, assessment and manager training
Managers and leaders are trained how to run individual performance assessment and development
sessions in 93 per cent of organisations. How performance assessments are monitored in
organisations is shown in Figure 23.
Performance assessment monitoring
Performance assessments are
monitored by assessor
Performance assessments are
monitored by division
Performance assessments are No
monitored by grade
Yes
Performance assessments are
monitored by contract type (part-
time and full time)
Performance assessments are
monitored by gender
n=28
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Figure 22 Top Employers for Working Families Benchmark 2014
Assessment is well monitored in general. There is a risk that part-time workers might be assessed
less favourably than full-time colleagues. The Institute for Employment Studies has found that
people who work in non-standard patterns in the organisation can get poorer performance
outcomes (e.g. part-times workers, the majority of whom are women)2. Therefore some employers
might want to increase their level of monitoring of assessment by contract type: currently, only 50
per cent are doing so.
Seventy-three per cent of organisations are training three-quarters or more of their managers in
how to run individual performance assessment and development sessions, and in 85 per cent of
cases this training incorporates understanding the roles of unconscious bias. A large majority – 85
per cent – have defined the knowledge, skills and behaviours needed to develop and lead teams that
deliver both high performance and the flexibility required to support good work life balance and
wellbeing, with 82 per cent providing training for their managers. However, this training is only
compulsory in 42 per cent of benchmarking organisations. As organisations roll out flexible working
they need to ensure that line managers have the necessary skills to maximise its effectiveness:
creating a high performance and family-friendly workplace depends upon having competent
managers who are supported through training and skills development. Only half of organisations
were able to report that 75 per cent or more of their managers had reached the required level of
capability.
2
Performance Management, Literature Review, IES 2011
26You can also read
