Do proposed changes to the law around flexible working go far enough?
There are two Private Members’ Bills that set out changes to the Employment Rights Act 1996 currently progressing through Parliament.
The Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Bill sets out changes that will make it easier for employees to request flexible working up to twice every 12 months, require employers to make a decision on flexible working requests within two months and consult with employees before refusing an application.
But, flexibility is not always fair.
Another Bill progressing through the Commons is The Workers (Predictable Terms and Conditions) Bill. This Bill aims to protect people working on zero hours contracts from “one-sided flexibility”. Currently, employers can require workers to be on standby in case they are needed for a shift last minute which may or may not materialise. The Bill makes new provisions to introduce a new statutory right for workers to request a predictable working pattern.
What is the policy context?
In both cases, the proposed changes to the law hand more rights to workers to request greater control and autonomy over the way they work. Considered together, the Bills also illustrate the spectrum of working conditions that exist in the economy. The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices outlined that quality work is subjective, pay is not the only metric that matters and our perception of quality work can change. People are most likely to enjoy work when they have some autonomy in what they do. Workers with limited choice of employment are particularly vulnerable to an imbalance of power between themselves and their employer over how they work, which can lead to poor working conditions. These individuals are likely to be more socioeconomically vulnerable overall, which has a bearing on the social determinants of health.
What do the proposed changes to the Employment Rights Act 1996 mean for work, health and the economy?
Greater, fairer flexibility will help more people get to work and stay in work, including people living with ill health or people with caring responsibilities. This should help bring more people of working age into economic activity and support the growth agenda. Additionally, there is a strong evidence base that autonomy and control reduce the risk of work-related stress and improve productivity. In fact, at some of the highest performing workplaces, cultivating and promoting worker flexibility goes beyond the logistical working conditions of where and when work takes place. Organisational psychologist Adam Grant describes successful implementation of a mindset shift towards greater flexibility amongst workers at Google. A culture of encouraging employees to think beyond logistical flexibility helped workers see both their jobs and skills as flexible. This enabled Google employees to ‘become the architects of their own jobs’ creating a new vision of their role that suited their goals while continuing to deliver. The gains were evident in employee satisfaction as well as performance.
The Bills progressing through parliament aim to hand more flexibility, control, and autonomy to workers to improve the balance of power between them and their employers. This will help protect employees and help employers get the basics right.
But companies truly unlocking the potential of their workforce will empower them to have more of a meaningful say in their work, beyond the remit of these proposed changes to the law.