Clearly these barriers need to be overcome if the majority of employers are to consider ways toinstigate quality part-time work. Initial recommendations from the Work Foundation includeengaging accountancy bodies such as ICAS and ACCA in the good jobs agenda, as accountants areoften a source of general advice and support for small organisations; publicising a series of bestpractice case studies; and encouraging business networking around good jobs, perhaps throughexisting business channels such as BusinessLink. Getting employers to reconsider the nature ofwork is a long-term challenge and an area which needs considerable future research.Limited recommendations exist on how to develop quality part-time work for organisations whichhave overcome or do not perceive these barriers. The Institute for Employment Research (IER),for example, lists the following measures 31 :• An evaluation of the line manager’s role in granting requests for part-time working• The mainstreaming of part-time work within organisations (incorporating it within existingorganisational structures)• The application of the business case for increasing part-time work• An increase in senior role models working part-time, especially menIt is difficult to see, however, how these recommendations would work in practice, probablybecause the literature on quality part-time work is in such early stages. An employer, for example,might struggle to see how part-time work could be incorporated within existing organisationalstructures without specific recommendations on how to do this.On the final bullet point above, the IER says: although part-time work is predominantly undertaken bywomen, usually for childcare and caring purposes, an increase in the numbers of (senior) men workingreduced hours will help to drive the message home to organisations that part-time work can be good foremployees, as well as good for business. While we agree with the latter sentiment, organisationscannot force more men to take part-time roles.What is needed, instead, is the availability of part-time, quality work, which will encourage allemployees - of both genders - to work part-time if it is their preferred way of working. It is hopedthat this would have a snowball effect: the availability of such work would allow more people towork part-time, which would create more role models, which would improve the reputation andavailability of quality, part-time work.Job-Shares: A Partial SolutionJob-shares are one way of enabling higher paid, higher skilled work to be split into part-timeworking. According to BusinessLink, the benefits of job-sharing to employers include 32 :• The retention of valued workers• A wider range of skills, experience, views and ideas• Increased flexibility to meet peaks in demand• Greater continuity when one worker is sick or on holiday• A wider pool from which to recruit• Increased commitment and loyalty• A potential reduction in absenteeism, sickness and stress31Lyonette et al. (2010). Op cit.32http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=107441200416
Women surveyed in this study were generally positive about the idea of job-shares. The employeesbenefit from the flexibility and the employers benefit because they get more than 100% as people whowork part-time always do more than 50% of the work, said one respondent. Another stated, I think[job-share schemes] can be an extremely effective means of enabling mothers to work and fororganisations to benefit from the skills and knowledge of two people for the price of one. Job-shares canovercome some of the problems of part-time working, with one respondent saying, at least with ajob-share you are probably not being asked to do too much more than you would in a normal job, whereasthose in part-time work seem to try and have to fit 5 days work into 3. Job-shares are also not lookeddown on in the same way as part-timers seem to be.Job-shares do not always work well in practice, however. Only 25% of mothers who have access tojob-share schemes make use of them 33 . While the majority of women surveyed in this study werepositive about the idea of job-share schemes, many potential downsides were identified:• Communication between job-sharers: The handover is often the missing piece of the jigsaw in myopinion and is important for workers and employers.• Compatibility of job-sharers: It can be tricky to try and find a willing partner and someone who isat the same level and has the same skills and experience. Relationship between job-sharers: Youhave to totally trust the person you job-share with and have to have a very good relationship withthem.• Additional work for colleagues: Two people shared a job on a 2 and a half days basis, but it wasnot easy for us to work with them. We had always to share twice the information with them.• Employer attitude: I think that there is still a prevailing feeling that senior level jobs can’t beshared. Fear of additional costs was also cited as a reason why employers might not be keenon job-shares.• Management of job-sharers: If you end up in a situation where the two job-sharing are played offagainst one another, or not managed properly, then I foresee big problems.• Management of other people: My management role would... be very difficult to keep on top of withtwo people involved.• Career development: I can’t quite work out how you move forward in your career when two peopleare essentially tied together (somewhat like a three legged race!).Jobs which can be broken down easily into discrete tasks were identified as being more suitable forjob-shares. I think that job-shares work best in roles where the tasks largely begin and end on the sameday, e.g. receptionist, hairdresser, GP, physiotherapist, or [where] the role can be broken down into discretechunks or projects. If the task depends on ongoing follow-up or relationships with customers/clients, then itcan be difficult to handle this between two people.Communication can be improved by having job overlap, where both job-sharers are in the office atthe same time for some of the working week. The most common framework for job-sharing is tosplit the role equally into 2.5 days 34 ; if there is no overlap, however, job-sharers do not have anopportunity to share information face-to-face. Some employers have tried to address this byemploying each job-sharer for 3 days a week with one day’s overlap, but this entails additional costsdue to a 20% increase in salary and benefits (6 days a week in total, rather than 5). Job-sharerssometimes work simultaneously for 2 or 3 days a week, which works well from a communications33La Valle, I., E. Clery & M.C. Huerta (2008). Maternity Rights and Mothers’ Employment Decisions. London: Department ofWork & Pensions & National Centre for Social Research.34Equality & Human Rights Commission, cited in Ridgley, C., J. Scott & A. Hunt (2005). Flexible Employment in HigherEducation: Job Share, A Report. Stoke-on-Trent: Staffordshire University/FEO.17
Change language