Flexible Working Report

TUC assessment of flexible working in the UK

Latest figures from Britain's Labour Force Survey (LFS) show that British workplaces are still far from flexible. New research for the TUC shows that the majority of employees have no individual working time flexibility.

More than one in ten employees - a staggering 2.3 million - would like to work fewer hours even if this involved a cut in pay but are not able to do so. More than 800,000 part-time workers would like to work more hours but are trapped in low hours jobs, many of which are also low paid [1] .

Union members have the best chance of enjoying the benefits of workplace flexibility but unions have no magic wand to change hostile employers or eliminate the long hours culture.

Introduction - how we organise work

1.1 The Government's recent announcement of the extension of unpaid paternity leave and extend the right to request flexible workers to carers spurred employers' groups into a frenzy of complaints. John Cridland, Deputy Director-General of the CBI, was reported as saying '[the Government hasn't] made the right judgment calls from a business point of view' (Financial Times, 30 October 2005).

1.2 Given that employers' groups always claim that every new piece of employment legislation is the last straw, it has become somewhat difficult to take such claims seriously.

1.3 The Government has established a number of new basic rights at work, including trade union recognition, the minimum wage; the part-time work regulations, the working time regulations and extensions to maternity and paternity leave.

1.4 Judging by what employers' groups say in public, they see most of the new workers' rights as unnecessary ''red tape''. If their fears are justified, and changes in legislation are in fact holding back business, we would expect to see the economy in real trouble at this point.

1.5 The truth is that the economy has done well and the number of employee jobs has increased by almost 2.2 million since 1997 (Labour Market Trends, October 2005).

1.6 Many employers' groups would agree that they are in favour of flexible working and sensible hours (see Managing Change: Practical Ways to Reduce Long Hours and Reform Working Practices, DTI in association with the TUC and the CBI, 2005), but are against legislation to give workers the right to work flexibly (see ''The Work Life Balance and All That'', Institute of Directors, 2001).

1.7 However, contrary to employers' report that flexible work is now widely available (see DFES work life balance surveys 1 & 2), the Labour Force Survey (the Government's major survey of workers) shows that the numbers taking up flexibility are not increasing overall.

Table 1: Percentage of employees with flexible working arrangements 1995-2005

	1995	1997	1999	2001	2003	2004	2005
Flexitime	14.9	10.1	9.6	10.0	10.7	10.3	11.5
Annualised hours	6.2	4.0	2.7	4.7	4.6	4.7	4.7
Compressed week*	3.0	2.4	2.0	1.5	1.3	1.2	1.1
Job sharing	0.7	0.7	0.7	0.7	0.7	0.7	0.6
Term time only working	4.3	4.2	4.1	4.3	4.4	4.7	4.7
None of these	74.7	78.7	80.0	78.9	78.2	78.5	77.4
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100	100

LFS Microdata Service spring quarters

*Compressed week = 9 day fortnight or 4.5 day week

1.8 Furthermore, the LFS evidence shows that just over half a million employees report that they have asked their employer if they can change their hours but have not been able to get what they want.

1.9 In fact, the evidence shows that there is a massive mismatch between the hours and patterns of work that employees want, and what they can get. Unsurprisingly, most workers would prefer fewer hours, but we should not forget that there are still a substantial number of part time workers who are underemployed and who would like more hours. If these preferences were to be managed in a more intelligent way by employers, then labour turnover could be reduced and motivation and productivity increased.

1.10 In sum, the organisation of workplaces needs to reflect the changing nature of the labour market. This would involve looking at the different work/life balance needs of an individual at every stage of their career. In particular, we need to retain the potential of older workers. Work life balance issues affect us all and go much wider than the initial focus on families and carers. This suggests that right to request flexible working might usefully be extended to all workers.

1.11 Union members are more likely to have good access to flexible working. This report sets out a number of case studies that show unions negotiating solutions that work for both individuals and employers. The European Trades Union Confederation Working Time Innovation Award [2] illustrate the complex, large scale flexible working arrangements in place in major European manufacturing and private/ public sector organisations.

1.12 The TUC would like to see a comprehensive and coherent approach to the organisation of working time which moves towards giving all workers - employees, agency workers and the dependant self-employed - more choice and control over their hours and patterns of work. This can only be realised if more employers develop partnerships with unions to create mutually beneficial ways to organise work.

1.13 We do not ask for flexibility at any price, rather, the new approach must balance the rights of workers with their duties to their employers. We would be happy to talk to employers groups about work organisation and productivity more generally on a sector-by-sector basis. Perhaps this discussion could form part of the agenda for the new sectoral forums promised by the Government in its 2005 election manifesto.

1.14 We ask employers to work in partnership with us to ensure that new flexible working rights maximise competitiveness. Our aim is not only that workers should be able to obtain a better balance between work and life, but also that we should ensure that there are sufficient sustainable high value jobs.

The Arguments

Workforce/workplace mismatch over working hours continues

1.15 According to the Labour Force Survey, a staggering 77.4% of employees have no working time flexibility [3] . This has only changed very marginally since 2003 (down from 78.2%).

1.16 The right to request flexible working came into force in April 2003 to make it easier for employees with children under six or disabled children under 18 to get the working time arrangements that would help them stay in paid employment and look after their children. In its recent review of the legislation the Government suggested that there is insufficient individual workplace flexibility for the carers of adults.

1.17 While the Government proposal to extend the right to request to carers in the Work and Families Bill is welcome, it is disappointing that the parents of school age children over the age of six will not benefit from the extension of flexible working rights. New TUC research dents the Government's claim that no further action is required because many employers already exceed statutory requirements by offering flexible working to the parents of older children [4] . Data from the Labour Force Survey, the most comprehensive and reliable source of information on employment in the UK, suggests that while many companies might have flexible working policies, the large majority of employees have no flexibility in their working lives. There is a serious mismatch between employers' claims of extensive flexible working arrangements and the reality for many workers.

1.18 A CBI survey [5] suggests that a third of private sector employers offer flexitime to their employees. Yet according to the Labour Force Survey only six per cent of private sector employees actually work flexitime (the proportion is more than three times as high, at nearly 20%, in the public sector - see table 2). Requests for flexitime have been popular under the right to request flexible working, particularly among male employees. Almost one in four of all requests, and almost three out of ten from men, involve flexitime [6] . There are now 150,000 more employees using flexitime than in 2003 when the right to request was introduced but even now only just over one in ten (11.5%) of all employees in the UK have this arrangement. International comparisons show that Britain operates much under par. The most conservative estimates in Germany suggest three times as many people have such valuable personal flexibility. [7]

Table 2: Flexible working by public/ private sector - per cent

	Private sector employees	Public sector employees
Flexitime	6.3	19.8
Annualized hours contract	3.8	5.1
Term time working	1.0	13.9
Job sharing	0.5	1.0
Nine day fortnight	0.2	0.2
Four and a half day week	1.0	0.4
Zero hours contract	0.3	0.2
None of these	86.8	59.3
Total	100.0	100.0

Source: LFS Microdata Service, spring 2005

1.19 According to the CBI a third of private sector companies offer job share schemes [8] and the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey, sponsored by the DTI and ACAS, shows just four out of ten workplaces in the economy as a whole (including the public sector) have at least one job share arrangement, an increase of 30% since the late 1990s. Yet data from the authoritative Labour Force Survey shows that the actual number of job sharers in the economy has declined during the last decade, in both absolute and percentage terms. In 2005 only 0.6 per cent of all employees had job share agreements (see Table 1).

1.20 The compressed work week (extending daily working hours to be able to either work a nine-day fortnight or four-and-half day week), an arrangement that provides time off without involving a cut in pay [9] has been in steady decline during the last decade, a trend that has continued since the introduction of the right to request flexible working. Just over one per cent of employees now have such a set-up (see Table 1).

1.21 The ability to adjust hours is a hallmark of individual working time flexibility. Yet in spite of the right to request flexible working and data from the 2004 Workplace Employee Relations Survey suggesting that 70% of workplaces now allow employees to shift to part-time work, a massive 2.3 million employees say they would like to reduce their hours even if this involved a cut in pay.

Table 3: Prefer shorter hours at present even if this meant less pay

Employees	Prefer fewer hours per week even if pay is cut			All preferring fewer hours per week
	Male	Female	Total	Male	Female	Total
Full-time	1,008,119	999,044	2,007,163	5,293,915	3,385,854	8,679,769
Part-time	42,270	277,150	319,420	126,390	795,399	921,789
Grand Total	1,050,389	1,276,194	2,326,583	5,420,305	4,181,253	9,602180
Per cent of all employees	9.6%	12.3%	10.9%	49.9%	40.2%	45%
Approached employer re reducing hours - no success	180,000	337,000	517,000	230,000	456,000	686,000

Source: LFS Microdata Service, Summer 2005

1.22 The number of workers who would like fewer hours even this means a cut in pay has fallen by about 200.000 since the introduction of the right to request [10] . This is a modest step in the right direction but has helped fewer than one in ten of all those who would be willing to take a pay cut in order to change their regular working hours. And over twice as many as those who had their request accepted say that their employer has not agreed to their requested change in hours.

Unhappiness about long working hours continues

1.23 The right to request has made little impact on the long hours culture. Indeed, according to the DTI's Second Flexible Working Employee Survey, workers who usually work more than 40 hours per week are much less likely to have their employer accept their request for changed working arrangements than those who usually work less than 40 hours per week. [11]

1.24 According to the Labour Force Survey, altogether more than four in ten (45%) of all UK employees, some 8.6 million workers, would prefer to work fewer hours but the majority of them could not pursue their wish if it involved less pay. The Government has sometimes cited the fact that only a minority of those who would like to reduce their hours would still pursue this wish if it involved a pay cut in support of its refusal to end the UK opt out of the Working Time Directive. However, this assumes that all the hours that people work are paid hours. Nearly five million people are regularly working unpaid overtime. Altogether almost half of all those who would like to reduce their hours - 3.5 million - work additional unpaid hours beyond their contractual working time. Cutting back on their unpaid extra hours should not and need not involve a cut in pay.

1.25 The lack of proper control over working hours continues the vicious cycle of inequality: when one person works long hours their partner often has to reduce their hours to look after their family responsibilities. All too often, when one partner has to reduce their hours to look after children or provide care for an elderly relative, the other partner has to work extra hours to make up for the lost income. Traditionally of course this means that women cut back on their hours and careers (and future pension benefits) and men work the extra hours.

1.26 Whilst there are many people who ideally would like to work fewer hours, there are a substantial number who would like to work more. This is particularly so for part-time employees. The majority of part-time workers are not seeking full-time work (though over half a million of them do) but they would nevertheless like good part-time work of sufficient length and quality. A much higher share of part-time jobs in the UK than in most other European countries are 'mini-jobs' of less than 15 hours per week. The Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) points to another lost resource in the economy: a 'missing million' older workers who are economically inactive but would like to work if part-time work was available.

Who is requesting change?

1.27 Almost two out of three people say that their reason for wanting changed working arrangements is not narrowly related to looking after small children. Instead they might want more time to spend with family, pursue education or simply have more time off. Yet gender differences continue to be very significant. Twice as many women requested change for childcare reasons than men; and while three out of ten men requested change for education or simply to have free time, these reasons did not even register on the statistical scale for women. Women clearly continue to carry the lion's share of caring responsibilities, perpetuating the gender pay and pensions gap. At the same time men find it significantly harder to get their employer to accept their request for change, restricting their opportunities to play a part in family care.

1.28 The TUC welcomes the DTI's Second Flexible Working Survey findings [12] that suggest that employers generally are becoming more positive towards requests for flexible working from employees and that the right to request is making some inroads for some employees. Twelve per cent of requests from parents of young children were reported as being rejected completely, a significant improvement since the introduction of the Right to Request. Sixty nine per cent of requests are now fully accepted and another 12 per cent accepted with a compromise. Employees with young children - the group who have a statutory right to request flexible work - are more likely both to request change and to be successful with their request but the accommodation of the wish for change is by no means limited to this group. Over a fifth of eligible parents made a request, compared to one in seven of parents of older children and one in ten of employees with no dependent children. [13] However those who have a statutory right to request flexible working but whose request is refused lack the backing of the law to challenge the refusal - a issue the TUC has consistently called on the Government to remedy.

Scratching the surface

1.29 The LFS shows that 517,000 workers who say that they would be willing to take a pay cut to reduce their hours have asked their employer to make the change but are unhappy with the result. This is a substantial figure, but only represents 22 per cent of those workers who want to cut their hours even if this means less pay. [14]

1.30 The huge imbalance between those people making a request and those saying they would like different arrangements suggests that the problem is not just whether employers accept requests once they are made, but whether employees are able to make a request in the first place. A serious problem is that two thirds of workers who are unhappy with their work-life balance never approach their employer . [15] Most people simply will not make a request unless they are reasonably sure that this will be favourably received. Numerous studies, most recently by the CIPD, show that the key to success is not whether an organisation has a policy on flexible working but whether there is a supportive culture showing people that a diversity of working patterns is acceptable, if not desirable. Key here is the attitude of line managers. According to the 2004 Workplace Employee Relations Survey, almost two thirds of line managers still believe that it is up to the employee to sort out work family conflicts and to find their own solutions to work-life balance. But according to the CIPD 'the real challenge for employers is how to implement and operate flexible working in practice, in order to create the positive culture and secure the improved performance they desire.' [16]

Greater flexibility for union members

1.31 A positive culture is more likely in workplaces where unions are recognised. Two out of three unions report [17] negotiating successes in relation to work life balance and flexibility, and in many cases this involves the extension of the right to request to a broader group, or to all, employees.

Table 4: Flexible working by union membership - per cent, 2004

	Union member	Not a member
Flexitime	15.9	9.7
Annualised hours contract	6.9	4.4
Term time working	8.1	3.4
Job sharing	0.8	0.6
Nine day fortnight	0.5	0.1
Four and a half day week	1.3	1.0
None of these	66.5	80.9
Total	100.0	100.0

Source: Labour Force Survey Microdata Service. Autumn quarter 2004

1.32 The table above shows that that union members are almost twice as likely to have flexible working time arrangements as non-union members.

1.33 Unions are much stronger in the public sector, and have successfully worked with employers to help the public sector effectively use flexible working practices to address the diverse working time needs of its workforce and accommodate new service delivery requirements.

1.34 But the union mark-up is not limited to the public sector. According to the Labour Force Survey, union members in the private sector are also more likely to have flexible working than those who are not members. And union members are more likely to know about their rights to flexible working than other employees according to the DTI survey . [18]

No sign of a reduction in the part-time penalty

1.35 The EOC's recent investigation into flexible

• and part-time working documents the loss to the British economy from the under-utilisation of the skills of part-time workers and suggests that this is a major factor in Britain's productivity lag compared to leading industrial competitors. [19] More extensive - and imaginative - use of flexible working arrangements could help improve productivity.

• 1.36 There is no sign of a re duction in the 40 per cent part-time pay penalty, which has a devastating effect on women's lifetime earnings and pensions. It was hoped that the right to request flexible work would reduce the number of people who are forced to trade down the quality of their job in order to work hours that enable them to meet their caring responsibilities. But two studies, sponsored by the DTI and the EOC, find no hard evidence that the right to request has overcome institutional pay discrimination against working parents and carers. [20] The pay gap between part-time and full-time employees has continued unchanged for over thirty years - part-time workers earn a shameful 60 pence for every pound that full-time workers earn.

• 1.37 In the first year of the right to request, one in three of the people who had their requests for reduced hours accepted had to 'pay' for this either with a demotion, reduction in hourly wages or increased workloads. [21] According to the DTI second Flexible Working Employee Survey, 56% of all employees who changed their working patterns (not only from full-time to part-time) experienced negative consequences. A cut in pay was the most widely cited consequence. [22] Part-time employment in high paying jobs continues to be rare. Fifty per cent of all part-timers say they previously held jobs with more responsibility or at a higher level of qualification according to recently published EOC research on part-timers working below their potential. [23]

• 1.38 The TUC calls on employers to open up jobs at all levels to flexible working in order to retain the valuable skills and training invested in UK's women workers.

Lack of strategic thinking limits flexibility benefits

1.39 While employer organisations stress the benefits of workplace flexibility, the CBI claims that employers are reaching the limit of their ability to allow flexible working to meet employee choice in the workplace.

1.40 The TUC rejects this concept of flexibility - a one-way street whereby flexibility is often synonymous with long and unsocial hours that takes no account of employees' work life balance. Our long hours culture creates rigidity and promotes a downward spiral of disincentives to workers. A situation where 11 million UK workers say that they want to increase or decrease their hours of work cannot be good for business. This mismatch must impact adversely on the size of the recruitment pool, labour turnover, motivation and productivity. In fact, the way to utilise the skills of a changing, more feminised workforce is through strong partnerships to develop mutually beneficial patterns of working time organisation as is common in Europe.

1.41 A critical mass of people wishing to work flexible hours - not only parents - is likely to increase rather than decrease the chances of finding workable solutions for a team and business (CIPD). [24] Additionally line managers find it easier to implement flexible working if they do not have to deal with resentment from those who are excluded from a flexible working scheme (eg non-parents, older employees). CBI complaints that the management of working time flexibility and other new rights are taking up too much senior management time smacks of the short-termism, which too often characterises British management. The TUC wants to see employers and unions embracing the opportunities provided by the growing demands for working time reorganisation and a better work-life balance. The CBI's own evidence of best practice companies clearly demonstrate the business benefits of working time flexibility when there is a strategic rethink of work organisation. [25]

The Solution

• Working together to make flexible working pay

1.42 Where management and unions work together, the real potential of working time re-organisation is realised.

1.43 Health unions are working closely with NHS management to come up with new ways of the health service meeting changing needs. [26] At Croydon Primary Health Trust there are several different flexible-working schemes, including that of the health visitor team at Shirley Clinic. The new scheme started with a review of their clients needs. There was concern that working mums were not able to attend the baby clinics, and that fathers had also expressed a wish to be able to sometimes bring their babies to for their regular check. At their suggestion, the health visitors switched from a regular working week with flexi time to a compressed nine-day fortnight so that they could introduce an evening and Saturday morning clinic. Most of the team now work a nine day fortnight. One team member who cares for young children did not want to work want this pattern (and did not have to do so) but the rest of the team are enthusiastic about the improvement to the service they give to parents as well as appreciate the non- working day they get through reorganising their working week.

1.44 At Northern Rock Building Society managers were working unpaid extra hours. Unifi (now part of Amicus) negotiated the extension of the flexi time scheme to include managers in order to tackle the endemic long hours culture.

1.45 The T&G has negotiated a formal job share scheme for flight attendants at Air Canada.

1.46 Organon Research in Scotland, a Dutch owned pharmaceutical firm with a high proportion of scientific staff, has introduced a flexible working policy in consultation with Amicus, agreeing a formal flexible working procedure for those requiring permanent change. The policy is open to all permanent employees- not just those with young children but otherwise follows the Right to Request procedures quite closely. There is official encouragement of informal flexibility- temporary arrangements that can be decided between the employee, their line manager and the HR department, without the need for much paper work or a formal process. Ten per cent of staff have made permanent changes to their working arrangements, mostly after return from maternity leave. Many others use the opportunities for non-permanent change, including a number of staff who take unpaid additional leave during school holidays or work from home on an ad hoc basis. The success of the policy did not happen over night - HR took time to allay line managers' fears and provided practical help and examples to show how work could be done differently.

1.47 Bristol City Council has long led the way in showing how employee centred flexibility can serve as the basis for service improvements. A survey done jointly by management and unions uncovered a huge potential of staff interested in exploring different working patterns. The biggest reason employees gave for wanting change was frustrations with the inefficiency of the current system. On top of that particularly women wanted time for education and training, and men wanted to spend more time with their families. An example of change in the organization of work following this consultative process between management and unions resulted in Sunday opening in key libraries and more customer friendly schedules in pest control offices. Bristol - again in close co-operation with its unions - has recently introduced a policy designed to respond to the wishes of its older workforce. Older employees can, as everyone else, apply for flexible working under the council's flexible working policy. Towards the end of their working life employees can apply for a move to a less strenuous job. And employees can continue to work beyond their official retirement age until they are 70 if they choose.

1.48 Rochdale Council is rolling out its work life balance policies in consultation with its unions by trying new ways of working in pilot schemes. This 'let's suck and see' approach is summed up by the employee relations co-ordinator's advice to managers: 'work with your team and come up with a work life balance scheme for you and your team. Look at the needs of your customers and when they need you to be there; look at the general overriding needs for your service and the individual needs of all team members and then come up with a set of rules which are your work life balance scheme.' The council can point to improved services in several areas as well as to concrete financial savings, from dramatic reductions in sickness to savings in overtime costs by having proper procedures for time-off. Such approaches are far removed from the 'entitlement culture' so feared by the CBI. They are based on finding a win-win solution between the service needs and the employees' wishes. As Mohammed Iqbal, a deputy manager at the council in RBS and an equality officer for the union UNISON says: 'There are no limits to flexibility as long as the service is not undermined.'

1.49 Key to the success of all these and other schemes has been the detailed co-operation between management and unions. Instead of approaching flexible working as a benefit handed out to those with deserving special circumstances, the focus is on finding solutions for everyone - including making business more efficient.

1.50 This week the European Trades Union Confederation will make a Working Time Innovation Award to a European employer and union that has worked in social partnership to find working time arrangements that improve business competitiveness, job security as well as workers' balance between work and personal lives. The entries demonstrate that the co-operation and imagination of European employers and unions have produced collective agreements that resolve the tension between business need and the long/short hours culture. Most importantly they show that far from limiting flexibility, regulation of an upper limit of hours enables a sensible compromise to ensure everyone wins.

W orking time policies for the 21^st century

1.51 The organisation of work in the 21^st century needs to reflect the changing nature of the labour market if the UK is to remain competitive. Women are increasingly becoming more qualified than men but not utilising their skills potential after establishing a family. Both men and women want greater equality in their input at home. Skills and education gained at the beginning of one's working life no longer suffice and more people need to return to education during their working life. Older workers might look for a change in pace when they get closer to retirement age. The demands of work reorganisation go beyond family responsibilities. Work organisation needs to reflect the changes in people's expectations over their life course.

1.52 The TUC welcomes the Government's emphasis on work and family issues and commends the extension of the right to request flexible working to carers as a step in the right direction. But the evidence clearly shows unless there is a greater push to change in workplace culture towards true workplace flexibility based on mutual benefit the pace will remain too slow.

1.53 Without a sensible limit on working hours overall and greater incentives for employers to seriously renegotiate the way work is organised, the British economy- and British workers - will continue to lose out.

This report was compiled by the TUC and Ariane Hegewisch, American University, Washington Programme on Work Life Law

---

[1] Source: LFS Microdata Service, Summer 2005

[2] To be announced on 18 November 2005 in London and published in an ETUC report early 2006

[3] The Labour Force Survey defines flexible working as one of the following - flexitime, annualised hours, compressed working week (either 9 day fortnight or 4.5 day week), job sharing, term-time only working and zero hours contracts. There is a continuum, with flextime being nearly always positive for workers, whilst term-time only working can generate serious problems with loss of pay and benefits for many workers. In particular, we regard zero-hours contracts as a negative arrangement for workers and have thus excluded them from our analysis. For the purposes of this report we have also excluded part-time working.

Homeworking, another form of flexibility highlighted in the right to request flexible working, is also not included in this measure of flexibility. There are an estimated one million employees who occasionally or regularly work from home.

[4] DTI (2005): Government Response to the consultation Work and Families: Choice and Flexibility; Oct http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/consultationchoiceflexibility2005final1.pdf, p.44

[5] [5] CBI: Business summary 'Flexible Working'; Sept 2005

http://www.cbi.org.uk/ndbs/cbi_bss.nsf/0/80256c8300576d6880256cad0060cc59?OpenDocument

[6] Holt, Heather and Grainger, Heidi (2005): Results of the second flexible working employee survey; dti Employment Relations Research Series No 39, p. 2

[7] Statistisches Bundesamt (2005): Leben und Arbeiten in Deutschland: Ergebnisse des Mikorzensus 2004; Satistisches Bundesamt: Wiesbaden; http://www.destatis.de/presse/deutsch/pk/2005/Tabanhang_MZ2004.pdf

[8] CBI: Business summary 'Flexible Working'; Sept 2005

http://www.cbi.org.uk/ndbs/cbi_bss.nsf/0/80256c8300576d6880256cad0060cc59?OpenDocument

[9] Palmer, Tom (2004): Results of the first flexible working employee survey; DTI Employment Relations Occasional Papers URN 04/703 www.dti.gov.uk/er/emar

[10] Source: LFS Microdata service, summer quarters 2003 and 2005

[11] Holt and Granger (2005) p. 17

[12] Holt and Granger (2005), pp.11-19

[13] Holt and Granger (2005)

[14] LFS Microdata Service, Summer 2005

[15] Holt and Granger (2005) Table A3c

[16] CIPD (2005): 'Line managers need the 'will' and the 'skill' to effectively implement successful flexible working practices'; Press release 6^th October; www.cipd.co.uk/pressoffice/_articles/06102005081904.htm

[17] TUC Equality Audit 2005

[18] Holt and Granger (2005) p. 27

[19] EOC (2005): Britain's hidden brain drain- Final report; September

[20] Manning, A. and B. Petrongolo (2005): The part-time pay penalty; DTI Women's Equality Unit and London School of Economics; Francesconi, M. and Gosling, A: (2005): Career paths of part-time workers; Equal Opportunities Commission: Manchester

[21] Maternity Alliance (2004): Happy anniversary? The right to request flexible working one year on; Maternity Alliance, London

[22] Holt and Granger (2005), p.3

[23] Darton, D. and Hurrell, K. (2005): People working part-time below their potential; available from www.eoc.org.uk/cseng/research/below_their_potential.pdf

[24] CIPD (2005): Flexible working: Impact and implementation- An employer survey; Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development: London; February, p.13

[25] For example DTI (2005) Managing change: Practical ways to reduce long hours& reform working practices; in association with CBI and TUC; Dex, S. and Smith, C. (2002) The nature and pattern of family-friendly employment policies in Britain ; Joseph Rowntree Foundation ; Croucher, R. and Kelliher, C. (2005): The right to request flexible working in Britain: the law and organizational realities; The International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations; Vol. 21/3, pp. 503-520

[26] 'Changing times in health: a practical guide to work-life balance'; Southwest London NHS with Amicus, NHS Employers, TUC and UNISON;