A campaigning charity has joined the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in calling for the creation of more part-time and job-share positions in order to give women and carers a fairer chance of employment.
But the call came as a study revealed that one in three UK workers were being forced to take on numerous part-time jobs as an alternative to one full-time position in order to make ends meet.
Despite this situation, in an interview with the Independent on Sunday, Yvette Cooper called for a “major cultural shift” in the way that both employers approached flexible working, saying that part-time work should not mean an end to career progression.
The Secretary of State was referring to the findings of a ‘family-friendly’ taskforce that the government plans to publish this week into parents’ working hours. It recommends that, as of later this year, every time a new full-time vacancy is advertised in a job centre, employers should be asked if it could be offered on a flexible basis, whether that includes part-time, job-sharing or some other variant.
Cooper said in the interview: “This will give people the opportunity to think again about what could be offered. It is still the employer’s decision what kind of job they offer, but it is a process of changing culture. We want to encourage a cultural shift.”
She believed that such a move would benefit both parents and employers who would have access to a broader labour pool. The taskforce report, chaired by Women Like US, will set out a “compelling business case” for part-time and flexible work in response to concerns expressed by major employers that such moves are dangerous at a time of economic instability.
The government is also considering whether to extend flexible working rights beyond parents of under-17s that have worked at their current organisation for 26 weeks to those that are in their first day on the job.
Sarah Jackson, chief executive of campaigning charity Working Families, said that employers needed to move away from the current full-time default setting and ensure many more jobs were offered on a flexible or part-time basis.
“The government and public sector can take the lead in shifting discussions about flexible working to the recruitment stage so that a working pattern that suits both employer and employee is decided at the outset, saving time and money later,” she added.
Job centres could also help private sector employers rethink the skills they required and whether positions always needed to be offered in the traditional full-time format.
“At a time of recession, every employer needs to be fishing from the widest possible talent pool. Our full-time culture means too many talents are wasted – particularly women and carers – and the UK loses out,” Jackson said.
She claimed there was a positive link between flexible working and performance as costs related to absenteeism, sickness and recruitment were reduced.
But Tina Holt, HR director at technical recruitment agency NES Group, warned that the fact that one in three workers were being forced to take a second job to cope financially could lead to reduced productivity instead.
“Jobseekers should seriously consider the impact of taking on secondary employment as it can affect overall health and wellbeing and can have a knock-on effect on family life. For businesses, this could result in decreased efficiency, low morale and high stress levels among these employees,” she said.
Too many staff were being pushed into taking on numerous part-time jobs as an alternative to one full-time post, Holt added.
Figures from the Office of National Statistics revealed at the start of this year that 2.8 million people were officially “underemployed” – or working less hours than they would like – between July and September 2009, a sharp jump from the 2.1 million in the same period two years ago.
While those in full-time work plummeted by 37,000 for the three months to December, numbers of part-time staff jumped by 25,000, with just over a million people finding themselves unable to get a full-time job – the highest figure since such records began in 1992.
One Response
Part time means no time for men.
Yvette Cooper is right to say that flexible and part time working helps those with caring responsibilities to be able to find employment but to make employers ask if every full time post that is advertised “could be offered on a flexible basis, whether that includes part-time, job-sharing or some other variant” will add to the growing level of male unemployment. Nationally 90% of part time posts are held by women and, as men are already far more likely to be unemployed than women, to demand that the full time posts that most men want must be considered for part time working will add to the already higher than female level of male unemployment. When a full time post is divided into two or more part time posts statistically it becomes a primarily female job opportunity, which seems to be what Yvette wants rather than rather than taking steps to provide a more gender level playing field.
The evidence is already here in Local Government where the very high level of part time working (typically 2 part time posts to every full time post) has contributed a workforce gender imbalance of epic proportions. The Local Authority that I work for employs 4 women for every man, (what are you doing about that Yvette?) and the workforce profile shows that the majority of this imbalance is linked to part time working. 60% of the 8000 or so full time posts are held by women and 40% by men, but 90% of the 18000 part time posts are held by women and just 10% by men.
Given that we have the equivalent of 16000 full time posts but over 26000 staff the additional costs associated with this level of part time working is substantial. Having to provide payroll services to 26000 staff costs far more than providing a service for 16000, there are 10,000 more appraisals to do (just think of the management time that takes) team meetings waste over 50% more working hours as 1.6 people attend for every full time post and so on.
All the available statistics show that part time work effectively discriminates against men as it doesn’t meet their primary need which, despite slow social change, is still to provide for their family. What Yvette is doing will give more opportunities for women by reducing the opportunities for men. This is not the answer, if we value equality we should set targets for the percentage of part time work, a minimum to help women / those with caring responsibilities and a maximum to avoid displacing men, and set gender targets by job categories / salary bands / overall workforce to help promote a fair gender balance in the workforce.