Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South East) (Lab) I beg to move, That the
Bill be now read a Second time. It is a pleasure to introduce the
Bill, having come ninth in the ballot. I must begin by thanking my
hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Grahame Morris), who is not
currently in the Chamber. For some reason I saw him about three
times during the day on which the ballots were being carried out,
and on each occasion he asked me, “Have you put your name down for
the...Request free trial
(Bolton South East)
(Lab)
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
It is a pleasure to introduce the Bill, having come ninth in the
ballot. I must begin by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for
Easington (), who is not currently in
the Chamber. For some reason I saw him about three times during
the day on which the ballots were being carried out, and on each
occasion he asked me, “Have you put your name down for the
ballot?” I have been a Member of Parliament for 12 years. In
every one of those years I used to put my name down, and of
course I never came anywhere near the possibility of getting a
Bill through, so I really must thank my hon. Friend for all his
encouragement.
I also want to thank the Ministers with whom I have been dealing
over the last few months—the Minister of State, Department for
Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, the hon. Member for Sutton
and Cheam (), who is no longer present, and
the Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial
Strategy, the hon. Member for Watford (), who represents my old home
town—and to welcome the new Minister, hon. Member for Thirsk and
Malton (), to his post. I also
want to place on record my thanks to the ministerial team at the
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy for all
their help and support. I want to mention two names in
particular, Matthew Wootton and Tony Mulcahy.
I know that some colleagues today may have a personal interest in
flexible working, and I hope that they will contribute to the
debate. This is an important issue, because flexibility in the
workplace is no longer just a perk or a “nice to have”. For many
it is a lifeline, because it offers a much-needed pathway into
the labour market and allows those with caring responsibilities
to save on childcare costs by “flexing” their working
patterns.
Let me start by talking about the importance of flexible working
from the employee’s perspective. Many Members of Parliament,
including me, were fortunate enough to be able to work from home
during the pandemic, and we may appreciate the benefits of
flexible working more than most. When we plugged ourselves into
our online meetings each day, it meant that we could carry on,
and fulfil the demands of our job, by being virtually connected
to this Chamber; to our constituents in virtual advice surgeries,
or to meetings with charities and other organisations. Even
before the pandemic, however, many of us enjoyed a certain degree
of flexibility in how we managed our diaries. Constituents have
told me that working from home made them feel much more connected
to their children. Many mothers—and fathers—were relieved not to
have to be late collecting their children from school each day.
Working from home also made life easier for carers who, like me,
were looking after a chronically unwell family member.
During the pandemic millions of people benefited from flexible
working, and I think we all recognise that this is a good
position to be in. However, in many jobs there are still
invisible restrictions that hold people back—for instance, the
need to live in high-cost accommodation close to the centre of
cities, or to maintain working arrangements that are hard to
combine with family or other responsibilities. Recent research
conducted by the charity Working Families shows that three in 10
UK parents are working in jobs that are below their skill levels
because they cannot find the flexibility they need elsewhere.
That is a massive waste of talent.
(Hampstead and Kilburn)
(Lab)
My hon. Friend is making an important speech on an issue that I
am passionate about. She will know that we as a country are in
the midst of a mental health crisis that, in addition to
destroying lives, is costing the UK economy about £100 billion a
year. The evidence, which I am sure she has looked at, shows that
flexible working brings mental health benefits as well as
wellbeing to employees. Can she elaborate on whether she thinks
the Bill contains benefits not only for public health but for the
economic development of our country?
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. I acknowledge the
sheer amount of work that she has been doing on the issue for
many years, and I thank her for that. I will come on to the
economic benefit of flexible working and how much we lose out by
not doing so. Mental health is an issue that is becoming more a
feature of our daily lives and in society.
It is important to remember that flexibility is far more than
hybrid working. It covers job shares, reduced or compressed
hours, flexitime, and even phased retirement. Offering
flexibility to balance work and home life can be key to ensuring
progression in the labour market and to opening up employment and
promotion opportunities to everyone, regardless of their gender,
age, disability or location.
In the last few months, I have met a number of charities and
organisations that represent thousands of members who are
affected by flexible working—or rather, the lack of it. For
example, the Multiple Sclerosis Society shared numerous cases of
how flexible working has benefited people with MS. I learned
about Trishna, who lives with MS and has found that having good,
flexible working policies from her employer means that she is
able to stay in work longer. Flexible working means that she can
work from home with flexible hours and can manage her workload
around her fatigue. She can start work early and finish early
when she needs to, and can bank hours for days when she does not
have the energy or strength to work.
Although more people have been able to work flexibly since the
start of the pandemic, some have not been able to work in that
way despite wanting to, even though there is often no good reason
for the employer not to let them. That has serious consequences
for women and families in particular, and for those with
childcare commitments.
I recently met an organisation called Pregnant Then Screwed,
which shared a large volume of shocking cases where women had
been affected by the lack of flexible working opportunities. In
one case, a mother shared:
“I had to leave my job after maternity…because my job didn’t
support flexible working and I was unable to find another
suitable part-time role in the company.”
She says that, to her detriment, it meant that she had to leave
her career and it affected her mental health. She
“became a stay-at-home mum, putting huge pressure on my husband
to pay for our household on one income”.
That is really unfortunate, because statistics show that if women
can access flexible working, they are twice as likely to stay in
that job and continue with their careers while having children
and a family life.
Men’s ability to access flexible working is just as important.
The statistics show that women are twice as likely to excel in
their career if their husband is helping with the childcare.
Younger families, single parents and lower earners were hardest
hit financially during the pandemic and again now we have the
cost of living crisis. In a recent survey, the charity Working
Families found that 60% of those who took part said that it is
financially harder to raise a family now than it was three years
ago. That makes it more urgent than ever for people to have
access to flexible working.
As my hon. Friend says, this issue is close to my heart and I am
glad she has cited the work of Pregnant Then Screwed, which has
done valuable research on this topic. She will know that one in
three requests for flexible working is turned down. Will she
elaborate on the fact that we need to change the legislation, but
also the culture of the workplace so that employees, especially
mothers who are trying to look after their children and go to
work at the same time, feel they can ask their employers for
flexible working?
My hon. Friend anticipates something I will touch on in my speech
relating to the financial side. In fact, I was just about to come
on to the point that flexible working is good not just for
employees, but for employers and the wider economy. By removing
invisible restrictions, flexible working fosters a more diverse
workspace. The evidence shows that that leads to improved
financial returns for businesses. McKinsey points out that by
fully utilising women in the UK economy, we would be adding £150
billion to our economy by 2030. Therefore, widening flexible
working is very important for employers, too. It has also been
shown that workers who have more flexibility are more motivated
at work and are more likely to stay with a particular
employer.
(Warrington South) (Con)
The hon. Lady is making a very powerful and good speech, and I am
broadly supportive of the measures in her Bill. She talks about
the engagement she has undertaken with charities and a number of
organisations representing employees. Has she engaged with the
Federation of Small Businesses and other employer organisations?
I am particularly concerned about the impact the Bill might have
on small businesses.
Yes, and I have discussed the matter with Zurich Insurance Group,
which is very keen on flexible working. I think that when I
explain the Bill in detail, the hon. Gentleman will find that it
will not place any undue financial consequences on small
businesses if an employer is not able to offer flexible working.
The idea is to think a bit more out of the box and more
creatively. I do not think that small businesses are against
flexible working either. When I talk about businesses and
employers, I am including everybody in that. I am saying that it
is a good thing for employers, whether they run a small business
or a large business. Recent research from the charity Working
Families found that half of all UK parents would leave their
current job if they found one with more flexibility, so it would
help an employer.
I have personal experience as an employer, and, even before the
pandemic, I was a strong advocate for the benefits of flexible
working. In my office alone I have accommodated staff with
childcare needs, those who wished to study part-time, two
employees who were job sharing and an employee who worked
compressed hours so that he could fulfil his council duties. I
have to say that it worked very well in my office.
Taking a broader perspective, recent figures show that there are
almost 9 million economically inactive working-age adults in the
UK, with 1.75 million citing caring for family as their reason
for not working. Again, that is a huge reservoir of untapped
talent and productivity that greater flexible working
opportunities could help us tap into.
The Bill will introduce changes to the existing right to request
flexible working. For those who are not familiar with the
background to the legislation, the right was first introduced in
2003 for employed parents and carers of children under the age of
six and disabled children under the age of 18. The legislation
has been amended several times, most recently as part of the
Children and Families Act 2014. The right currently allows all
employees who have 26 weeks of continuous service with their
employer to make one statutory application per year to change
their working hours, working patterns or work location. When the
employee submits such a request, they are asked to explain what
effect, if any, the change would have on the employer and how
that might be dealt with. Employers have to consider all eligible
requests and can refuse them only on one of the eight business
grounds set out in the legislation. They have three months in
which to respond to the employee’s request.
The Bill, which I hope will pass through Parliament, would, along
with the use of secondary legislation, give an employee a right
to ask for flexible working hours from day one. An employer could
decline that, but they would need a credible business reason to
do so. While the day one right is not explicitly stated in the
Bill, as I understand it, secondary legislation would be
introduced to say that it is a day one right. I hope that the
Minister will confirm that in his response.
The Bill is focused on setting the right conditions for employees
and employers to have an open-minded conversation about what
flexible working arrangements might be possible in any given
context. It hopes to simplify and normalise the process of making
and responding to flexible working requests, bringing benefits to
employees and employers alike.
The Bill has four measures. The first is a duty on the employer
to consult the employee before rejecting a flexible working
request. I am aware that organisations such as the TUC and
Working Families, who continue to lobby for stronger flexible
working rights, have been making the case that, at present, it is
too easy for an employer to refuse flexible working requests.
Hopefully, this measure would prevent employers from just saying
no without engaging with the employee as to why. We hope that
that will bring on a culture shift. Of course, it requires both
sides to discuss the matter properly.
Secondly, under the Bill, the employee could apply for flexible
working hours twice in 12 months. That is understandable, because
sometimes situations change unexpectedly. An employee could
become a carer or diagnosed with a long-term health condition
meaning that their work arrangements were no longer sustainable,
so being able to request a change twice in a year would assist
with that. Of course, in the end, all of these things benefit the
employee and the employer, because otherwise good employees may
well leave.
Thirdly, under the Bill, instead of a three-month period, the
employer would have two months in which to respond. That would
encourage responsiveness from the employer and ensure that
matters are dealt with as soon as possible. With modern
technology and the things that are happening, it is right that
the Bill should update the current situation.
One of the final measures in the Bill is to remove the
requirement for the employee to explain the effects that the
changes they applied for would have on the employer and how they
might be dealt with. That is quite hard for some employees. Some
people are good at writing an articulate case and making a great
submission, but many employees may not necessarily have the
linguistic skills to make a beautiful case. New employees in
particular may not have the confidence or experience to do so. It
would therefore be helpful to remove that burden from the
employee.
I hope this Bill will encourage more constructive dialogue about
flexible working and will make employer and employee focus on
finding ways that are acceptable to both. The Bill does not of
course resolve all the issues concerning better flexible working,
but it is a step in the right direction.
I thank bodies including Working Families, the TUC, Pregnant Then
Screwed, the MS Society and other campaigning organisations, and
Zurich Insurance Group, a big insurance company which continues
to lead the way on flexible working. I also thank my hon. Friend
the Member for Hampstead and Kilburn for her campaign over many
years and her intervention. I again thank the Minister the hon.
Member for Thirsk and Malton for his support. The Conservative
and Labour parties can work together on this and agree that it is
good for our nation. I hope all hon. Members in all parts of the
House share my desire to ensure that the Bill succeeds; as we
know, there are certain fragilities that accompany the private
Member’s Bill process and I would like to navigate past them with
the support of Members across the House.
11.51am
(North Devon) (Con)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton South East () on introducing this
important Bill, which we are pleased to support. Indeed, our
Conservative 2019 manifesto commits us to
“encourage flexible working and consult on making it the default
unless employers have good reasons not to.”
The current flexible working access requirements are too slow,
and are not available to employees at the start of their
employment. I sit on the Work and Pensions Committee and this
week we heard evidence on the importance of flexible working in
enabling employers to fill vacancies. While acknowledging that
not every job can be done from home or with as much flexibility
as the employee may wish, employers must move to accommodate
employees’ needs for flexibility in such a competitive jobs
market.
More flexible working would increase opportunity in my rural
constituency. As long as people are connected to broadband, which
is still an issue, this will enable them to access jobs and
opportunities they would otherwise have to move away for. We must
recognise, too, that the lack of public transport in remote rural
constituencies is a very real barrier to some people being able
to get to work. Also, given the increase in fuel prices, for some
the costs of getting to work now outweigh the financial benefits
of travelling there. I should add that too many
university-educated people leave North Devon because they cannot
find a role close to their community that suits their
qualifications.
This week I attended the ReWAGE event here at Westminster. It has
produced a report on the importance of flexibility in the
workplace, and indeed making it the default. As we recover from
the pandemic, we should pick up some of the positives, and
recognise that how we want to work has changed. Its report found
that flexible working has benefits for employers, employees and
society more broadly; it widens economic opportunity as it
reduces barriers to entry and can help diversify economic growth
away from urban centres. But many jobs still have invisible
restrictions that hold people back, like the need to live in
high-cost accommodation close to the centre of cities—or, I would
add, to travel to work in a rural environment. Maintaining
working arrangements can also be very hard to combine with family
or other responsibilities. We want to enable a high-skilled,
high-productivity, high-wage economy that also delivers on our
ambition to make the UK the best place in the world for people to
work, whoever they are and wherever they live.
Workers who have more flexibility are more motivated at work and
more likely to stay with their employer. The business case for
flexible working is clear. We know there are particular times in
people’s working lives when they may need a bit of extra
flexibility to balance their work with other commitments or
responsibilities. That is why the Government’s manifesto
committed to build on existing leave entitlements by introducing
two new leave rights, for working carers and those with a baby in
neonatal care, and also to make it easier for fathers to take
paternity leave.
However, it is clear that there are also many other occasions
when people may need that little extra flexibility, for instance,
as they approach retirement, when they need to care for an
elderly relative, while they recover from a longer-term health
condition or as childcare arrangements change. They might even
need it just to get medical treatment or attend other
appointments. Technological advances have also made it a more
realistic prospect, with less disruption to business and to
employees. There is no one-size-fits-all solution; legislation
has to create a framework for employees and employers to have
genuine, two-sided flexibility. That will help society build on
the culture shift brought about by the pandemic.
As we look for our economy to become more productive, that is
dependent on the workforce also becoming more productive. That is
very much driven by an approach to employment that recognises the
needs of individuals and their own complex family lives. The more
flexibility that can be brought to that relationship, one
suspects the greater the productivity, making it a mutually
beneficial solution for the economy, the employer, the employee
and their family. Work-life balance is a necessity, not a luxury,
and we have the opportunity today to deliver that change.
11.55am
(Darlington) (Con)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton South East () on bringing forward this
important Bill. Having had the privilege of guiding my own
private Member’s Bill in this Parliament, I commend her on the
efforts she has put in to bringing forward hers; it is a very
rewarding process. I also wish to pay tribute to my good friend,
my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton () for taking his place on
the Front Bench—it is long overdue. However, following his
leadership of the all-party group on fair business banking, I
have serious concerns about who is going to take over the
excellent role he played in that organisation. I would also like
to praise the hon. Lady for the way that she has approached this
process, engaging with Ministers on this Bill, which is gathering
support right across the House.
Flexible working can mean a number of things, including hybrid
working, part-time working, compressed weeks, self-rostering, or
even job sharing. This is a timely Bill. As a result of the
covid-19 pandemic, flexible working has become commonplace for
people up and down the country. As we entered lockdown, many
businesses that previously had never adopted flexible working
were forced to adopt new arrangements. Those new arrangements
included remote working, using new technology for work, or
finding new ways of working. I know that many businesses have
continued these flexible practices, which has generated a greater
appetite for remote and/or hybrid working patterns from
employees.
That said, individual employers and employees have different
perspectives about remote and hybrid working patterns, and about
returning to offices or places of work. There are differences of
opinion between those advocating a return to the office and those
pushing for a more employee-oriented flexible post-covid-19
future of work. Research shows that employees experience a mix of
benefits and risks from remote or hybrid working patterns,
depending on their circumstances. There are often mixed outcomes,
such as greater autonomy and discretion over work patterns
coinciding with work intensification and the potential blurring
of boundaries between work and life, something to which we can
all relate.
Personally, I strongly support flexible working and firmly
believe that only by championing a flexible and dynamic labour
market can we grow the economy, I am pleased that that view is
shared by the Government. Indeed, in 2019 I stood on a manifesto
that included a commitment to encourage flexible working and to
consult on whether flexible working can be the default, unless
employers have good reasons otherwise.
Having been an employer before I was elected to represent the
people of Darlington, I know only too well the benefits that
flexible working can bring. I moved to enable my staff to work
flexibly long before the pandemic made it a necessity for so many
businesses, and I still embrace flexible working for my team now
that I am an MP, with members of my team working part of their
time from home.
Almost 10 years ago, I was approached by a member of my staff
who, following the birth of her child and her partner suffering
from a debilitating condition, was unable to manage without
having her extended family nearby, necessitating a move out of
the area, which would have made commuting impossible. To resolve
this dilemma, arrangements were made to supply broadband, a
laptop and a phone to my employee, so she could work from home
and have the benefits, comfort and convenience of having her
family nearby. I have seen at first hand how flexible working can
have huge benefits for a business by increasing morale, improving
employee retention and productivity, and ensuring a more diverse
and inclusive workforce by giving access to greater talent pools
than would have previously been the case.
This Bill is not the first time that legislation relating to
flexible working has been brought before Parliament. The
statutory right to request flexible working is an employment
right under part 8A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, with
section 80F setting out the statutory right to request contract
variation. The Children and Families Act 2014 also includes such
a provision. It is welcome that Governments of all colours have
brought in legislation on flexible working, and I am pleased to
see that this Bill has cross-party support.
I know the Minister is well versed in business and experienced in
dealing with employment-related matters, and he will have heard
the sentiments of the House today. I thank the hon. Member for
Bolton South East for giving us the opportunity to talk about
these important issues and wish her every success as the Bill
continues its passage.
12.01pm
(Heywood and Middleton)
(Con)
I am grateful for the chance to speak on this important Bill. I
would like to thank and congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton
South East (). It is always nice to be
able to work cross-party with a fellow Greater Manchester
MP—although we are both from the bit that calls itself
Lancashire, so let’s say Lancashire MPs.
The covid pandemic was an extremely difficult time for this
country. However, some of the solutions that were necessary
during those difficult times should be looked at as opportunities
for the future, and flexible working is a prime example. Many
people, especially in constituency, do not work in industries
where practices like working from home are possible. We owe a
huge debt to those workers in industries, such as food
production, manufacturing or logistics who, even at the height of
lockdown, continued to go into factories and warehouses to ensure
that there was food on supermarket shelves and supply chains were
kept running.
None the less, in many more industries than we thought possible,
we found out how flexible working could refine our workplaces.
Whether that was working from home or working different hours, we
saw that work could still be completed to the highest of
standards and that targets and key performance indicators could
still be met, with many people being able to continue meetings
and work in a productive way. It also added the possibility of
some jazzy backgrounds and bookshelf competitions on all those
many hours of Zoom meetings.
My team were able to continue working straight out of the box.
Having just been made an MP, I had to assemble a team, but they
could not get into the office, so we all had to talk on Teams or
Zoom for hours a day. They managed to plough through thousands of
cases and we got to our 5,000th case within the first 18 months.
It was an incredibly trying time. If my team had not been able to
work their hours around what was going on in their own lives,
such as childcare and looking after relatives, it simply would
not have been possible. In a real sense, flexible working stopped
this country from falling over.
I am struck by the point my hon. Friend is making. As Members of
Parliament, we are lucky to be able to use a laptop and work from
home, but the vast majority of working people are not using
laptops on a day-to-day basis. As my hon. Friend mentioned, they
are going into their workplaces to use the equipment there. He is
absolutely right that this legislation is not just about working
from home; it is about the flexibility to ask for varying times
and adjustments. It recognises that employers have certain
requirements as well. Does he recognise that employers benefit
from having those flexibilities?
My hon. Friend is entirely correct; fundamentally, it is about
making sure that work is done by the best possible people in the
best possible way. The reality is that not everybody lives a
nine-to-five lifestyle any more. For example, often now both
parents work, and people have childcare commitments or are
carers. The option for someone to vary their working practices in
a way that allows them still to make a good living and maintain a
good home life is incredibly important.
Flexible working can be a lifesaver for parents of young
children, single parents, those with disabilities and carers.
Parents are now able to pick up their children from school
regularly, and that relationship is good for the mental health
not just of the parent but of the child. I am of an age such that
I remember my mum being at home the entire time and dad going to
work, and because of the nature of his work I sometimes would not
see him for a very long time. It is really important to have that
relationship with both parents.
I have heard about employees nearing the end of their careers but
now feeling more able to continue to work because they have the
option to work differently. That is really important for small
businesses in particular, because there may be a bit of
institutional knowledge that cannot be easily replaced, so it is
a good thing to give somebody the chance to work differently,
train somebody else up, cut back their hours and look forward to
their retirement as part of a managed process.
I should also highlight the positive effect of flexible working
on shrinking the wage gap. ONS figures for 2022 show that for
those under 40 the gender pay gap for full-time workers is just
over 3%, but for those aged 40 to 49 and above the pay gap jumps
to 10.9%. For those over 40, there is a lower incidence of women
being promoted into higher-paid positions and a higher incidence
of women moving from full-time to part-time work.
That change from full to part-time work directly corresponds with
a very difficult decision that a lot of new parents have to make:
whether to return to the office or stay at home to look after the
children. For most, the extortionate cost of childcare means
there is only one viable option. This results in parents—still
mostly mothers—leaving the workforce or taking up part-time
roles, thereby stalling their career development and thus
increasing the gender pay gap. But we now know that this is not
necessary. Parents can, and should, share duties while working
from home or by changing their hours, and they should have a
right to request such flexibility from their employers. We must
make sure that access to such a style of working is available to
everyone.
The Bill will benefit not only employees but employers.
Businesses and companies thrive when the best people are in the
right position and are able to do the job they are trained to do.
By tearing down the barriers that prevent parents, the disabled,
carers and older people from remaining in the workforce, we will
unleash a wave of potential into our economy. This is a win-win
piece of legislation, so I again thank the hon. Member for Bolton
South East for bringing it forward. I encourage colleagues to
support the Bill and look forward to supporting it myself.
12.07pm
(Hastings and Rye)
(Con)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton South East () on bringing this pertinent
piece of legislation to the House for consideration.
In 2003, legislation came into force that provided employed
parents, and certain other carers, of children under the age of
six or disabled children under the age of 18, a statutory right
to request a flexible working arrangement if they had 26 weeks of
continuous service. Such an arrangement could include, for
example, a change to their work location, working hours and/or
associated working pattern. The right was rightly extended to
carers of adults in 2006 and of children under 17 a few years
later in 2009.
The Children and Families Act 2014 extended the right to request
flexible working to all employees with 26 weeks of continuous
service. The current statutory framework is intended to help
employers to secure the business benefits of flexible working; to
enable employees to better reconcile their work and non-work
lives; and to provide employees with access to contractual
flexible working.
As a result of the covid-19 pandemic, many businesses that
previously had never adopted flexible working were forced to take
on new arrangements, primarily including remote working, as was
the case in my private office—I am sure that other Members
experienced exactly the same thing. This change required the use
of new technology for work and the finding of new ways of
working.
I am glad that the Government strongly support flexible working
and believe that only by championing a flexible and dynamic
labour market will we grow the economy while better supporting
employees across the country.
In September 2021, the Government published a post-implementation
review of the Flexible Working Regulations 2014. It found that
80% of employees and 96% of employers reported that flexible
working was available in their workplace. Notably, it stated:
“In the vast majority of workplaces (83%), where a request had
been made the request was granted.”
However, it also found that flexible working take-up has remained
broadly flat since 2014, with an all-economy average of 59%, as
well as highlighting differences in reported take-up and
availability, spanning sectors, occupations and genders, as well
as different sizes of workplace. In the same month, the
Government published a consultation on proposals to encourage a
better dialogue regarding flexible working opportunities; it
aimed to increase the frequency of requests, as well as speeding
up the administrative process involved in making them.
I welcome the amendments that the Bill will make to the
Employment Rights Act 1996. Ultimately, it seeks to introduce a
requirement for employers to consult an employee before they can
reject a flexible working request. As a result of the pandemic,
hon. Members present have first-hand experience of managing and
working with staff on a remote basis. Although not without its
initial challenges, particularly in relation to technology, it
has proved both practical and successful. At its best, flexible
working can provide employees with a better work-life balance,
which in turn is to the practical benefit of employers. It also
means that people born in my beautiful constituency of Hastings
and Rye can live and work in the community where they were born
and grew up.
There is, I think, broad support among hon. Members for this Bill
and for what it entails. That support is echoed by a whole range
of interest groups, organisations and individuals. We have seen
that remote and flexible working has been hugely beneficial for
many people; I believe that ultimately the provision of flexible
working, whether or not it is welcomed, is destined to be a key
part of the make-up of business and employer-employee relations
in the coming years.
If we want the British economy to grow in real terms and grow in
dynamism, it is imperative that changes to the workplace are
properly considered, evaluated and embraced. That will be to the
benefit of employees, employers, the wider public and society
more generally. Positive change in the workplace cannot and
should not be held back, as we are here today to recognise. It is
through that lens that I consider the hon. Member’s Bill. I know
from speaking to residents of Hastings and Rye that it will be
welcomed by many of my constituents. For all those reasons, I
give the Bill my strong support.
12.13pm
(Bury North) (Con)
I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of
Members’ Financial Interests: I am a practising solicitor and a
partner in a firm of solicitors.
I support the Bill, which I think is a perfectly reasonable Bill.
I am pleased to support the hon. Member for Bolton South East
(), a fellow Lancastrian MP. I
do not know whether she would wish me to say this, but I remember
the halcyon days at Bury magistrates court when the hon. Lady, an
eminent barrister, used to prosecute my clients and I did my best
to defend them, mainly unsuccessfully. The memories came flooding
back when I heard her speech. It is good to support her with a
good Bill, but I want to make some points that I hope are
constructive.
Flexible working is not a panacea. Every speaker so far has
talked about it as something that the economy has to go towards.
For a huge employer such as Zurich International, with the right
resources and in a business whose nature suits it, I am sure
flexible employment is a good thing.
If you will indulge me, however, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would
like to mention my wife Joanne, who is up in the Gallery. She is
a small business owner—she runs a business in Bury North—and the
opportunity for flexible working in her life is non-existent. As
a self-employed person, she does not have the luxury of being
able to do that. She works—I am not saying this because she is my
wife—night and day to keep people in employment.
The nature of the business that Joanne runs—my hon. Friend the
Member for Darlington () ran a similar business for
many years—means that it is incredibly difficult not to have
employees in the office. It is a firm of conveyancing, will and
probate solicitors. With the technology and interaction that is
required, in the main employees have to be there to do the job.
As MPs, we sometimes forget that. Colleagues have talked about
experiences in the pandemic. For small businesses in
constituencies across the country the thing that matters is
making money. They make money in order to be able to pay wages,
and if they cannot do that, flexible working conditions do not
exist at all.
This is a reasonable Bill, because it does not place undue
burdens on people in businesses of different sizes, but we have
to understand how businesses work, including small businesses.
The situation for a business in Bury that employs 10 people does
not correspond to that of Zurich International. This is not a
criticism of the Bill, and I know that the hon. Member for Bolton
South East reflected this in her speech, but when we talk about
self-employment—we should talk about the self-employed much more
in the House and cherish them much more—we must understand the
sacrifices that thousands of self-employed people make to ensure
that others at least have the opportunity to work in a flexible
manner.
I have another concern about flexible working—I would welcome the
thoughts of other speakers on this—as Bury Council, laudable
organisation that it is, has essentially encouraged all its staff
to work from home. During the pandemic, we had to work at
home—now that may be a good thing, or it may be a bad thing. One
impact is that people are not in town centres. They are not going
to a local shop to buy tea, coffee and sandwiches at lunchtime.
There are hundreds fewer people in town centres. If we are going
to encourage flexible working—again, I think that there is a lot
of merit in that—we must accept that there are consequences. We
have to look honestly at the issue of productivity, which blights
the labour market and our industrial output.
During the pandemic, many of us had to work from home—that was
true of the Passport Office and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing
Agency—but I remain to be convinced of the benefits of that step
for such organisations, which need access to certain types of
information, and there is also a need for interaction with
colleagues. When we offer flexible working, especially in the
state sector, we have to be mindful of productivity and what it
means.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for allowing time for
interventions. He is making an excellent speech, and I agree with
many of the points that he has made, which have prompted earlier
interventions from me. One of my concerns, having run a small
business, is that when teams are together in the office a culture
is created, with a transfer of knowledge. If someone is working
from home that does not happen, which is why it is incredibly
important that businesses think carefully about how they can
allow flexible working to take place. It is not one size fits
all, and for small businesses with only two or three people,
having everyone working from home is not necessarily right. They
have to create the workplace culture that is right for them.
As ever, my hon. Friend is absolutely correct. We have to be
mindful of that. Again, the House has to understand the pressures
on businesses. This is an extremely difficult time for businesses
across the country. The concept of flexible working takes second
place to being able to pay wages and bills, and making sure that
people are employed.
Can I alleviate the hon. Gentleman’s concern? Under the Bill, if
the employer says, “No, I cannot provide flexible working,” that
will be the end of it. There is no ability on the part of the
employee to take the employer to an industrial tribunal or any
such thing. If the employer says no, that is the end of the
matter, so I do not think that small businesses or any other
employer have to worry about the consequences of the Bill.
I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention. As I said at the
start of my speech, that is the very reason why I support the
Bill. It does not place burdensome legal responsibilities on
employers, but, while I am not criticising the Bill or the good
intentions that underpin it, it is right that we discuss the
realities of small businesses and the pressures they are
under.
I welcome the Bill. It is great to be able to support a fellow
Greater Manchester/Lancashire MP in trying to change employment
practice. Flexible working is a great concept, because we want to
ensure that people are not locked out of the labour market. As
the hon. Lady has rightly said, many people with childcare
responsibilities, and others, need flexible working to help them
into the market and to ensure that they have an equal opportunity
to thrive and succeed. There are, however, other realities that
we must always keep under consideration, and we must always
celebrate the self-employed.
12.21pm
(Burnley) (Con)
It is a pleasure to speak in this debate. May I start by
welcoming my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton () to his rightful place on
the Front Bench? He will bring incredible expertise to his
role.
I also congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton South East () on bringing this Bill to
the House. I spent some time with her on a parliamentary
delegation a few months ago and know from the conversations that
we had then, not just with each other but with counterparts and
other organisations, how much this matters to her.
The working world has changed fundamentally over the past two
decades—not just the typical 9 to 5, Monday to Friday, but
flexible working, too. What was once an exception is now very
much a norm. Whether it is flex time, part time, compressed
hours, annualised hours, working remotely, job sharing or
sabbaticals, it is far more common for employers to offer it and
for employees to accept. That only increased further during the
covid-19 pandemic, when we saw lots of business rethinking how
they do things and what they need from their staff, including
many in Burnley and Padiham, who saw organisations for the first
time adopt flexible working practices and do so rapidly.
That did not just mean employers in my constituency offering
remote working. They also took a more flexible approach to
childcare and the hours that employees could work. Some have
sought to scale that back, but a great deal more have continued
with those arrangements, even if with tweaks, because they have
seen ways in which their business can adapt.
We must recognise, however, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bury
North () has said, that flexible
working is not suitable for every company, every employee or
every set of circumstances. We need to encourage employers to
give greater thought to flexible working and to whether it is one
way of getting a more productive workforce.
There are a host of brilliant manufacturing businesses in Burnley
and Padiham. For them, flexible working may—I emphasise the word
“may”—be more difficult to operate in practice. They may have
shift patterns or they may need to keep the factory open 24/7. We
saw how important that was during covid, when companies switched
from manufacturing their traditional product to producing PPE and
hand sanitiser. If flexible working, employees working from home
and annualised hours do not fit a shift pattern, we in this place
have to be mindful and respectful of that.
I wonder, therefore, whether there should be an option in law not
just to say yes or no to a request for flexible working, but to
give a trial period, where the statutory consideration period of
three months—or two months, if this Bill is passed—would not be
necessary and the employer could say, “It’s not a yes and it’s
not a no; we want to see whether it works.” I think that would
alleviate the concerns of small businesses and businesses that
have never found a way to offer flexible working.
(Bosworth) (Con)
It is an interesting idea to consider how to allow a bit of
flexibility both ways. Who would my hon. Friend see as the right
arbiter for such a scheme?
Ultimately, that must be a conversation between the business—the
employer—and the employee. I think most employers want to do the
right thing for the people who work for them; that is how to have
a productive and motivated workforce, and the employee often
wants to do the right thing for the employer. Getting both sides
together to say, “Is there a way of coming up with a trial
period? It may not be exactly what the employee has asked for or
exactly what the employer has offered for so long, but is there a
trial period?”, while the employer knows that at the end of that
period there is no obligation to say, “Yes, this definitely
works.”, or, “No, it definitely doesn’t.”, but that there is the
option to consider it, would help.
If the trial does not work out as planned and the employer does
not think it is sustainable in the long term—something that is
sustainable for four or five weeks might not be sustainable for
four or five years—then that gives the employer confidence to
say, “Not now, but I’m happy to look at it again.” It gives the
employer a little bit more flexibility.
As I think about my constituency, an area with higher
unemployment than some other parts of the country, flexible
working offers an opportunity to bring people back into the
workforce who might otherwise struggle, be it because of
childcare issues or because they are not ready to take on
full-time hours. In doing that, we must ensure that we address
some of the points my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South
() made about building a
culture: if we are bringing someone back into the workforce for
the first time, they might want a greater propensity for working
from home or doing annualised hours, but if the impact is that
they do not properly get the opportunity to embed themselves in
the organisation and get the benefits of learning from
colleagues, the downsides outweigh the positives.
My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, but I want to touch
on productivity, because that is the central point. It is great
to offer people the chance to work in various different ways and
by various means, but if that employee is not productive in that
situation away from the office, it simply cannot happen.
I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. One of the great problems
that has vexed our economy for at least a decade is lost
productivity or the suppression of productivity growth. Any
changes that we try to make to employment law and employment
regulations must have at their centre, “What will this do for
productivity?”. Ultimately, we have spoken for a long time about
a focus on economic growth, but—particularly in an economy like
ours, where unemployment at the national level is at 3.5%—the
only way to have sustainable high growth in the economy is by
increasing employee productivity. We must think carefully about
how we do that.
This Bill provides a way forward and offers both employers and
employees a balance of flexibilities. As we think through the
Bill as it goes to Committee, we must consider whether there are
further tweaks we could make to flexible working and the kind of
options available to employers, so that they can say yes, no or
offer a possible third option. Nevertheless, I look forward to
supporting the Bill later.
12.28pm
(Southend West) (Con)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton South East () on bringing forward this
important Bill. It is a very worthwhile Bill and I am delighted
to see that it has the support of all sides of the House—or
certainly two sides of the House. I also welcome the new
Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (), to his place and look
forward to hearing his summing-up.
This Bill is incredibly timely. Over the course of the covid
pandemic, people’s working patterns and their expectations
shifted dramatically. Many businesses that had never considered
flexible working suddenly had to adapt to new ways of working,
including remote working. Speaking for myself, I was rather
overwhelmed initially by the advent of Zoom technology, chatrooms
and Google Meets, but I found that I was not a dinosaur. I
adapted and I innovated, as did many entrepreneurs and schools.
We had fascinating insights into the workings of parish councils
and discovered that the host was all-powerful, even though Jackie
Weaver did not have the authority in the end.
Before I came to this place, I set up the Invicta National
Academy, which is a charitable venture that provides an entirely
online tuition service. I remain a member of its advisory
council, as set out in the Register of Members’ Financial
Interests. It is an archetypal flexible working enterprise:
teachers came from all over the country to teach children who
were stranded at home. The staffroom was always virtual, teachers
could prepare their lessons whenever they wanted, and they could
choose how many lessons and courses they wanted to teach, but the
quality of what they produced in those Zoom classrooms was first
rate.
Good organisations innovated and moved ahead, but of course, the
world has now returned to normal. I cannot imagine working 100%
remotely, particularly not in this place. I welcome the
connection and the ability to discuss; I think we produce better
legislation that way. A rigid working day does not necessarily
suit everybody, however, particularly those with caring
responsibilities or with disabilities, and we need to look after
them and preserve their place in the workforce. I am delighted
that the Government strongly support flexible working. We
understand that the only way to grow an economy is to champion a
flexible and dynamic labour market.
It has been interesting to hear stories from Members on both
sides of the House of interesting and successful flexible working
patterns in their constituencies, and of course Southend West is
no different. The spirit of innovation and enterprise marks out
Southend as an impressive city, however, which is why it should
be considered for the UK city of culture in 2029. I will
highlight two examples. First, the Southend citizens advice
bureau offers a hybrid approach to every single employee and
volunteer, which is taken up by between 30% and 40% of them. It
offers a work-life balance that is designed to work for everyone
involved with it. I am delighted to hear that that has been a
huge success with staff very happy with the arrangements.
Secondly, I will highlight the charity Action for ME—myalgic
encephalomyelitis—which contacted me before this debate. As I am
sure all hon. Members know, ME is a chronic, fluctuating illness
that is characterised by a feeling of extreme tiredness all the
time. One in every 250 people in the country is affected by ME,
including 740 in my constituency. Some 25% of them are severely
affected, which often means being housebound. Less than 10% of
people with ME are in full-time work, so the ability for them to
work remotely and flexibly, and to build a schedule around
managing their symptoms, is incredibly important and is a way to
preserve their mental wellbeing as well as their financial
stability and security.
I am pleased that the Bill will support those with ME,
particularly the 740 in Southend West. It will help them to
develop better employer-employee trust and open communication. It
also opens the door for employees to request flexible working
time more often.
I welcome four specific aspects of the Bill. First, the proposal
to introduce a requirement for employers to consult the employee
before rejecting their request for flexible working. That will
make the process more open and transparent and also make life
much easier for those with other responsibilities. It also seems
to be civilised in 21st century Britain for employers to behave
in that way.
Secondly, it is an improvement on the current situation that the
Bill will allow an employee to make two statutory requests in any
12-month period rather than the current one request. It
alleviates to some extent—not fully of course—the worry that an
employee with disabilities or caring responsibilities will have
about whether to use up their one request at a particular moment
in the year, or whether to battle on. At least now, there will be
two opportunities.
Thirdly, I welcome the fact that the Bill will force employers to
make these important decisions in a timely manner. The proposal
is to reduce the decision period within which an employer is
required to make that decision from three months to two months.
Three months is a long time to be waiting and worrying about
whether a request will be granted.
Finally, removing the requirement that the employee must explain
in the statutory request what effect the change would have on the
employer and how that might be dealt with is good progress. We
are moving into a world in which flexible working arrangements
will be seen as the norm rather than the exception.
In conclusion, flexible working is now a fact of life. It
provides people with the ability to manage their lives alongside
their working arrangements. I am pleased to be here today to
support the Bill and I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bolton
South East for giving us the opportunity to debate this important
issue in the House today.
12.36pm
(Devizes) (Con)
I am pleased to be able to speak on this important Bill, and my
congratulations and appreciation go to the hon. Member for Bolton
South East () for bringing it to the
House. I am also delighted to see my hon. Friend the Member for
Thirsk and Malton () on the Front Bench where
he properly belongs. He will be able to see the Bill through the
House and to honour our manifesto commitment, which said that we
wanted to make flexible working the default option for
employment. I am very much in support of that principle for the
reasons that have been so well set out by colleagues across the
House. My thoughts are with those who have caring
responsibilities who need the additional flexibility that the
Bill will bring them in order to stay in the workforce and
continue to contribute to our economy, but also to put their
families first, as we all do. I refer in particular to those with
disabled members of their family, children at home and older
people.
The Bill will also be helpful to those who have other
responsibilities or interests that they want to discharge
alongside their employment. One of the great needs of our society
at the moment is for people to contribute in their communities at
home, as so many would like to do and, indeed, as so many were
able to do—if in a slightly strange way—during the pandemic when
they stepped up to play a role in their neighbourhoods. For all
the intense stresses and distresses of that era we did see
something of the society that we would like to have in future
where people are living and working closer to home, playing an
active role in their community and being good neighbours to each
other.
The new economy that is emerging is one in which we care less
about balancing work and life as if those two things have
completely different spheres and operate in different universes
from one in which work and life are more blurred, where we could
have a more local, more sustainable life in which our economic
and our community activities are interlaced, which is a very good
thing. I revere my right hon. Friend the Member for North East
Somerset (Mr Rees-Mogg), the former Secretary of State for
Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, but I do not share his
fetish for office working at all costs. There is a great role for
working from home, and it is really about negotiation between
employers and employees about how to get that balance right.
The only aspect of the Bill that concerns me slightly—and I shall
be interested to hear the Minister’s view on why we are
supporting it—is the withdrawal of the obligation on the employee
to explain to the employer what the effect of flexible working
would be for the company. I wonder about that, because a
successful employer-employee relationship is one of common
interest. I think it appropriate to ask an employee who is
seeking a homeworking or flexible-working arrangement what effect
that might have on the company or other organisation and on that
person’s colleagues, and I think that that was a good principle.
I support the Bill and I recognise that it might be appropriate
to withdraw that obligation, but I think—and my hon. Friend the
Member for Bury North () made this point very well—that
we need to consider what burdens we impose on businesses when we
extend workers’ rights, and should always seek not to create an
adversarial relationship between employers and employees, who
ultimately share common interests.
That aside, I am happy to support the Bill, and look forward to
hearing from the Minister later.
12.40pm
(Putney) (Lab)
It is an absolute pleasure to speak in the debate. As a mother of
four who has had to negotiate very different flexible working
practices throughout those years of being a mother and carer, I
can assure the House that this subject is close to my heart.
I would like to invite you, Madam Deputy Speaker, to my jobs fair
on 11 November at the Roehampton leisure centre. I hope that
plenty of people who want flexible-working jobs—and, indeed, many
other jobs—will be able to come and find out more about
employment opportunities in the Roehampton, Southfields and
Putney area.
I also want to pay tribute to my right hon. and learned Friend
the Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman), the Mother of
the House, who marks 40 years in Parliament today, and who
inspired me to get into politics. She has campaigned for flexible
working throughout her time in the House. She was the architect
of the Low Pay Commission and the Equality Act 2010, she has been
a champion for women in the workplace in Parliament and at home,
and she is a long-time campaigner for flexible working for
parents, grandparents and carers.
I congratulate my hon. and brilliant Friend the Member for Bolton
South East () on bringing this vital Bill
to the House, on working with Ministers, many organisations, many
employers and others to bring it this far, and on her powerful
speech. Labour fully supports the Bill, and I am glad that so
many Members who have spoken today have come together to allow
this common-sense piece of legislation to progress.
As I said earlier, I have four children, and at different times
during their early years and primary-school education I would
have benefited greatly from these provisions—from knowing that I
could ask for flexible working, knowing that I could ask for it
for my team as a manager, and knowing that it would not just be
up to a certain manager or senior manager or the culture of a
particular organisation where people might say, “This just isn’t
the way we do it here”. I have had two job shares. I have
experienced various changes in working times and hours and
locations, depending on when my children were at nursery or at
primary school and when I had to pick them up. Every time I went
back from maternity leave—four times—my children immediately fell
ill and I had to ask for some kind of flexible working: it just
seemed to happen that way. The “day one” provision is very
welcome, meaning that people will no longer have to wait for six
months or many weeks. I have job-shared in politics as well, as
deputy leader of the Wandsworth Labour group, and I would welcome
much more flexible working in our political systems too.
Covid showed how differently we can work, and was a huge
culture-changer. That, I think, will enable this Bill to be
enacted and make an even bigger difference. It does make a huge
difference to be able to stay in work with caring
responsibilities, and, as others have mentioned today, that will
greatly increase the recruitment and retention of the best
possible workforce for our country. Flexible working should have
been the past for far longer, but it is certainly the future. It
is crucial to achieving gender equality in the workplace and a
fairer, growing economy, changing our economy and the world of
work for the better.
It is disappointing that the Government have not made a pledge on
flexible working in an employment Bill—such a Bill has still not
been brought to the House—and up to now have repeatedly failed to
follow through on their promises to promote flexible working. As
Working Families showed, one in three requests for flexible
working has been turned down, so we do need this legislation to
lead a change in working culture. With rights enshrined in law
for those conversations, working culture will catch up much
faster. Flexible working is not just about working from home, it
is also about the place in which people can work and changing
hours according to needs. The changes that the Bill would make
are straightforward and make complete sense.
As has been said, the Bill would introduce a requirement for
employers to consult the employee before rejecting a flexible
working request—or accepting it, as I hope will happen more
frequently. It would also allow an employee to make two statutory
requests in every 12-month period rather than the current one
request. That talks to the realities of life, where people can
have changes to their caring responsibilities, changes if they
have a long-term illness—there could be a change to that illness
during the year—or changes that may come about for their partner
or other people with whom they are sharing caring
responsibilities. There may be many changes, so two requests
instead of one would be welcome.
The Bill would also reduce the period in which an employer is
required to administer the statutory request from three months to
two months—obviously, it would be hoped that a decision would be
made more quickly—and remove the requirement that the employee
must explain in their statutory request what effect the change
would have on their employer and how that might be dealt with.
That would be shifted so that the employer would have to look
into it and think about ways in which it could make a request
work.
A Labour Government would go further. As part of our new deal for
working people, we will ensure that all workers have the
opportunity to benefit from flexible working and that they can do
so from day one as a default right, with employers required to
accommodate that as far as possible. The right to flexible
working would include flexible hours, compressed hours, staggered
hours and flexibility around childcare and caring
responsibilities. A Labour Government would support small and
medium-sized businesses to adapt to flexible working practices
and increase the uptake of flexible working. Labour would also
end one-sided flexibility, with all workers having secure
employment and regular and predictable working hours so that they
can plan their lives around a stable job.
I want to spend some time reflecting on the impact of that on
women in particular. The level of economically inactive
working-age women rose by 124,000 compared to the year before.
There are 1.5 million more women than men currently out of and
not looking for work. In January to August 2022, the number of
people—men and women—who were economically inactive due to having
to look after family members increased by 79,000 on the year
before, and one in five economically inactive people cite looking
after family members as the reason for that. Those figures
demonstrate the need for the Bill.
For too long, working women have been denied good quality,
affordable childcare, proper parental leave and access to
flexible working, and our country has been denied the opportunity
for growth that they would bring. Gaps in employment because of a
lack of flexibility and needing to leave work at times result in
a loss of confidence to return to work, having been out of work
for some time. They also result in reduced pension entitlement
and reduced opportunities for career progression. Those, in turn,
are a major reason for the gender pay gap. The changes that this
flexible working Bill would bring about would transform many
people’s work and go a long way to reducing the gender pay
gap.
I again congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South
East as well as the TUC’s “Flex For All” campaign, Action for ME,
Working Families, and Pregnant Then Screwed. Those groups have
been right to call out the Government for their shocking track
record and repeated broken promises on supporting working mums,
dads, carers and people with ME, but the Bill will be
transformative for working people and will address many of those
appalling statistics.
This is an excellent and long-overdue piece of legislation that
will transform the lives of hard-working people up and down the
country. This place is at its best when it is united around
common sense and a common cause, so I thank the Government for
their support in letting the Bill progress through the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. Just before I call the Minister, it was a pleasure to hear
the hon. Member for Putney () congratulate the right
hon. and learned Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman) on
the 40th anniversary of her election to this place. May I, on
behalf of the whole House, send our congratulations to the right
hon. and learned Lady, who, 40 years ago, was a trailblazer about
to become not only a very young female Member of Parliament, but
a mother? She has been a role model and a champion for women in
politics these past four decades and the whole House joins me in
sending her our most sincere congratulations and best wishes.
[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
I now have even greater pleasure in calling the newly appointed
Minister, .
12.51pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy
and Industrial Strategy ()
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I associate myself with the
comments made about those 40 years of service by our colleague,
the right hon. and learned Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms
Harman). I would also like to pay tribute to my predecessors, not
least my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam () and my hon. Friend the Member
for Watford (), who did great work in a
disappointingly short time in office—perhaps not too
disappointing for me, but he was doing a wonderful job.
I thank the hon. Member for Bolton South East () for bringing forward this
very important Bill. I was struck by her words when she described
it and similar legislation as a lifeline to many people, not
least carers, parents and those living with illness or
disability. I really appreciate what she has done with the Bill.
The key point in her speech was, I think, clarification on the
day one right. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Putney
(), also raised that point in
her speech. It is a key part of this policy package and we will
respond fully when we bring forward the response to the
consultation shortly.
I thank all hon. Members who spoke on this subject today. We
heard some fantastic contributions. My hon. Friend the Member for
North Devon () talked about flexible
working benefiting people in rural communities, which I am
clearly very keen to support. She also pointed out that this is a
very competitive jobs market. In fact, it is the most competitive
jobs market since 1974, in that we have record low unemployment
levels not seen since 1974, which I think we all welcome.
My hon. Friend the Member for Darlington () talked about how he
personally facilitated flexible working for his employees before
becoming a Member of Parliament. My hon. Friend the Member for
Heywood and Middleton () talked about flexible
working helping parents to manage childcare and decreasing the
gender pay gap.
My hon. Friend the Member for Hastings and Rye () talked about employees
having a better work-life balance being beneficial to employers.
I was struck that many contributions did not just talk about the
benefits of the Bill for employees, but that it is also critical
for employers.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bury North () talked about his own
experiences and about those who run small businesses that are
particularly affected by this kind of legislation and that they
must always be in our thoughts. My hon. Friend the Member for
Warrington South (), in his interventions, talked
about concerns around productivity and the impact on town
centres, as did my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (), who raised the idea
of a trial period—a very interesting point. That can be done
under existing legislation by granting the right to flexible
working for a certain period of time and then reviewing it
subsequently, but it is a very good point. The key thing is that
at any point, as the hon. Member for Bolton South East pointed
out, any business can reject a request if it gives reasons for
doing so, which is one thing specified in the legislation. A
request can be rejected on the basis of cost to the business,
quality or, indeed, the performance of the employee.
My hon. Friend the Member for Southend West () talked about how the Bill
could help people with conditions such as ME, by bringing more
people into full-time work, and my hon. Friend the Member for
Devizes () talked about how the
pandemic has increased the ability of our communities to operate
more effectively and about the importance of employers and
employees having a conversation about whether changes to employee
working patterns are appropriate. That is another key part of the
Bill.
The Government are committed to ensuring that the UK is the best
place in the world to work and grow a business. To do that, we
need a strong and flexible labour market that supports
participation and economic growth. The Bill formalises good
working practices, so I am pleased to confirm that the Government
will support it.
As has been discussed, flexible working has a key role to play in
supporting the labour market participation of certain groups
relating to disability, childcare, health and retirement. Many
strategies seek to encourage workplace conversations. We know
that with a good discussion and a bit of flexibility, working
patterns can be adapted to benefit both parties.
As many Members outlined, it is hugely important that we consult
employer groups and employee groups on legislation such as this.
We did that through the flexible working taskforce, which
involved a range of stakeholders from employee groups and
employer groups, such as the Federation of Small Businesses.
The ability to vary the time, hours and place of work is key to
the effective functioning of the flexible labour market in the
UK. Research suggests that in the absence of suitable working
hours or locations, groups of people are either not employed,
have retired early, or are working below their potential. That is
clearly bad for them and for the wider UK economy.
The Office for National Statistics recently published findings
showing that older workers who work flexibly are more likely to
be planning to retire later. Another of its studies looked
specifically at older workers who have left work since the start
of the pandemic but would consider returning to paid work in
future. It found flexible working to be the most important aspect
of choosing a new job among that group.
Once employed, those with a flexible working arrangement have
been found to be more engaged and more likely to increase
discretionary effort. A 2017 report published by HSBC showed that
nine in 10 employees consider flexible working hours to be a key
motivator to their productivity at work.
The right to request flexible working acknowledges that there is
no one-size-fits-all approach to work arrangements. It is
designed to help employees and employers to find arrangements
that work for both sides. In September last year, the Government
published a review of the legislation that found that in the vast
majority of cases—83% of them—in which a statutory request is
made, it is accepted.
The review found the framework to be functioning adequately but
highlighted some relatively minor areas for improvement, which
the Bill seeks to address. The areas for improvement were the
26-week qualifying period before a new employee can make a
request; how employers consider and refuse flexible working
requests; and the administrative process that underpins the
framework. One year on, the Government are pleased to see that
this Bill reflects what we consulted on. Although, as I said
earlier, I cannot go into the detail of our consultation
response, we will bring it forward shortly.
The Bill will make important changes to the right to request
flexible working, setting the right conditions for employees and
employers to realise the benefits of flexible working. The
Government are committed to building a strong and flexible labour
market that supports participation and economic growth. It is
great to see support for these measures across the political
spectrum in the House, as has been evident from today’s debate.
The Government look forward to continuing to work closely with
the hon. Member for Bolton South East to support the passage of
these measures.
12.59pm
With the leave of the House, I would like to thank all hon.
Members for their contributions: the hon. Members for North Devon
(), for Darlington (), for Heywood and Middleton
(), for Hastings and Rye
(), for Bury North (), for Burnley (), for Southend West
() and for Devizes (), and, obviously, the shadow
Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (), and the Under-Secretary
of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the hon.
Member for Thirsk and Malton ().
I think we all agreed that this Bill is a good idea. It will
benefit employers and employees. We are mindful of the fact that
some jobs can only be done in person and so there may not be the
opportunity for flexibility, but we also know that there are
many, many jobs where there can be such an opportunity. This is
just a question of drawing the attention of employers and
employees to the fact that there are other ways of working, and
the pandemic has really brought that home.
I seek clarification of one thing the Minister said about the day
one right, to which I referred. I do not know whether I misheard,
but I believe he said something about consultation on this. I may
have misunderstood the discussion in question, but my
understanding was that the reason the day one right is not in the
Bill is to do with the statutory parliamentary draftsman saying
that this is going to be introduced by means of a statutory
instrument, secondary legislation, once the Bill is passed. I
wanted that to be reconfirmed, because one of the most exciting
things about the Bill is a day one right. I hope the Minister
will be able to give confirmation on that. Finally, I wish to
thank everyone again, particularly the Government Whip, the hon.
Member for Castle Point (), for being absolutely
fantastic. I thank her for all her help in guiding and advising
me through the passage of this Bill, and I commend it to the
House.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a Second time; to stand committed to a
Public Bill Committee (Standing Order No. 63).
|
