What is the Impact of Flexible Working to the Worker and the Workplace?

Importance and Key Contributions In the current workforce, there is a growing need for employees to fulfil their life tasks and work tasks simultaneously. While this has been done under the guise of Work-Life Balance in recent... [ view full abstract ]

Importance and Key Contributions
In the current workforce, there is a growing need for employees to fulfil their life tasks and work tasks simultaneously. While this has been done under the guise of Work-Life Balance in recent times, more realistically it is performed under the umbrella of Work-Life Fusion. Modern employees have shown a desire for a fusion of work and life. Tasks and times have become interchangeable, and the anchor of a desk or time based role is released. This concept of Flexible Working is, however, often misunderstood and poorly defined.

This paper explores the concept of flexible working and its impact on the worker and the workplace. In addition, the legal framework that was designed to protect workers and worker rights is discussed. The basis for a law which restricts working to 48 hours per week, when averaged over a three month period, is explored for its efficacy in a changing work environment. When written, this law focussed on a manufacturing oriented workforce. As workers and workplaces have evolved, the law has remained static, and, having arguably become outdated and ineffective, it is now freely ignored by employees and employers alike.

Technological advances have impacted greatly on the ability to meet flexible needs. Although flexibility may not be sought by all, with up to five generations co-existing in the current workforce, there is demand for its existence. There is a risk, however, that this ability to be flexible develops into the norm and the working pattern evolves into a hybrid of traditional nine to five and flexibility. At its worst, this means that the employee is waking to email, presenting for the traditional work day, adding a little overtime and returning home to continue the work process via technology. In contrast, at its best, the flexible worker is one who is task focussed not time focussed and blends life activities with work tasks, interchanging with a high degree of fluidity. This paper looks at both positions and discusses the personal, professional and organisational impact.

In addition, the paper gives an insight into how modern Irish workers view their flexible relationship with their employer. An often unwritten, flexible contract is in place between employers and employees, founded on mutual trust and often mutually beneficial. This pseudo contract however, is in contradiction of the law of the land, and, while business is becoming reliant on the flexibility of their staff, employers and employees continue their fugitive practices unchecked. This paper assesses the practice and analyses the consequences of its continuation or its removal.

Theoretical Base
The Chartered Institute of Professional Development (CIPD) (2014) defines flexible working as a type of working arrangement which gives some degree of flexibility on how long, where, when and at what times employees work. Dourish and Edwards (2000) note that flexibility in the workplace is the ability to accommodate individual differences in needs, use, style or task. Organizations are promoting flexibility as a clear benefit to both business needs and the employee needs (Holbeche, 2001).

In Ireland, there is no flexible working legislation. Flexible hours and flexible working arrangements are generally at the discretion of individual employers, rather than being governed by specific legislation. People who share a job are viewed as part-time workers and have all the statutory entitlements of part-time workers (Citizens Information, 2014). The Organisation of Working Time Act (1997) sets out the statutory minimum entitlement for employees in relation to working hours, annual leave, night work, breaks and rest periods (Citizen Information, 2013).

Fitzpatrick and Fishman (2008) point to the use of Smartphones, Instant Messaging and wireless connectivity as a means for employees to work effectively from home. It is further added that the focus for employees changes to the task being worked rather than the hours at a desk (Fitzpatrick and Fishman, 2008). Bercovici (2012) posits that the traditional workaholic mentality of employees working long days in unfavourable conditions has been replaced by the ‘always-on’ worker, who has different and possibly tougher conditions to contend with.

IBEC (2013) found, in studies undertaken in 2006, 2008 and 2013, that the presence of flexible working arrangements for employees had decreased. In 2006, flexible options were available to 81% of employees, which increased slightly to 82% in 2008 before decreasing to 71% in 2013.

The existence, and provision, of flexible working raises a number of questions, First, what does the concept of flexible working mean for the employee? Is there a risk of burnout to the ‘always-on’ employee? Are workplaces becoming drop in centres for occasional employee visits, removing the social workplace discussions? This paper addresses these questions, and explores flexible working in the Irish context. The benefits, and challenges, of flexible working, both for the employee and the workplace, are analysed.

Research Question
Although based on a larger study, the research question of this paper asks ‘what is the impact of flexible working on the worker and the workplace?’ Specifically, this paper explores the context of worker and workplace welfare, whether flexibility is a benefit or a challenge, the legal context of flexibility and the impact to the traditional work environment.

To satisfy the research question, a survey of 156 people was used to specifically target employees within indigenous and multinational organisations based in Ireland. Once all surveys were completed, nine semi-structured interviews were completed.

Findings
There were a number of significant findings resulting from primary research. First, a quarter of survey respondents were using personal devices to access work related material, with 41% indicating usage outside of work hours. This points to the growing trend of the “always-on” worker. During the interview process, respondents specifically noted that the accessed work out of hours. Interestingly, respondents stated that they did this without request or direction from their employer and did this to make their work lives easier. All of these respondents had a high level of flexibility and saw no issue with work contact spanning from 7am to midnight. When questioned on their view on the legality of this, respondents defended the process as their choice to manage workload and saw it as beneficial to them.

When assessing the impact of flexibility on the workplace, workplace conversations were seen as the biggest factor to be affected. It would appear, however, that these conversations have been replaced in any case by email. The media of email is the most utilised method of communication in the workplace and those who responded that they worked overtime primarily noted that they were spending this time managing emails.
During the interview process, four respondents were unaware of the legal working week and two interviewees were of the opinion that the legal working week was 60 hours. In the survey process, almost 90% of respondents replied that they worked in excess of the regular working week and 12% of employees were in direct contravention of the legislated 48 hour working week. Rather than point to an issue with the working practices, however, the data pointed to an issue with the law.

Implications
There are a number of implications that will be discussed more fully in the paper. First, the effect of working flexibly on employees will be discussed. Employees ability to manage life tasks and work tasks is explored. The concept of work-life fusion will be discussed and contrasted to the work-life balance fad. Secondly, the repercussions of increased flexibility will be explored in detail, identifying the benefits and challenges both organisationally and personally. While, in theory, an employee who is willing to work from waking time to sleeping provides more output to the organisation, in terms of time worked, it is a short term view. Employee welfare and subsequent cost to the organisation of an overworked employee cannot be ignored.

Furthermore, the legal implications stemming from flexibility will be discussed. Findings in the study indicate that the current legal framework is routinely ignored. This raises questions concerning the usefulness of existing legislation in the modern workplace. The paper will discuss the business context of adhering to an outdated law and how it is potentially more worker friendly to replace the legal framework with mutual trust.

References
Bercovici, J. (2012). Are You The Perfect Always-On Employee? No Problem. Here's How To Fake It.. [online] Forbes. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2012/08/10/are-you-the-perfect-always-on-employee-good-heres-how-to-fake-it/
CIPD (2014). Flexible working - Factsheets - CIPD. [online] Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/factsheets/flexible-working.aspx
Citizens Information (2014). Different types of employment. [online] Available at: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/types_of_employment/types_of_employment.html
Dourish, P., and Edwards, W. K. (2000). A tale of two toolkits: Relating infrastructure and use in flexible CSCW toolkits. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 9(1), 33-51
Fitzpatrick, D. and Fishman, S. (2008). The work from home handbook. Berkeley, CA: Nolo.
Holbeche, L. (2001). Aligning human resources and business strategy. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
IBEC, (2013). Flexible working arrangements report 2013. IBEC.
Kent, P. (2015), What is the impact of Flexibility on the Worker and the Workplace?, Unpublished Dissertation, Cork Institute of Technology.

Flexible, Working, Flexibility [ view full abstract ]

Flexible, Working, Flexibility