Flexibility stops plodding and goes for the fast track
In 2012, the tally of employees covered by a legislated right to request flexible schedules was:
Flash forward to today. As we acknowledged our many rights on the 4th of July, the Right to Request (RTR) gathered momentum and threatened to join them. A decade-old UK practice spread to its resistant former colony.
The current number of U.S. employees in areas with such laws or pending legislation are:
We take note of new cars that race from 0 to 60 in record time. Perhaps we should pay attention to RTR acceleration in the U.S. that in one year has leapt from 0 to 7 million covered employees. Can we expect this trend to continue?
As I said in my November TLNT article, (San Francisco’s Flex Work Legislation: Will It Be Win-Win or Lose-Lose?) :
Many observers, including a surprising number of critics, see FFWO (Family Friendly Work Ordinance) as an early step in a broader national movement.”
Six months later, those critics have proven prescient.
Judging from what we have heard from San Francisco’s Supervisor David Chiu and other advocates, inquiries about the legislation are coming in from cities throughout California and state legislators, and cities and states around the country. Legislation might be underway in jurisdictions near you.
It is not surprising why. Federal RTR legislation has stalled repeatedly since its first introduction in 2007.
An insistently unproductive Congress has refused to deal with workplace issues from minimum wage to flexible schedules. Calls for “leave it to the states” have been taken seriously by family and flexibility advocates. Thus cities and states legislate issues that have been national ones elsewhere.
New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer explains his city’s motivation as follows:
For New York City to remain an economic engine, it must actively compete with other global cities for top talent and business investment … [F]lexible work arrangements not only boost employee morale and productivity, they also improve corporate profitability and reduce turnover.
From American Express and Citigroup to KPMG and IBM, flexible work arrangements are on the rise … However, the pace of change is still frustratingly slow for millions of New Yorkers who are not afforded the opportunity to integrate work and family life through the use of FWAs. By implementing best practices and creating a framework for discussions between employers and employees, businesses both large and small will be spurred to consider flexible work arrangements. It is an idea whose time has come.”
Clearly the New York City comptroller sees the Right to Request firmly lodged in the work-life or family support movement. His preference is for an RTR for caregivers, similar to San Francisco’s. Vermont’s law and Berkeley’s initiative would extend the RTR to all employees. Interestingly, just this month after 10 years of caregiver-only focus, the UK law was broadened to cover all employees.
A year ago, a call to pay attention to the Right to Request experiment might have seemed trivial given many other economic, organizational and social issues in the workplace. As this process unfolds, the time seems to have come for those concerned with employee engagement, performance and, yes, flexibility to join in the RTR conversation – especially as it comes to a theater near you.
Comptroller Stringer makes two points about flex that are absolutely right:
Although we have had reservations about the Right to Request approach, we have offered conditional support because business practice has lagged well beyond proven practice – and popular pressure. And we believe that regulation without intelligent design and proven implementation support will create numerous new problems as it tries to solve old ones.
As you consider the issues raised by RTR and possible involvement in legislation in your neighborhood, here are some design decisions to bear in mind:
Coverage — In the political tension between what’s right and what’s feasible, one must ask:
Process — The method for proposing, reviewing requests can range from loose to tight, such as:
Decision — Existing and proposed RTR legislation allow denial on the first basis below; but, there are options:
Implementation — The greatest variety and weakness occurs in this area:
In this decentralized march toward Right To Request, a consensus on best practices might emerge.
One push in that direction could come from the experience of hundreds of U.S. companies that already offer flexibility on more inclusive terms than much of this legislation. Drawing on our experience with more than 100 companies and hospitals and our observation of hundreds more, we might suggest these four guiding design principles:
This was originally published on The Co Scheduler blog
