This research was funded by the NSW Department for Women. It is sponsored by the NSW Trades and Labour Council. It is being conducted by Families At Work. The research aims to establish the discrepancies between the rhetoric and the reality of flexible work practices in three Work and Family Award winning companies in NSW. Organisation A is a State based pub lic sector company, Organisation B is a large international company in the finance and property sector and Organisation C is a national bank.

The objectives of the research are to firstly, identify and highlight the discrepancies between written and actual practice of flexible workplace arrangements, and whether workplace policies that are designed to assist employees to organise their work and personal commitments more effectively do just that; and secondly, to promote good practice in the area of flexibility and the use of flexibility by employers.

The research began at the beginning of 1998. We have:

• interviewed Human Resource personnel in each organisation,
• interviewed personnel in unions representing each organisation,
• conducted two to four focus groups in each organisation with randomly selected groups of employees and managers, and
• interviewed two or three individual workers in each organisation who are utilising some type of flexible workplace policy.

We are currently writing up the results of the research. This paper will focus on the results we found in Organisation A. Most of the themes that emerged in this organisation emerged in the other two organisations.

The report is due for completion in December. We will be briefing the organisations involved, and launching the findings at a NSW Trades and Labour Council conference early next year. We hope to not only highlight the findings but the improvements and changes workplaces could make to ensure employees get a better deal.

Organisation A: is a state based public sector company that has 4,816 employees, of which 20.5% are women. Many of the activities the organisation undertakes have traditionally been seen as 'mans work'. They are located at 112 different locations. They have four human resource divisions and 56 personnel employed in human resources. They are known as a best practice organisation when it comes to work and family responsibilities.

The organisation has won many awards for their work and family policies. They say all the right things when it comes to what they are doing for their employees.

Cheryl and Susie's story

Cheryl and Susie's stories illustrate many of the themes that emerged. Cheryl is the manager of an outlying metropolitan division of the organisation. Susie is one of five employees in the division. The division works in a traditionally male area. Cheryl feels lucky that she works near where she lives as she is close to her family and can participate in school activities and doesn't want to move offices. Senior managers are required to move every two years with the aim to give them managerial experience. Cheryl would prefer to remai n where she is but may not have the option. Cheryl has said to management she would be happy to forgo promotion if they leave her in the current division. She has been told she can have two years more. She would like to have come back part time when her own children were younger. She now has a twelve and eight year old. She is very aware of her staff's family responsibilities.

Susie went on maternity leave and requested to come back to work part time after leave. She did not want to work full time but she could not afford to quit work altogether. Susie works in a technical job and most of the others who do the same job are men. No-one had ever requested part time work in this area. Cheryl was very proactive about helping her come back part time as she didn't want to loose her expertise and certainly did not want to loose one of the few women on the team.

According to both Cheryl and Susie it was other members of the team and the geographically adjoining team that had difficulty with her proposal . They did not believe the job could be done on a part time basis, that the amount of work needed to be done would be covered. There were many discussions between Susie's team members and the members of the other team that had regular contact. In the meantime, Cheryl was having discussions with her managers up the line, convincing them that it could work, one of whom was very supportive. A couple of Che ryl's managers have, increasing the number of women, as part of their performance reviews. It was eventually agreed amongst the team members that Susie could work part time on a trial basis of six months, during which time she had to prove that it could work. One of the reasons Susie and Cheryl were eventually able to sell it to the team was the fact that their division employs young people as part of a graduate program. It was decided that one of the graduates could pick up the slack for Susie.

The main challenges she has faced since she started working part time are small issues such as the fact that safety training had always been done on a Thursday and Susie doesn't work on a Thursday. It required a lot of talking to get those who did the training to change the day.

After 6 months the team members had no complaints so it was decided she could continue part time. Susie has been working part time now for 12 months. Her co-workers are very pleased with the results and Susie says she works extremely productively and feels very grateful to the organisation for providing her with the opportunity to work part time.

While Susie was on maternity leave she had a chance to apply for a promotion. Cheryl rang her to let her know she should get the information together she needed to apply for a promotion and fill in the application form addressing all the competencies and demonstrating these. Although she had met all the requirements to get a promotion, she was initially turned down, in Cheryl's opinion because she was on maternity leave. Susie, with Cheryl's backing then appealed the decision and she was granted a promotion while she was still on leave. She was the only one that applied that obtained the promotion.

A select number of senior managers were offered an opportunity to go to a live-in course. Cheryl was one of these and was very keen to do it, although she did not want to live in as she did not want to leave her children over night for the period of time the course was on. She said she would like to go and although she cou ld not live-in, had no problem doing the one and a half to two hours commuting each day. The course organisers said it was too far to go when the course didn't finish till 7pm and Cheryl could not attend. She has had similar problems when she has wanted to travel interstate with children. She says this is frowned upon and the general attitude is 'don't you want to get away from your kids'.

The main themes and issues that emerged when we examined this organisation closely were

Diverse views of flexibility

A number of people thought it was about being flexible so as to meet business needs with the aim of putting themselves out for the business and for colleagues.

Other employees defined flexibility as being about allowing a balance between your home and work life.

Susie and Cheryl defined it as being able to work part time, take family leave, flexible hours and rostered days off and working at home on the occasions when it was possible. They also thought it was about give and take. They both felt committed to the organisation and gave their best because they believed that the organisation deserved their loyalty.

Flexibility as a two way street

There seemed to be a feeling in both focus groups that if the organisation was prepared to be flexible the employee should be prepared to be flexible in return. Predictably, this was particularly marked in the management group.

Knowledge about flexibility

Before we undertook this study, we thought that if employees were not accessing flexible work practices, it may be because they did not know of their existence. This was generally not correct in this organisation. Most employees and ma nagers we spoke to seemed to know what policies and programs were available and what they were entitled to.

Although most people seemed to know what their entitlements were, there was a feeling that employees in the outer metropolitan areas and perhaps country areas did not find out about policies and programs till much later than their city counterparts.

Cheryl said that she did not know about family leave until three or four years after she started. The way she found out was that one of the members or her team - a single father - was asked to participate in a video about the wonderful flexible work practices that the organisation provided and when he came back to work, he said 'did you know we can take family leave?'

Understanding of the intent of flexibility

The managers group agreed with each other that policies and programs in themselves will not mean managers understand what flexible work practices are or that employees use flexibility. They say that the intention or the spirit behind t he policies and programs is what needs to come across .

It was clear in Susies case that the fact that the policies existed did not make it easy to use them. Getting the part time she wanted was a battle.

Use of flexibility

The employee's views of the organisation and the flexibility it offers is generally very positive. This is interesting given that many of them said they didn't use flexible work practices. Many of them commented on how good it was for 'other people'.

Three of the eleven employees we interviewed in the focus group said they work flexibly and we enquired why the others did not. It seemed that they either didn't think that the work they did could be done flexibly, they didn't need to work flexibly, they'd never thought of changing the way they work, they thought it was too much trouble to set it up in the first place or they didn't define the way they worked as flexible. This was interesting as some were in fact using policies and practices the organisation defined as flexible work practices.

There appeared to be a feeling amongst employees and managers that even if they didn't want to use flexible work practices, it was important that they knew they could if and w hen they did want to.

One manager commented that employees don't use flexibility because they are largely dedicated to the job. This seemed to be implying that those who did work flexibly were not quite as dedicated or comm itted as those who did not. But at the same time, this manager acknowledged that the fact that they could use flexibility contributed to high morale and commitment to the organisation.

Although Cheryl and Susie clearly used the organisations flexibility, they commented that some of their colleagues said to them, 'we want to work part time too' and when quizzed on why they didn't, they said 'they had just not thought of it before.'

Nature of work

For those that said they did use flexible work practices, there was a certain amount of complaints about how difficult they were to take and how well they worked, given the nature of the work the employees are doing.

Some employees expect that the nature of work makes it impossible to have more flexibility and anyway they are 'here to work' and their family will accommodate the work, so they shouldn't complain.

There was definitely an agreement from the employee group that many jobs don't necessarily len d themselves to different types of flexibility.

Susie commented that in her job she could not work from home as the nature of the work meant she had to be on-site when she was at work. But she agreed with Cheryl when she said that perhaps if they worked out the tasks they did, there would be some tasks that could be grouped together which could just as easily be done at home.

Specialised knowledge

It was brought up a number of times that because the organisation requires specialised knowledge this creates a stumbling block to being as flexible as they would like to be. Managers in particular commented that often a specific individual is required to be present at work because they are the only one with the information and expertise required at the time.

A number of managers said they were prepared to come in and do the work themselves rather than ask their staff to come in on their days off or work back. They expressed a strong dislike in asking their staff to do extra work but said that sometimes it was unavoidable because the nature of the work and the organisation itself fostered specialists in particular areas of w ork. They were keen to try and foster generalist workers.

Priority to meet business objectives

Meeting customer and client needs was an important consideration of managers and one that they stressed was a priority consideration when deciding about whether particular job s could be done more flexibly.

There seems to be the understanding amongst managers that the policies exist, but there is an immediate need to get work done regardless of policies. One manager said that 'to build the people you want it might mean stepping outside policy but at the same time being aware of boundaries there that can influence policy. Knowing where you stand is very important.'

One of the Unions, the APESMA, is concerned that because the organisation's priority is to meet business objectives, they move people around to suit the business without considering their personal needs. One employee commented that there is no consideration given to locating people who need it close to the child care centres, so the organisation has to start considering bringing in families from outside to fill the centre. This particular employee transports a co-worker's child to the workbased childcare centre since his friend was located elsewhere in the business (away from the centre). Another employee said they have asked for a transfer to Liverpool so th ey can use the child care centre but so far have had no luck. These employees believe there should be more consideration as to how the organisation can better serve its internal customers (the staff) not just the external customers.

A male employee took paid parental leave one day per week four years ago. He commented that although at the time it was no trouble at all getting the leave he wanted, he belie ves that if he were to approach his manager now for a similar arrangement 'it wouldn't go down well at all, because they are focussed solely on dollars and performance and that sort of stuff'.

A representative of the APESMA believes that 'the biggest issue in the organisation is reconciling commercial activities with family friendly policies and they can't reconcile it.'

Co-worker attitudes

There was a strongly expressed view that it was not necessarily the organisation, but ones colleagues that mattered when it comes to using flexibility. Employees assist each other to get the flexibility they need. Or in some cases employees hinder their colleagues due to an inflexible mindset. This was certainly the case with Susie and her desire to come back to work part time. Because it had never been done before and because co-workers were not open to change, Susie and Cheryl spent a great deal of time and energy getting to a point where team members were prepared to entertain part time work with a trial period.

System inflexibility hindering employees use of flexibility

There was some concern that there were systems or policies in place that may be hindering flexibility because they are not able to accommodate the spirit of flexibility or in some cases they actively work against it . For example an employee had done extra work but could not take the time off , because of a policy that said he could not accumulate more than two days of banked time in a month. It was possible to get a special memo from his boss to allow him the extra days but management changed and he lost his days .

The other issue that was causing concern was the inconsistency of systems and policies. It depends very much on where the employees work as to whether or not the policies are implemented strictly.

The employees implied that having an 'attendance clerk' promoted a prefect mindset which is not conducive to a mature, respected, trusted workforce. The attendance clerk is 'another worker who takes on the role along with their other duties' - just as a prefect in school would do. The employees believe that if flexibility policies are to work well employees must be able to be trusted.

One employee complained that although she preferred to have the same day off each week, she was prepared to change the day to fit in with business needs, but the system was not flexible enough to accommodate different days per week happily.

One of the managers discussed the advantages of part time work for people as they get older who are soon to leave the organisation. One of the problems he identified with this is 'the old type superannuation scheme which determines your exit at a particular salary'.

An employee had a concern about the organisations HR system not being computerised. He said i t has a paper based system that is probably about 20 years o ld. He believes if it was updated It would enable people to change their work procedures and times competently and know whether they are feasible or not. He said a computerised record would enable maintenance, monitoring, and evaluation of work practices much easier.

One of the problems that Cheryl had was that she needed to get a doctor's certificate to take family leave to look after her sick child. But, she said her child may just need rest and recuperation not necessarily to see a doctor. She was resigned to the fact that rules are rules, although she thought this rule was unnecessary, bureaucratic , did not display much trust in the employees and made using a flexible work practice like family leave, stressful.

Enterprise agreements and flexibility

Another workplace system that governs employees conditions and opportunities is enterprise agreements. Because there is a different agreement negotiated for each business group, there is some inconsistency between different ar eas of the organisation. Only the holding company's agreement talks about compressed hours. This was of concern to some employees who would like to be able to either work compressed hours or would just like to know they could if they wanted to. There was al so some confusion about whether employees outside the holding company could in fact work compressed hours on an informal basis.

Policy inconsistency

To some extent the inconsistency of policies is unavoidable. In an organisation as large as this one, it is impossible for there to be a homogenous culture. But employees thought it is a concern that they can not rely on business policies being consistent across the organisation.

Awards, contracts and flexibility

Although the unions were generally talked about in a positive light by all those we spoke to in the organisation, a couple of managers said they would like to do more (in regards to flexible hours) but are constrained by awards and having to pay overtime. The organisation is shifting to 24 hours and they are encouraging people to work different hours.

The Association of Professional Engineers Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) believes there has been an ideological shift - a more market driven approach - in the organisation in the last couple of years. A sub sidiary of the organisation has announced that it does not want to pay parental leave for employees who work interstate. They say that if they have to pay nine weeks parental leave this will put them at a competitive disadvantage. The union argues that this is nonsense as at present there are only ten to twenty employees working interstate and anyway a person just about to have a baby would most likely not apply to work on a short term contract interstate. The union sees it as a dangerous precedent if one part of the business begins to lose entitlements. They are worried that the erosion of Award conditions will lead to less flexibility for employees overall.

The organisation argues that employees decide if they want to go interstate and they can negotiate their contract on an individual basis and that the 12 months unpaid parental leave is a minimum entitlement - a starting point to negotiate from.

A number of employees discussed the issue of contracts with us. Once an employee gets to a certain level within the organisation they may be offered a contract of employment as opposed to being under the Award. This contract means the employee may receive a higher salary but they loose some Award conditions, in particular, their rostered days off.

One employee who was acting in a higher position for a number of years was asked to go on contract. He was told that he either went on contract or went back to his position and salary prior to the one he was acting in. He felt he didn' t really have a choice. One way he lost pay and the other way he lost his RDO's. Having made the decision to go on contract he thinks he has enough flexibility given the constraints of the nature of his job. He believes the contract situation can be a good one, but because there are no set rules with a contract, unlike those that apply under an Award, the work situation and an individual's manager is critical to the flexibility that the employee can utilise.

Cheryl said that her rostered days off are an important part of assisting her to balance her work and family responsibilities.She said that she saves her days off to attend her children's school events such as sports days and canteen d uty. She described RDO's as her 'mental days off'. She has been discussing going on contract but she says she will not go on a contract unless she can negotiate to keep her rostered days off. This may mean she will not be put on a contract which will inevi tably have ramifications for her career.

Lack of courage and the desire to change

A constraint to using flexibility that was identified was lack of courage and this was articulated very well by a manager who said people did not want to stick their heads up in case they got shot.

One employee said that using flexibility is about having an attitude that it can work

In every workplace there is a mindset that says, we have never done it like that before so why start now. And, its always been ok the way it is so why do we need to change.

There is a belief that some areas of the organisation are more intractable than others and are slower to see the need to change.

Certainly in the area that Susie and Cheryl work there is a traditional mindset that has never had to accommodate difference such as someone wanting to work different hours. It took the courage of both women, particularly Cheryl to stick her neck out and fight to make it work. It is easy to get a reputation as a trouble maker who creates waves.

The culture of long hours

One of the problems with the successful utilisation of flexible work practices is the clash with the desire for employees, especially managers, to work longer and longer hours. The organisation is feeling the pressure to operate long hours in order to assist them compete in an open marketplace. It is an organisation in flux, undergoing massive restructuring. The discussion we had in both focus groups around long working hours, but particularly in the managers group, was very lengthy and led to many complaints about the incompatibility of bala ncing a healthy personal life with long working hours.

One of the managers in the focus group worked particularly long hours, much longer than any of the others. When we asked him why, he said it wasn't the job so much as the sort of person that he is. He said his father was a 'hard worker, a work-a-holic' while his mother took care of seven children. When we asked him if he was a typical manager, he said 'I wouldn't think so'. He said there was a number of factors leading to managers working long hours. These included personality, background and nature of the job.

A few of the managers we interviewed said they refused to work long hours.

Managers as role models

When we enquired from the managers if they led their team by giving an example of working less hours, they discussed how difficult this was, especially for less experienced managers.

One of the managers in the focus group said when a manager works long hours or displays other behaviour like not taking sick leave, employees may think they have to do the same.

Although the managers group seemed to be aware of their influence as role models, it didn't prevent them from behaving in ways they did not think were good to model such as working long shifts. Some felt they could overcome the influen ce of their behaviour by the way they manage.

Cheryl, as manger of her team is a perfect role model of how to make use of flexibility. Clearly she is a mentor for Susie and has provided the impetus for Susie to get the flexibility she now has.

Management adapting to flexibility and culture changes

The organisation is in flux and it is in the process of testing new ways of doing things. Management style and skills are also being evaluated. Managers are attending sessions to help them manage employees more flexibly. Althou gh there clearly is still evidence that wheels turn slowly and that culture does not change over night, all of the managers we interviewed expressed a desire to help employees have more flexibility. They also expressed a view that it is becoming much easier to do this in the changing culture.

Surprisingly managers were generally considered by employees to be very understanding and 'lenient' when it comes to flexible work practices. 'Its not management (where the difficulties are), it's at the most basic level.' Some of the 'basic' problems expressed to us by employees, in being able to use flexible work practices, were the nature of the work that make it difficult to work flexibly, colleagues who have narrow minded thinking, the long working hours that are expected in some areas, outdated systems and policies that contribute to pettiness, and inconsistency about how policies are applied.

But this positive attitude to managers was not universal. One man told us about his wife who works part time as a customer service officer in the organisation's call centre. He says that management treats her contemptuously because she works part time. He says part timers are considered lower down the ladder than casuals, in terms of getting a desk you can call your own that isn't fronting a brick wall.

Most of the managers, but not all, said that employees felt comfortable about asking them for more flexibility.

One manager said that employees were worried about keeping their jobs and being seen to be in the office working was a strategy they used to increase their job security.

A couple of managers were excited during the focus group about the prospect of being more proactive and going to their staff and asking them what they wanted.

Cheryl and her managers are clearly an example of the new wave of management. It was Cheryl's persistence that led to Susie getting part time work. It was also Cheryl who approached Susie and insisted that she apply for a promotion while she was on maternity leave. She then proceeded to assist her where she could to fill in the application and competency forms. And to top it off when her application was rejected, Cheryl went into bat for her and helped her to ap peal the decision.

Inequality in who gets to use flexibility

There was some contention about whether or not employees with families were treated any differently to those without families.

Some managers acknowledged that there was inequality in who gets to use flexible work practices. One manager said that 'smaller teams are bearing the load so that others can be flexible. There will always be people who are filling the gap so others can be flexible.' and 'some benefit more than others.'

One professional employee said there was a difference between the way he was treated and the flexibility he was allowed compared to his wife who also worked in the organisation in a less skilled position. He believes this is because he is a man and is respected by colleagues for wanting to play a bigger part with his family, because he is in a more 'powerful' position and therefore more highly valued, and because he is willing to be more 'aggressive' about what he wants.

There is no doubt that the fact that Susie is a woman working in a traditional male role, played a part in her being able to work part time. Cheryl's managers have as one of their performance criteria the fact that they have to increase the number of women in their divisions.

There is also the fact that Cheryl is a woman with a great deal of personal power and determination. This would have increased the chances of winning the flexibility she wanted.

Equality of opportunities for those who work flexibly

A male employee who took parental leave four years ago commented that if he were to ask for it now it would be approved as it is a policy, but he would not get promoted to a senior management position. He believes management's reaction would be, 'If you wish to stay on this salary rate and not be entitled to any bonuses or anything like that then you sit on that title and go and have a family. When you want to come back and be a serious employee we'll consider you then.'

He believes he would be overlooked for jobs and put on projects that are dull and uninteresting as he would be considered an unreliable employee that could not be counted on to be available five or six days a week. He says because of t his attitude he would not take parental leave again.

When we asked the managers group whether staff who use flexible work practices have the same opportunity to training and promotions, they said yes, but when we asked if they had promoted anyone we got a more reticent and mixed response.

The managers seemed to agree that there was limited promotional opportunities across all areas for people who work part time. They also thought it would be difficult for someone in management to work part time. One manager gave himself as an example. He is currently doing two jobs and working very long hours. He said he would be worried if he gave some of his managerial work away to anyone else to do on a part time basis that he would be putting this person at risk of failure and he woul d not be able to fulfil his line responsibility.

We asked the managers if they would use more flexibility if they felt they would not be disadvantaged with their career. All but one of the seven managers we interviewed in our group said they would. When we asked whether there is a perception in the organisation that flexibility will affect your career, there was silence and then one voice piped up ......there might be.

Susie managed to get a promotion while she was on maternity leave but only because of the dedicated efforts of her manager and because she knew her rights and was prepared to appeal an initial decision. On the other hand, Cheryl feels she is being disadvantaged in her career because she has a family and will not compromise her time with them. She will not go to live-in training sessions or overnight interstate trips without her children. As a result she has missed out on training and travel. She is also considering giving up the opportunity for career progression through not going on a contract as she does not want to give up her days off to be with the children and go to their school events. She is also putting herself in a situation o f a manager that is considered to have limited experience as she does not want to work in a division too far from her family.

Improvements that could be made

Below are just a couple of improvements that the workplace could make. I would like this workshop to brainstorm in small groups what this organisation should be doing to improve their situation.

Overhaul the systems.

It is important that the systems that are in place do not prevent flexibility from occurring . Why, for example is there a sign off and on book? Why do employees have to have doctor's certificates for sick children? For flexibility to work it is important to rely on employees and their integrity. A system that requires documentation from management before an employee can access time in lieu is not efficient nor does it send a message to employees that they are trusted. Employee's performance should be based on what they produce, not the number of hours they are in the office. The attendance clerk position is a system that is working to thwart efforts of some employees to be comfortable in using flexible work practices.

Systems that have been in place for many years prior to the introduction of many forms of flexibility have not been revamped and are in some cases working to prevent employees getting the flexibility they need and are hindering employees being able to use their own judgement about how the workplace can best benefit.

Create a safe place.

Lack of courage is understandable if the history, culture and inflexible mindset of the organisation and for that matter most Australian workplaces make the act of courage too risky. For the organisation to succeed in having employees use the flexible work practices they need, it must become a place employees feel comfortable and secure in. They need to know that working in a non-traditional way will not jeopardise their opportunities, their chances of promotion or worse, will not lead to their dismissal.

Improve induction kits.

This should be done so every employee knows what options they have and the flexibility they can access right from the start. Induction should be done at a local level. Each division needs more than one copy of the family practices manual.