2024-09-19 20:30:03
When most of us think about flexible working, we associate it with the location-focused hybrid or remote working approaches enjoyed by desk-based employees. Yet in the case of frontline staff such as nurses and shop workers, employers have traditionally considered introducing flexible working models as very difficult or even impossible.
And yet, ccording to research from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), a huge 60% of all UK employees fall into this category, which means the majority are missing out.
Meanwhile, another study by the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) and flexible working consultancy Timewise, Flexible working for all: achieving greater equity for frontline and site-based workers, points to the creation of a two-tier workforce consisting of ‘flexible haves and have-nots’.
It indicated that most organisations had undertaken only “limited” work so far to address this disparity. As a result, the report says: “For too long, flexible working has been overlooked, ill-defined or poorly implemented in site-based and frontline contexts.”
But a key problem with this situation is that because people who are low paid, young or from minority groups are overrepresented in frontline roles, the situation simply entrenches disadvantage. Furthermore, the study says: “Such roles typically afford less opportunity for autonomy and control over working patterns – factors that can impact health and wellbeing.”
At the very least, 37% of employees in this category indicate they feel less valued than their desk-based colleagues. This scenario is known to affect employee engagement, motivation, loyalty and ultimately retention.
The slow shift to frontline flexible working
But things are slowly starting to change. Research undertaken by the CIPD in 2023 showed that just under two-thirds of employers now offer their frontline workers at least some form of time-based flexibility. The current most common model here is variable start and finish times (46%). A third of the organisations questioned provide flexibility in the scheduling of shifts or rotas. A further 31% enable employees to swap shifts with colleagues. Other less popular options include compressed hours and job shares.
“These things may not seem like a massive change, but even small things can make quite a big difference in terms of people feeling they have more autonomy and control or that their employer is listening to them,” says Claire McCartney, the CIPD’s senior resourcing and inclusion policy and practice manager.
Moreover, she believes that “things are starting to shift” now as employers across the board increasingly recognise they need to do more for this group of staff. This shift is being driven by a couple factors, notes Emily Rose McRae, senior director analyst at research and consulting firm Gartner.
The first is that although there are more than twice as many frontline workers as desk-based employees globally, attrition numbers are about the same. This is an important consideration for employers needing to compete for staff due to persistent skills and labour shortages in key sectors, such as construction, manufacturing, health and social care.
“It’s an increasing concern for executives, and not just in one industry or function either – everyone’s feeling the pain,” McRae adds.
A second factor is that during the Covid pandemic, many frontline employees found themselves classed as key workers. So, from having roles that had traditionally been undervalued, they were suddenly deemed vital to keep the country running. This led to an increase in expectations and a greater willingness to quit if they were not met.
“Flexibility, especially for hourly workers, involves more control of their schedule and more flexible breaktimes,” explains McRae. “But it’s also about more stability in their work schedule too – if you don’t have stability, you don’t know how many hours you’ll be working when, which means you constantly have to change your life around.”
Flexible working options for the frontline
As to what frontline workers said they would value most in flexible working terms, the top choice – 46% of those surveyed by Gartner – was flexibility in terms of the days they worked. Only 24% actually benefited from this approach, however.
A further 34% felt that working on a ‘total hours’ basis was important, even though only 14% had access to it, while another 27% liked the idea of being able to work at different sites – but, again, the option was available to only 8%.
A key problem here, believes McRae, is that employers make inaccurate assumptions too often about what is possible or not, and where the limits are. As a result, she points out: “You hear executives saying, ‘People just don’t want to work anymore’, which simply isn’t accurate. They want to work, but they want more than is being offered to them, so it’s about making work possible.”
Three employers that have made it work, as laid out in the IES and Timewise report, are Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, DIY retailer Wickes, and civil engineering company Sir Robert McAlpine.
The NHS Trust focused on adapting its existing rostering process for a small pilot group of nurses to give them more input and control over their shift patterns. Wickes introduced a range of informal – flexitime, split shifts and compressed hours – and formal flexible options – reduced hours, job share and fixed patterns – at 13 of its stores during a four-month pilot project. Sir Robert McAlpine, meanwhile, provided support, training and individual, tailored coaching its senior leaders and line managers on how to implement and manage flexible and agile working.
Significantly, all three employers have since expanded their trials to cover different roles and areas of their organisations. Participating employees have reported improved work-life balance, enhanced health and wellbeing and better job satisfaction as a result.
For employers, this has translated into “higher levels of employee engagement, lower levels of sickness absence, and increased staff retention”. Therefore, the report concludes: “Organisations that invest in implementing flexible working effectively for all will see a positive return on their investment.”
How tech leaders can take action
So, what do tech leaders need to do ensure this kind of initiative works? The first step, once senior business executives have bought into the proposition, is to consult with the workforce.
Gemma Dale, senior lecturer at Liverpool John Moores University and co-founder of the Work Consultancy, says: “A good option and starting point is to engage with employees to seek information on the forms of flexibility that are of interest to them. They’ll also often have practical ideas about how flexible work could be made to work in practice.”
Being open to novel arrangements is vital, not least as they can be implemented on a trial basis “as a joint learning experiment”, she adds.
McCartney agrees. “Piloting is vital to try things out, see if they work and ensure there aren’t any unintended consequences,” she says. “So, you need to pilot and trial, evaluate and adapt.” Another key consideration is getting line managers on board as “if they’re not supportive, they can act as blockers and barriers”.
One approach is to encourage them to lead trials. The aim is to help them better understand the benefits of flexible working both for themselves and their customers. Adequate training and support, which includes providing toolkits to offer practical advice, is likely to prove effective.
As for useful software, McRae recommends exploring the workforce management applications market. Possibilities here include rostering and scheduling automation systems to ensure the right people are available in the right place when needed. Various smaller vendors offer workforce management systems that connect with contingent worker platforms to help fill any holes in the labour supply.
“Working out what skills you need for each shift, whether they’re available and whether people will want to work it is a big maths problem,” McRae says. “But there are still lots of companies doing it by hand, even if they use computers elsewhere.”
Change is coming for the frontline
A key advantage of automating the process is the invaluable data that such systems generate.
“So, for example, if there’s a shift no one wants to take, it can give you some useful information to start exploring why – is there a problem on site or maybe the pay isn’t high enough?” McRae says. “Once you make the leap, you may find you have to confront some harder questions as the data will identify pain points that simply providing additional flexibility won’t be enough to solve.”
Other areas for consideration in automation terms include providing employees with access to the communication and information-sharing tools, such as portals, that are now commonplace among their desk-based colleagues.
Paul Ridings, global director of growth at business software and services provider OneAdvanced, says: “Technology adoption among office and hybrid staff has accelerated in recent years, but remains lagging among frontline workers.”
To support his statement, Riding points to a recent report by Quinyx, which provides workforce and task management applications aimed at hourly workers. It indicates that a huge three-quarters of frontline employees believe there is room for improvement in the technology they use to do their everyday jobs.
But McCartney believes that change is coming. This will be partially driven by the new Labour government’s recent introduction of an employee’s right to request flexible working from their first day of employment, which is likely to lead to more requests.
“So, the adoption of these kinds of flexibility for frontline workers will continue, especially at organisations experiencing skills shortages. They’ll have to find ways to be more creative and innovative to attract people, and the expectation of most employees these days is that they want to work in more flexible ways,” she concludes.
