Work smarter not longer, says government
Lucy Ward, social affairs correspondent Tuesday September 6, 2005 The Guardian
The ever-present jacket on the back of the office chair should be taken home, the government will urge today in a call for an end to Britain's long hours working culture.
Instead of compelling or permitting workers to stay late at their work stations, employers should favour "working smarter, not longer", according to a report concluding a change in working patterns can benefit staff and bosses alike.
The new study, produced jointly by the Department of Trade and Industry, the TUC and the employers' body the CBI, highlights examples of innovative flexible working practices in some firms, ranging from annualised or monthly hours, job sharing and part-time working to a so-called "anytime anywhere" approach allowing employees to control both the location and hours of their working day.
The employment minister Gerry Sutcliffe will argue at the report's launch that working smarter is the key to improving both employee satisfaction and productivity, confirming the government's resistance to union pressure for greater regulation. He will say: "Changing working patterns can benefit everyone - employers, workers and their families."
Moves to reduce working hours come against a background of increasing time spent at work in Britain, coupled with mounting health concerns and pressure for improved work-life balance.
Britain's notorious long hours culture sees workers put in the longest working hours in Europe - 43.6 hours a week on average compared with 40.3 hours on the continent, while the past seven years have seen a significant rise in the number of employees working more than 48 hours a week, up from 10% in the late 1990s to 26% (around 3.5 million people) now.
Estimates suggest that, following a recent sharp increase, one sixth of the British labour force is now working at least 60 hours a week.
The impact of such hours on workers' health is also raising unprecedented concern. A US study published last month, in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, found that routinely working at least 12 hours a day increases the risk of becoming ill by 37%.
Today's report, Managing Change, identifies approaches used by blue chip companies such as BT, Excel, Rolls-Royce and the law firm Eversheds to tackle issues including what the management consultants Accenture - another employer cited - dubs "a macho, work-hard play-hard philosophy".
Accenture, which has 10,000 employees in Britain, introduced change 18 months ago after finding all its main rivals had abolished overtime payments, while its graduate recruits increasingly saw work-life balance as a high priority.
The company axed paid overtime, prompting initial opposition from staff, but also forbade employees to opt out of the maximum 48 hour working week set down under EU working time regulations (from which the UK has an opt-out) and introduced a system of time off in lieu.
Meanwhile, managers were told to support work-life balance and flexible working requests, while a focus on presenteeism was made a black mark against managers.
The company says employee satisfaction and retention are up, though the system's introduction is still patchy.
Land Rover, also cited as an example of good practice, overhauled an initial, unpopular version of an annualised hours system intended to address the peaks and troughs typical of the car industry. The new scheme made the system more predictable for employees, meant they were still paid if stood down because of low demand and introduced scope for them to take time off outside official shutdown periods.
The telecoms giant BT, which preempted latest trends by introducing home working in the early 1980s, now boasts 75% of staff working flexibly. The introduction of "anytime, anywhere" working has saved £5-6m in productive time, it estimates.
Ministers, under pressure from unions to increase regulation to address long hours culture, are anxious to promote the business case for voluntary change. They will continue to resist pressure to end the EU working time directive opt-out, which they claim would limit firms' flexibility.