Public sector bosses are talking the talk when it comes to work-life balance but not displaying much action, according to a report from the Work Foundation.

In fact, the report, which was commissioned by Unison, says that in some cases managers are deliberately blocking people from flexible working or are granting requests only to selected favourites.

Overall, the report finds that public sector organisations make substantial ‘paper commitments’ concerning work-life balance.

Three quarters of employers in the public sector have initiatives and policies in place to address work-life balance for some or all staff, such as flexible working, job sharing, home working, term-time contracts, career breaks, childcare provision, and time off to care for sick children. This is considerably higher than the extent of work-life balance policies offered to all workers across Britain.

Yet only half of the 1000 trade union members from the health, education and local government sectors surveyed felt they had the chance to make real choices about their working arrangements.

And only just over half said they were aware of the work-life options open to them. Some 53 per cent said their workplace offered flexitime; 52 per cent job sharing; 19 per cent working from home; and 32 per cent term-time working. These figures were much lower than the stated availability of work-life balance options across all British workplaces.

A third of members believe their managers are not committed to helping them achieve work-life balance.
And in addition, some union members reported their managers sought to deliberately thwart the uptake of flexible working – either by not communicating available options, or by dissuading people from requesting them.

Laura Williams, senior researcher at the Work Foundation and co-author of the report, said: “Work-life balance is one of those areas where public sector organisations claim to be most progressive.

“But what this study does is to take a peek beneath those superficial commitments to what happens in real life. And what we see is a classic rhetoric-reality gap. In the worst cases, managers appear to want to stamp out any modest deviation from the norm and become standard-bearers for inflexibility.

“Now the phrase work-life balance has become popular, the onus is on employers to think creatively about how it can be used not just to benefit staff but to reform the organisation – to make it more efficient, responsive and conducive to ‘good work’.”

The report uncovered evidence of the difficulties of working flexibly. For example, in an organisation, one member said that there was an unwritten policy that employees who worked longer shifts (12 hours) were eligible for career progression, but those who did eight-hour shifts to fit around family commitments were not.

A familiar complaint was that individuals were made to feel like a troublemaker if they raised the possibility of work-life balance arrangements. One member said their manager had told them ‘I don’t do part-time’. In several organisations, flexibility was only available to a chosen few.

The study found:

• One in four said that work was too demanding




• A total of 30 per cent said their career had been damaged by caring responsibilities




• Some 66 per cent say their job was stressful compared with 34 per cent who said their home life was stressful




• A total of 68 per cent of members called for greater flexibility in working arrangements

Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said: “It is clear from this report that too many employers are still paying lip-service to providing a proper work-life balance in our public services. We need to get employers to understand that achieving that balance can produce great results with a well-motivated workforce delivering quality services.”