Changing the mindset on flexible working

Changing the mindset on flexible working

Latest News & Events

Changing the mindset on flexible working

money changing hands
Is it possible for the parties to the current proceedings in the Fair Work Commission re a model working from home term in modern awards to do other than treat it as a contest between employers and workers?

Sadly, the answer is “no”. Our workplace relations system is designed to be driven by conflict –  by claims and counter claims by employer associations and unions based on opposing ideologies and traditional and political views on how they should represent their constituents in industrial proceedings.

And the Fair Work Commission itself and its members are firmly positioned as the arbiters in that contest as is intended under the Fair Work Act 2009.

What all of that means is that our systems and the positioning of the key parties involved are not conducive to collaboration or to partnering in long-term strategic change. Every case is a transaction in conflict and that is one of the reasons why we have a productivity problem in this country.

So how is that going to deal effectively with issues like “working from home”?

The irony

The COVID pandemic changed the landscape completely because lots of people were not allowed to go to work – they had to work from home if they were going to work at all.

Those circumstances gave rise to some innovative changes to award provisions which allowed employers and employees some additional flexibilities around arrangements with hours of work and use of leave entitlements.

These included temporary options of:

  • varying ordinary hours to operate up to 10.00 pm enabling people to arrange their working hours around their parenting responsibilities and
  • employees being able to schedule their meal and rest breaks to times that suited them rather than the specific times prescribed in the award and
  • being able to utilise annual leave to cover more time off work but at a proportionately reduced pay rate 

Of course, once the COVID lockdowns were over, these flexibilities were removed from awards without any real consideration of whether there might be a case for retaining them.

That was a pity and an opportunity missed because the pandemic lockdowns gave employees the experience of working from home and many liked it and that fundamentally changed how we think about work as part of life. 

So what now?

The Fair Work Commission was tasked last year with undertaking a “Work and Care” review of modern awards and the consideration of “working from home terms in modern awards” is a step in that process.

It is being reported that, as we move further on in time from the pandemic closedown period, more and more employers are demanding more and more workers to return to the office – in some cases full-time and in others for typically 2 or 3 days per week.

The flip side to that is that study after study shows that a majority of people want some flexibility in their working arrangements and, for those whose jobs can be done from home, that is commonly desirable for them. It has become a sought after attribute in employers’ offerings to the labour market.

If you believe the media, employer groups are now advocating the abolition of penalty rates in return for flexibility in hours of work, something which the Federal Government has already pledged to override by protecting penalty rates through legislative change.

It is a bit of a mystery why we don’t simply revisit how the FWC dealt with working from home arrangements during the pandemic – they did do some practical things that seemed to work like allowing an employee and employer to agree to an arrangement of ordinary working hours outside the span of hours in the Award where an employee wants that and the employer is happy to accommodate it. Sure, you might need to make some adjustments to protocols around the right to disconnect in the individual’s case but it really shouldn’t be that hard. 

Some employees have a statutory right to request a flexible working arrangement

Employers now have additional obligations and exposures in relation to requests for flexible working arrangements for workers who have a statutory right to request a flexible working arrangement. These are people who have 12 months service with an employer and:

The odds are that many of your employees fit under one or more of those categories.

Employers now have to genuinely consider and consult with workers about requests for flexible working arrangements, there are strict procedural requirements and timelines involved and a worker who is not happy with an employer’s refusal of their request can take the matter to the Fair Work Commission for mediation, conciliation or arbitration. 

Awards have already been modified to specifically provide for disputes over requests for flexible working arrangements to be dealt with in accordance with dispute settlement provisions in awards.

One of the concerns that employers could have is whether insertion of a working from home clause in Awards would result in in expansion of the right to have a dispute with an employer dealt with by the Fair Work Commission to all award-covered employees rather than just those in the categories that have a statutory right as noted above. Logically, it would have that effect.

So what does all of this mean?

Flexible working and working from home are here to stay.

Employers who continue to resist that will find themselves not just challenged to find and retain the people that they need in a competitive labour market where flexible working is a valued commodity, but will also likely be challenged in the FWC and possibly other jurisdictions to justify that resistance on “reasonable business grounds”.

There are organisations which are more than happy to offer flexible working arrangements because they see the value in them for employees, they equip their organisations with the tools and leadership skills to manage people in those flexible arrangements, they hold people accountable for their performance and behaviour and they actually see improvements in productivity. That is what the future workplace should look like.

So the question that you need to answer for your business is “Do you really want to engage in a tug of war that you can’t win?” 

Please call us on 0438 533 311 or email enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au if you want to explore how we might be of assistance.

 

 

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Award review on “work and care” underway

Award review on “work and care” underway

Latest News & Events

Award review on “work and care” underway

example flexible working arrangement

Yesterday, the Fair Work Commission commenced its new “Work and Care” Review of Modern Awards which, on face value, could bring about the most substantial and biggest range of changes to our modern awards for decades.

When modern awards were created back in 2009, they were essentially a merger and rationalisation of thousands of pre-existing Federal, State and Enterprise-based awards leading to the 121 modern awards that we have today. 

This “Work and Care” Review has its origins in a Senate Inquiry into Work and Care established in 2022 which led to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations instructing the President of the Fair Work Commission to initiate the review.

The Fair Work Commission has issued a discussion paper which sets out the terms and process of the review and addresses relevant recommendations made by the Senate Committee and some other matters. It also has a comprehensive set of questions on the variety of matters to be considered in the review. You can access the report here.

The Senate Committee’s recommendations

Here is summary of the relevant recommendations of the Senate Committee as presented in the FWC discussion paper which shows how far reaching changes could be:

  • An enacted right to “disconnect from work” enabling and supporting productive work from home and flexibility of work, protecting workers’ rights to disconnect from their job outside their contracted hours, reinforcing that right with employers and applying a positive duty on employers to reasonably accommodate the right wherever possible;
  • Amending the Fair Work Act to provide improved rostering rights for employees and, in particular, working carers, by requiring employers to implement rostering practices that are predictable, stable and focused on fixed shift scheduling (eg fixed times and days) and increasing employers’ existing obligations to genuinely consider employee views including working carers on the effects of roster changes and  other work arrangements;
  • Conducting a work value case in care sectors including early childhood education, aged and disability care and sectors covered by the SCHADS Award with a range of entitlements specifically mentioned eg payment for work-related travel time, administrative responsibilities and essential training and a minimum shift call-in time;
  • Extending the definition of “immediate family” for carer’s leave purposes to include any person who has been a member of the employee’s household for at least 18 months, an employee’s children including adopted, step and ex-nuptial children, an employee’s siblings or the siblings of an employee’s spouse or de facto partner or any other person significant to the employee to whom the employee provides care;
  • Consideration be given to the adequacy of existing leave arrangements including separate carer’s leave and annual leave;
  • Reviewing access to and compensation for paid sick leave and annual leave for casual and part-time workers;
  • Requiring employers to provide at least two weeks’ notice of roster changes, to genuinely consider employees’ view on the impact of roster changes and to accommodate the needs of employees plus an employee “right to say no” to extra hours with protection from negative consequences;
  • Reviewing the operation of the 38 hour week with consideration of stronger penalties for long hours and other possible ways to reduce them including through the work health and safety system to ensure safe working hours;
  • Introducing an enforceable “right to disconnect from work, restricting employers from communicating with workers outside their contracted hours except for emergency or welfare reasons plus increase penalties for wage theft for unpaid additional hours;
  • Introducing mandatory annual reporting of companies with 20,000 or more employees in Australia on workplace practices to ensure roster justice and flexible working arrangements and related collection of data on requests for flexible working arrangements made and shift roster changes;
  • Developing a new statutory definition of casual employment that is restricted to work that is genuinely intermittent, seasonal or unpredictable and restricting the use of “low base” contracts, ensuring part-time employees have access to regular and predictable patterns and hours of work with consideration of penalty rates for work outside contracted hours;
  • Developing standard definitions of full-time and part-time employment for inclusion in the Fair Work Act 2009;
  • Undertaking a review of standard working hours with a view to reducing the standard working week.

Please remember that these are just recommendations which are to be considered in the review being undertaken by the Fair Work Commission. Some of the items require legislative change and that would be up to the federal government to negotiate through Parliament. So it will be a while before we know exactly what any award or legislative changes that flow from the Senate Inquiry will look like in real terms.

What this all means

The last year and a bit have delivered far more change in workplace relations law and employment rules via legislation, modern award reviews and decisions made by the Fair Work Commission and the Courts than we have seen in years.

This review tells us that we can expect more of the same in the years ahead.

The other element here is the WHS one that is noted in relation to extended working hours but equally links the positive duty to eliminate or control psychosocial hazards, many of which can be connected to some of the recommendations of the Senate Inquiry – eg around remote work, organisational justice, reward and recognition, job demands, etc.

The positive duties are progressively being rolled out across the country via State and Territory legislation.

For this reason, it is important to consider the agenda here in that broader context and the smartest way to do that is to consider whether any of the issues raised here are demonstrative of an issue in your workplace and the need for you to do something about that.

Conversely, have a think about whether you already accommodate some of the items raised here or perhaps you could actually do so. Remember that the Fair Work Act and modern awards provide minimum standards and there is nothing that should stop you from considering what you might be able to offer more than those in any way.

Given the challenges that we have in both accessing the talent we need for our businesses and looking after our own and our employees’ wellbeing, anything we can do over and above those minimum standards helps us on both counts.

You could also consider negotiating an enterprise agreement with your employees delivering on some of those above award benefits and using that as a public validation of your commitment to your people/your Employer Value Proposition. There might also be some changes that you want to make that are not allowed for under the relevant Award and so an enterprise agreement might be useful legally validate and protect desired changes.

We will monitor developments in the review and communicate further as and when developments occur.

If there is anything here that resonates with you and you would like to explore further, give us a call on 0438 533 311 or email enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au. We would love to have a chat about it.

 

 

 

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Opportunity knocks!

Opportunity knocks!

Latest News & Events

Opportunity knocks!

example flexible working arrangement

So you have new positive duties to eliminate sexual harassment and to eliminate or control psychosocial hazards, right?

And people are telling you that this is another layer of compliance and risk that you have to negotiate as a business owner or manager or find yourself in hot water, right?

What if I told you that, if you really do value and want to care for your people, this is a great opportunity…..to validate what you are doing right as well as to identify ways that you can do it better?

Like most “compliance questions”, it is about your mindset – are your people assets to be cared for or risks to be managed?

What would it look like if we flipped it?

Let’s revisit a few of the psychosocial hazards in Safe Work Australia’s “Model code for managing psychosocial hazards” and picture them as strengths:

  1. The work demands on our people are reasonable physically, psychologically and emotionally
  2. Our people have reasonable control over their jobs
  3. Our people are well supported.
  4. Our people are clear about the roles that they play in our organisation.
  5. People believe that we manage and communicate change effectively.
  6. People believe that they are properly and appropriately recognised and rewarded for the contributions that they make.

And so on for the rest of the psychosocial hazards. 

When you look at them in that way, how many of those statements do you think might be true in your organisation?

Where do you see that there might be opportunities for improvement?

Changing the language can make a real difference to how you look at the subject matter can’t it? 

And guess what – when you see this as an opportunity knocking, you will find it is actually the best way to manage the risks.

How can we help 

We have been encouraging and helping organisations to adopt a positive mindset to improving workplace culture, communications and people practices for many years so, for us, the new positive duty stuff just adds some context to what we have already been doing with our clients. It is nothing new for us and it needn’t be especially challenging for you with the right guidance and support. 

So for us it is just business as usual with a few more tools in the toolkit. 

Need help?

  • Give us a call on 0438 533 311 or email enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au to arrange your free first consultation to see how we can help with advice and support on this or any other HR matter

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Is it time to revive “the e2 initiative”?

Is it time to revive “the e2 initiative”?

Latest News & Events

 

Is it time to revive “the e2 initiative”?

example flexible working arrangement

The “e2 initiative” was a project undertaken by Ridgeline HR Practice Leader, Peter Maguire in association with two quite different organisations that he worked with over a decade ago.

Investors in People Australia was the Australian licensee for Investors in People, a standard of excellence in leadership and development of people originally developed in the UK in the early 1990s. Investors in People is still going strong in the UK and in some other parts of the world albeit that it has never really taken off in Australia.  For further information on Investors in People, see https://www.investorsinpeople.com/. Peter was an accredited Investors in People Specialist who advised and assessed organisations using the Investors in People Standard.

The Australian Institute of Employment Rights (which was created in the WorkChoices era) works to promote the recognition and implementation of employment rights in a cooperative industrial relations framework based on the principles of. the International Labour Organisation.  In 2007, the Institute released The Australian Charter of Employment Rights which sets out 10 fundamental principles on which fair and balanced workplace laws and relationships should be based. There is an accompanying Australian Standard of Employment Rights which provides more detail on how organisations can implement those 10 principles in their workplaces. For further information on The Australian Institute of Employment Rights and its work and publications, go to https://www.aierights.com.au/. Peter was one of the leads for advising and assessing organisations against the Australian Standard of Employment Rights.

What was the “e2 initiative”?

The initiative brought together the two standards – the Investors in People Standard as the measure of “effectiveness” of an organisation and The Australian Standard of Employment Rights as the measure of the “ethics” of an organisation.

The equation:                      ethics x effectiveness (e2) = employee engagement (e2)

The premise for developing the program was that there was a clear disconnect between what we knew then to be best practices in leadership and management of people and what was happening with workplace laws and organisational behaviours and cultures in our workplaces.

The concept was that by bringing the two instruments together we could influence the development of more harmonious workplace relations environments which would also have the dual benefits of improving employee engagement and productivity.

There was also the potential for organisations which implemented the two standards effectively in their workplaces to achieve accreditations as an Investor in People and as an Ethical Employer. 

Are things different today?

In some ways, yes and, in others, no.

LIke then when we were not long into the Fair Work era, we are going through a period of significant legislative change in workplace relations pursuant to the election of a Labor government after years under conservative governments.

Like then, we still have regular reports of large organisations underpaying wages and entitlements and in many cases they are simultaneously harvesting record profits.

We have had inquiry after inquiry making findings of culpable corporate misconduct in so many different jurisdictions.

We also still have peak bodies for unions and employers being openly combative when it comes to any proposed changes to employment rights and workplace relations laws. 

Like today, leadership experts were urging our managers to be accountable, be compassionate, be engaging, be vulnerable and be collaborative. On the other hand, they were being told to  manage risk, reduce costs and maximise profits and they were being rewarded for that. It was the latter that provided organisations’ policy settings.

So there is a lot that really hasn’t changed much at all.

The advent of positive duties

The penny has dropped that the traditional compliance/risk management model as applied by most organisations doesn’t work. 

The positive duties that organisations must now meet in relation to elimination of sexual harassment and psychosocial hazards have been introduced for that reason – it isn’t just about changing policies, it is about bringing about real changes in behaviour – by individuals and work groups and organisations and everyone whom we interact with in the course of the work that each of us do. We all have a role to play in that.

That was exactly what the “e2 initiative” was about – changing workplace behaviours in partnership with all of the people in a workplace.

Need help?

Interested in exploring ways in which we might be able to help you to deal with your new positive duties? Give us a call on 0438 533 311 to arrange your free first consultation to see how we can help with advice and support on this or any other HR matter. 

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Psychosocial hazard #14 – Conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions

Psychosocial hazard #14 – Conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions

Latest News & Events

Psychosocial hazard #14 – Conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions

example flexible working arrangement

The final psychosocial hazard that is listed in Safe Work Australia’s Model Code of Practice on Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work is “conflict or poor workplace relationships or interactions”.

Why is conflict or poor workplace relationships or interactions a psychosocial hazard?

This hazard involves poor workplace relationships or interpersonal conflict between colleagues or with other businesses, clients or customers.

It may involve frequent disagreements, disparaging or rude comments, from one person or multiple people. A worker can be both the subject and the source of the behaviour. It could also be inappropriately excluding a worker from work-related activities. 

Some questions that you might ask to assess whether there are any  psychosocial hazards related to conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions in your workplace include:

  • Is the workplace one where staff are encouraged to compete with each other and so they don’t support each other?
  • Is there a culture where swearing, name calling, being rude or spreading rumours are commonplace and not addressed appropriately?
  • Are there managers or customers who make unreasonable demands on workers and who are critical or complain when they don’t get what they want?
  • Is the leadership team dysfunctional and not respected by the workers?
  • Does the workplace lack the policies and procedures and the training that are needed to set appropriate standards of behaviour and to effectively deal with any incidences of disrespectful or unsatisfactory conduct?
  • Are changes made to work processes, systems or resources without consulting the affected workers?
  • Do you have managers who micro manage people who don’t need that level of supervision to do their jobs?
  • Is there a lack of defined work processes and clarity of roles and interdependencies between workers?

This list is not exhaustive and while we have based these posts on the model code produced by Safe Work Australia, there can be differences in the specific details for each State or Territory. So you need to check that in the jurisdiction in which your workplace lies.

Need help?

Give us a call on 0438 533 311 to arrange your free first consultation to see how we can help with advice and support on this or any other HR matter.

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Helping with your positive duties

Helping with your positive duties

Latest News & Events

Helping with your positive duties

example flexible working arrangement

All organisations have to meet their new positive duties to eliminate sexual harassment and to eliminate or control psychosocial hazards.

Relevant authorities have published codes or guidelines which set out what organisations are supposed to do to meet these positive duties and the reality is that, if we are to be seen to be compliant, we need to do what they say.

But they are really complex and designed with large organisations in mind, ones which have their own WHS and HRM people and systems and resources to manage these obligations.

For smaller businesses, a much simpler approach is needed and that is achievable with the right partner. Here is how we would go about that.

What does good compliance look like?

There are consultants out there who will tell you that, if you put in place the documentation – like employment contracts, position descriptions, employee handbooks, policies and procedures – you will be able to demonstrate your compliance.

Sorry but that just goes part of the way and can actually create risks if you have them on paper but don’t actiually manage people issues in accordance with them.

20 years ago, I developed our 4C compliance model because compliance involves a lot more than just having a document.

This is what good compliance looks like:

C1: Commitment: leadership makes a positive statement of intent like in a policy or a values statement or a purpose statement, etc

C2: Capability: the organisation provides the resources – the people, systems, tools and processes – that are necessary to give life to the commitment

C3: Competency: the organisation provides people with the skills, knowledge, tools and time to apply the resources properly to deliver the desired outcomes

C4: Culture: the commitment is demonstrated in practice through the applied capability of the organisation and the competency of its people to deliver consistent high performance and in ongoing measurement and continuous improvement.

How are you tracking against our 4C model?

Goalposts have shifted

Our friends at the Michelle McQuaid Group came up with the very simple and appropriate message that we need to shift from “a culture of compliance” to  “a culture of care” if we are going to properly address the mental health and wellbeing challenges in our workplaces and meet our are positive duty to eliminate or control psychosocial hazards.

They are right and there are good reasons for that.

The traditional approach to risk management has been to have a policy, tell people about it and act on any complaints or incidents that arise. That doesn’t work for many reasons but there are two in particular that I want to point to:

  1. This approach relies on people making a complaint and most victims and bystanders don’t do that; and
  2. It isn’t effective in addressing the underlying behaviours or factors that are creating the problem.

We believe that we have always had a duty to protect our people from psychosocial hazards including sexual harassment in line with the general duty to protect people from the risk of illness or injury at work.

What is happening now is that organisations are being told that they have an explicit duty to proactively assess their organisations for risk arising from psychosocial hazards and then eliminate or control/minimise any that they find through a systematic and engaging/consultative approach with their people.

Relationships are key

The underlying challenge is to create psychologically safe workplaces where there is trust and positive relationships between management and workers and other stakeholders and everyone is required to comply with the rules of behaviour – not just nominally follow the policies.

There is of course a need for formal and proper processes and policies and procedures etc but we need to think of them as tools supporting positive relationships rather than just as risk management tools. A core message coming through is that we have to get back to treating people as human beings rather than as human resources.

That is why positive relationships are so essential to creating the required “culture of care”.

How can we help

The image at the head of this article gives you an idea of the various ways in which we might be able to assist.

We have the benefit of having competencies in both workplace relations law and positive leadership, two essential ingredients to navigating this new positive duty.

We can simplify the processes set out in the guidelines to accommodate the needs of smaller businesses who do not have the resources to be able to manage and we can adapt them to suit the particular circumstances and settings of the business.

For HR/People and Culture practitioners who are struggling with what the new positive duties mean for what they should be doing and how they should be doing it, we can provide positive duty coaching  to help you make the necessary adjustments.

Need help?

  • Give us a call on 0438 533 311 to arrange your free first consultation to see how we can help with advice and support on this or any other HR matter

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH