‘Flextime’ in Britain

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33051, 19 October 1972, Page 17

‘Flextime’ in Britain

(N Z PA. Staff Correspondent) LONDON, October 18. A new term is beginning to be heard with increasing frequency in the British industrial and office scene: “flextime.”

It is used to describe experiments in flexible working hours, which, after being tried initially at a branch of the huge Lancashire chemical firm of Pilkington Brothers, have now spread to two large j insurance companies in Manchester and London, and to ! Wiggins Teape, the paper : group. Flexible working hours have been run with great success in West Germany for some time, but until recently conservative attitudes on the ; part of management, and i suspicion on the part of unions, have prevented any worth-while test in Britain.

It now appears that this resistance is breaking down, and, on the eve of Common Market membership, Britain could be on the verge of a revolutionary change in the way the working lives of both management and labour are regulated.

Flextime extends the working day from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., within which 12 hours there are two “core” periods, from

9 a.m. to noon, and from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. The remaining three periods are “flexible” time. During the “core” periods, all employees must be on hand. This gives a basic weekly 25-hour total; how the remaining 12| hours—to bring the total up to the usual 37i-hour normal working week—are compiled is up to the individual employee.

There is also the possibility of building up “debits" and “credits” of time. Time worked each month can be totalled, and, if an employee has amassed enough credits, he can take a half-day off, or more, to bring his account into balance.

One of the points of resistance from unions has been that the scheme requires that everyone punches a time-clock. Such clocks are fairly widely used at present, but flexible" hours would extend them into areas where fhev have never been used before. In the experimental firms, however, instead of the clock appearing as a symbol of the management’s policeman. it has come to be regarded as a truly independent and unbiased judge of the hours worked. The benefits of the scheme are many and varied. For the whole community, and for the individual worker, there is the obvious advantage that

the mad struggle which occurs morning and night aboard overloaded public transport is alleviated. For families where both father and mother are working, there would be a chance for at least one parent to be on hand to see children off to school, and also to be present when they arrive home in the afternoon.

The firms already working flexible hours have also found that morale has been raised by the fact that employees feel that they have more say in the organisation of their jobs: a degree of team-work is required to make sure the system works. The disadvantages which have been found to date do not appear to be serious ones. There have been some difficulties with the fact that offpeak commuter services are less frequent, and there is some worry on the part of management that the longer time they must keep their factories and offices open will add to heating, lighting, and maintenance bills. But the increase in productivity from a more efficient and happier staff should offset any such costs, and those incurred to staff a supervising office for the system. It is little wonder that many large firms are watching the present experiments with keen interest.