Personalised approaches to flexibility

So far, we have focused on formal FWAs, the offer of which is provided for by organisational policy. There is, however, a growing trend to adopt more personalised approaches to agreeing employment terms and conditions, and this includes flexibility (Bal & Jansen, 2015). These personalised approaches are referred to as ‘i-deals’ (Bayazit & Bayazit, 2019) and describe FWAs that are formally offered but as a result of individual negotiation not policy. In our study, this happened because we investigated small firms that often did not have formal policies (Atkinson & Sandiford, 2016). It is becoming more common, however, for these agreements to happen in larger firms as a recruitment and retention mechanism: there is no policy that provides for a particular FWA, but a potential or current employee negotiates as it as part of their idiosyncratic (individualised) deal (Rousseau et al., 2006). This is a very powerful mechanism for accommodating the needs of the heterogeneous older worker group (Perera et al., 2015) and can include any of the FWAs discussed in the previous section. It is extremely effective in meetingwide-ranging and often changing individual needs and allowing the organisation to be highly responsive (CfAB, 2018). It does, however, require careful management to avoid perceptions of, or the realities of, favouritism, unfairness or indeed discrimination (see Rousseau et al. (2006) for further discussion of this).

Informal approaches to flexibility

So far, we have discussed formal FWAs, arrived at by either application of policy or negotiated via an i-deal. There is also growing recognition of the importance of an additional form of flexibility, informal flexibility (de Menzes & Kelliher, 2017). Here, FWAs are not permanently embedded in contracts of employment. Rather they are ad hoc arrangements that are often temporary and are negotiated between a manager and employee to meet their particular circumstances. CfAB (2018) gives the example of a carer who was allowed to keep their phone on their desk in an environment where this was usually prohibited, in case their dependant needed to make contact. In our research, older workers appreciated informal flexibility to deal with unexpected caring or health situations, or sometimes simply to meet one-off commitments (Atkinson & Sandiford, 2016). CfAB (2018) argues that informal flexibility can be as beneficial in particular situations as contractual FWAs. In one of the few studies of this, there was greater uptake of informal than formal FWAs (de Menzes & Kelliher, 2017). Their use is perhaps underreported, and hence undervalued, as there tends to be little measurement or visibility of their usage (CIPD, 2019a). Yet they may better meet workers’ needs and thus drive the positive attitudes discussed below (de Menzes & Kelliher, 2017). Skilling managers to support and offer informal flexibility is an important organisational priority.

Offer of flexible working for older workers

In the UK, workers have the legislative right to request flexible working. For older workers, this is a relatively recent development, as it was only extended to include them (other than if they had caring responsibilities) in 2014. Rather than legislation, policy more typically relies upon a business case to promote the offer of FWAs. In the case of older workers, it argues that their skills, knowledge and experience make them an important labour market group and that their recruitment and retention is vital to organisational success. This is reflected in initiatives such as Fuller Working Lives (DWP, 2017), the government-/CIPD-led Taskforce on Flexible Working that started in 2018 and the Women and Equalities Commission ‘Older People and Employment Inquiry’ that also published its findings in 2018. These initiatives have, however, generally presented somewhat disappointing findings on FWAs, evidencing that its overall offer has stalled in the past ten years (CIPD, 2019a). While the reasons for this levelling off are somewhat unclear, it may be that it is seen as an unaffordable luxury in times of austerity (Lewis et al., 2017).

Also, management attitudes that outside commitments are an individual responsibility seem to persist stubbornly (van Wanrooy et al., 2013). The offer of flexibility to older workers is also limited, despite being highly valued (Marvell & Cox, 2018). Buyens et al. (2009) investigated the offer of formal FWAs to older workers already in employment and did indeed find that their use was not widespread. No single practice was offered by more than 25% of organisations, and for those offered by more than 20% the figures are: taking additional holidays, 24%; more flexible working hours, 20%; phased retirement, 24%; and improving comfort and efficiency, 25%. This would appear to be very short-sighted given the strength of the business case outlined below for offering FWAs to older workers and the missed opportunity to build a reputation as an employer of choice for this important workforce group (Smeaton & Parry, 2018).

The business case for offering FWAs to older workers rests on three pillars: ease of recruitment, the creation of positive attitudes that enhance their performance, and improved retention. Taking first recruitment, there is evidence that the offer of FWAs attracts older workers and thus widens an organisation’s potential pool of labour (Perera et al., 2015). Despite this, it is rarely used. Figures vary, but the Women and Equalities Committee (2016) suggests that only around 6% of vacancies are advertised offering FWAs to older workers, while CfAB (2018) found that only around 10% use it in recruitment for this group. Whatever the exact figure, it is clearly very small. Second, FWAs have been widely demonstrated to create positive worker attitudes, includingjob satisfaction (Wheatley, 2017), increased goodwill and improved productivity (Clarke & Holdsworth, 2017), and better employee engagement (Pitt-Catsouphes & Matz-Costa, 2008). For older workers particularly, they offer support in fulfilling their potential at work (Marvell & Cox, 2018). FWAs do need, however, to be well managed, otherwise they can create perceptions of unfairness and stress (Smeaton & Parry, 2018). Finally, FWAs have been demonstrated to aid in the retention of older workers, particularly where role redesign enhances job quality (Perera et al., 2015), and their individualised offer is important to this retention (Pitt-Catsouphes & Matz-Costa, 2008). This helps to address the concerns of around a quarter of UK workers, one-third of lower-skilled workers, who fear that they may not be able to continue in their job beyond the age of 60 (Thomson, 2018). They are of particular benefit to those with health difficulties or caring responsibilities (CfAB, 2018). Smeaton and Parry (2018) do, however, sound a note of caution that they can perhaps trap workers, citing a Timewise Foundation study in 2013 that found that around two-thirds of older workers with FWAs would not move employers due to concerns around not being able to find alternative FWAs. The overwhelming evidence, however, supports a clear business case for offering FWAs to older workers: they create labour market advantages in recruitment, they underpin positive attitudes that lead to improved performance and they help to retain an (often) skilled and experienced labour market group.