Flexible working:
what’s changing?
Flexible working:
what’s changing?
Leadership Focus journalist Nic Paton explores the challenges and opportunities of flexible working in schools, as new government guidance encourages leaders to rethink how flexibility can support recruitment, retention and staff members’ well-being.
A new push for flexible working
For any school leader trudging wearily (again) out of the school gate at gone 6pm or ‘just’ catching up on emails on a Sunday afternoon, the fact that the Department for Education (DfE) published updated guidance for schools on flexible working on 1 April will probably have elicited something of a hollow laugh.
Nevertheless, ministers are serious about the value – indeed the possibility – of encouraging and embedding flexible working in schools, particularly as a way to make teaching and school leadership more attractive and sustainable as both a profession and career.
In fact, the guidance comes ahead of changes set to arrive next year that will make it harder, or at least potentially more onerous, for schools to reject requests by members of staff to work flexibly.
Since April 2024, all employees have had the right to request flexible working from ‘day one’ of their employment. As part of the Employment Rights Act that came into force this spring, this ‘right’ will be strengthened further during 2027 by the introduction of a new ‘reasonableness test’.
Employers will have to accept flexible-working requests that are ‘reasonable and feasible’ and will be expected to consult with the employee making the request and provide an explanation of why any request has been turned down.
As the guidance states (see the panel at the end for more on this): “Schools and multi-academy trusts are encouraged to adopt a flexible-working policy that responds to the needs of the staff, and the employer, to address the challenges to flexible working in their school. Employers could consider embedding strategic, whole-school approaches to flexible working, with contributions from all parties.”
A new push for flexible working
For any school leader trudging wearily (again) out of the school gate at gone 6pm or ‘just’ catching up on emails on a Sunday afternoon, the fact that the Department for Education (DfE) published updated guidance for schools on flexible working on 1 April will probably have elicited something of a hollow laugh.
Nevertheless, ministers are serious about the value – indeed the possibility – of encouraging and embedding flexible working in schools, particularly as a way to make teaching and school leadership more attractive and sustainable as both a profession and career.
In fact, the guidance comes ahead of changes set to arrive next year that will make it harder, or at least potentially more onerous, for schools to reject requests by members of staff to work flexibly.
Since April 2024, all employees have had the right to request flexible working from ‘day one’ of their employment. As part of the Employment Rights Act that came into force this spring, this ‘right’ will be strengthened further during 2027 by the introduction of a new ‘reasonableness test’.
Employers will have to accept flexible-working requests that are ‘reasonable and feasible’ and will be expected to consult with the employee making the request and provide an explanation of why any request has been turned down.
As the guidance states (see the panel at the end for more on this): “Schools and multi-academy trusts are encouraged to adopt a flexible-working policy that responds to the needs of the staff, and the employer, to address the challenges to flexible working in their school. Employers could consider embedding strategic, whole-school approaches to flexible working, with contributions from all parties.”
The post-pandemic workplace shift
To an extent, this renewed emphasis on flexible working is unsurprising, given how dramatically workplaces have changed since the great ‘stay-at-home’ experiment of the covid-19 pandemic, as James Bowen, NAHT assistant general secretary, recognises. “Since covid-19, we have seen a major shift in the labour market for a lot of people,” he tells Leadership Focus.
“Particularly for office workers or people in the professions who aren’t necessarily client facing, there has been a huge injection of flexible working into the system. People can regularly now say, ‘I need to step away for a couple of hours’, ‘I need a flexible arrangement to pick up my kids from school’, ‘I need to work half days on Thursdays’ or ‘I need to work from home on certain days of the week’,” James adds.
JAMES BOWEN,
NAHT ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARY
The post-pandemic workplace shift
To an extent, this renewed emphasis on flexible working is unsurprising, given how dramatically workplaces have changed since the great ‘stay-at-home’ experiment of the covid-19 pandemic, as James Bowen, NAHT assistant general secretary, recognises. “Since covid-19, we have seen a major shift in the labour market for a lot of people,” he tells Leadership Focus.
JAMES BOWEN,
NAHT ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARY
“Particularly for office workers or people in the professions who aren’t necessarily client facing, there has been a huge injection of flexible working into the system. People can regularly now say, ‘I need to step away for a couple of hours’, ‘I need a flexible arrangement to pick up my kids from school’, ‘I need to work half days on Thursdays’ or ‘I need to work from home on certain days of the week’,” James adds.
Why flexibility is harder in schools
The difficulty for schools and school leaders is that the pandemic also taught us all another important lesson: that the school environment – the physical school classroom, especially – does not lend itself well to flexible-working patterns and, in particular, remote or home-based alternatives.
“We have to be honest about the limitations that flexible working has in schools,” James agrees. “Because all the time you have a class of children needing to be taught, you have to have people there to do it. It is very much a person-facing profession. We have to be realistic about the limitations to flexibility in school.
“The government, therefore, needs to recognise that flexible working in a school setting will never be able to compete fully with the kind of flexible working that can be offered in an office setting. If the government wants a truly flexible system in schools, this can be achieved, but doing so will require a large amount of money because far more teachers are needed to support that approach. I think the reality is that, given the state of the public purse, it’s not on the horizon anytime soon,” James adds.
IAN HARTWRIGHT,
NAHT HEAD OF POLICY (PROFESSIONAL)
“Our position is we support flexible working; it is just that many flexibilities available in other professions are rather difficult to deliver within the school setting,” agrees Ian Hartwright, NAHT head of policy (professional).
Why flexibility is harder in schools
The difficulty for schools and school leaders is that the pandemic also taught us all another important lesson: that the school environment – the physical school classroom, especially – does not lend itself well to flexible-working patterns and, in particular, remote or home-based alternatives.
“We have to be honest about the limitations that flexible working has in schools,” James agrees. “Because all the time you have a class of children needing to be taught, you have to have people there to do it. It is very much a person-facing profession. We have to be realistic about the limitations to flexibility in school.
“The government, therefore, needs to recognise that flexible working in a school setting will never be able to compete fully with the kind of flexible working that can be offered in an office setting. If the government wants a truly flexible system in schools, this can be achieved, but doing so will require a large amount of money because far more teachers are needed to support that approach. I think the reality is that, given the state of the public purse, it’s not on the horizon anytime soon,” James adds.
IAN HARTWRIGHT,
NAHT HEAD OF POLICY (PROFESSIONAL)
“Our position is we support flexible working; it is just that many flexibilities available in other professions are rather difficult to deliver within the school setting,” agrees Ian Hartwright, NAHT head of policy (professional).
The pressure on school leaders
“The big problem, of course, is that teaching is broadly a face-to-face exercise. All head teachers, school leaders and teachers face work intensity issues, too. At the end of a lesson, for example, a pupil may come up to ask a question, a parent may send an email or another issue may arise that requires a response.
“Time is easily eaten up with immediate, unplanned tasks. In small schools, leaders often wear many hats and must juggle teaching alongside a full gamut of leadership responsibilities. These include securing multi-agency support for pupils, supporting parents, managing the site and providing day-to-day, moment-to-moment leadership.
“Too often, leaders find that they have the fewest opportunities to be flexible in their work practices – for many, even being off-site for a few hours during the working day is impossible. The reality is that many schools lack the capacity or staffing to offer the kind of flexibility found in other occupations. Having said that, our experience is that most school leaders are striving to do as much as they can within the restrictions of the existing tools that they have.
“But we recognise that, quite often, this is going to have its limits and, moreover, may be hardest of all for the head teacher to achieve. The head teacher often feels the need to be visible on site, to be available and in the building,” he adds.
A school trying to make it work
Having said all this – and recognising the limitations they are working within – many school leaders are doing their best to introduce and embed at least some elements of flexible working into the school. One such school pioneering this approach is Charles Dickens Primary School in Southwark, south London, where head teacher Michael Eggleton (pictured) was, until March, a DfE flexible-working ‘ambassador’.
A school trying to make it work
Having said all this – and recognising the limitations they are working within – many school leaders are doing their best to introduce and embed at least some elements of flexible working into the school. One such school pioneering this approach is Charles Dickens Primary School in Southwark, south London, where head teacher Michael Eggleton (pictured) was, until March, a DfE flexible-working ‘ambassador’.
The two-form entry school, with some 500 pupils, has deliberately invested in a higher-than-average teacher-to-pupil ratio to enable flexible-working options:
Condensed hours
Flexible planning, preparation and assessment (PPA)
Flexible and part-time working
“Flexible working is not an easy one to solve in the school context. That is why, I feel, some schools have maybe shied away from it slightly. It is tough, without a doubt. What we do works for us as a school, but we do constantly have to evaluate what we have in place,” Michael explains.
One important element has been simply listening to what staff want in this context, he says. “I do regular ‘stay’ interviews with staff on a termly basis – every member of staff, from cleaners and support staff to teachers and leaders. The idea is not to rely on exit interviews to get your feedback – it is too late by then because your staff are either going or gone – to find out what you can be doing better,” Michael tells Leadership Focus.
“They’re not linked to performance management, and nothing is recorded. We talk about well-being and how people are feeling generally. How they feel things are going and what we can do to improve that. We talk about aspirations for the term and year ahead, and we discuss, in three or five years’ time, where you want to be, what you want to do and how we facilitate that.
“For those members of staff who are perhaps considering flexible working, we can start talking about that at an earlier stage – where, why and how we can possibly make that work. It is not the formality of a flexible-working request on my desk where I have ‘x’ number of days to respond, so it gives more chance to prepare for things in advance,” he adds.
“Flexible working is not an easy one to solve in the school context. That is why, I feel, some schools have maybe shied away from it slightly. It is tough, without a doubt. What we do works for us as a school, but we do constantly have to evaluate what we have in place,” Michael explains.
One important element has been simply listening to what staff want in this context, he says. “I do regular ‘stay’ interviews with staff on a termly basis – every member of staff, from cleaners and support staff to teachers and leaders. The idea is not to rely on exit interviews to get your feedback – it is too late by then because your staff are either going or gone – to find out what you can be doing better,” Michael tells Leadership Focus.
“They’re not linked to performance management, and nothing is recorded. We talk about well-being and how people are feeling generally. How they feel things are going and what we can do to improve that. We talk about aspirations for the term and year ahead, and we discuss, in three or five years’ time, where you want to be, what you want to do and how we facilitate that.
“For those members of staff who are perhaps considering flexible working, we can start talking about that at an earlier stage – where, why and how we can possibly make that work. It is not the formality of a flexible-working request on my desk where I have ‘x’ number of days to respond, so it gives more chance to prepare for things in advance,” he adds.
What flexible working looks like in practice
Flexible working in this context can mean a variety of things but, most commonly, encompasses condensed hours, being able to do PPA from home, working part-time or simply ‘flexing’ the school day. “The main flex that I have in my system is that I have some staff who will just leave at 3.30pm on some days of the week – and I am absolutely fine with that. If it’s not a continuing professional development day and we haven’t got any meetings booked, I’m not worried about that; I don’t require formal requests for that,” Michael explains.
“With other staff, we negotiate allowing them to take PPA home. At a primary level, I really don’t see this as an issue. With some staff, they can’t afford to go fully part-time, but what we can perhaps do instead is PPA from home and then perhaps half a day off unpaid. Whether or not they actually do their PPA that day is neither here nor there; they may be more likely to get it done in an evening or stay late another day to do it. Again, I am absolutely fine with that as long as the work gets done. I think that little bit of give in the system is quite good,” he adds.
One way the school has accommodated this flexibility is by deliberately having fewer teaching assistants (TAs) working across the school. While there are still TAs in specific roles – for example, supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities – there are no generalist TAs. “I’ve managed to take that saving, along with the fact I have no agency cover whatsoever – which is about £100,000 a year – and that affords me a few more teachers, which gives me that little bit of a buffer,” Michael explains, adding that he also works to keep his curriculum spending low.
“You can make adjustments quite easily but, definitely, in the school environment there are limits on what you can offer and for how long,” he concedes.
“We always try to make it clear that, whatever arrangement or flexible-working request is made, unless it is a formal, long-term contractual change, it has to be for a fixed period of time. And that’s something we have to evaluate based on the cohorts we have and whatever funding agreements we have going forward; it won’t necessarily be forever. That is fine for most staff, as long as they are aware of that and we are transparent about it.
“I think the key with flexible working is not being afraid to do it; it’s as simple as that. The benefits have always outweighed the negatives. It has enabled me to retain some incredibly talented staff which, in turn, has enabled me to do my job much better. And it has made my school much better by keeping them,” Michael adds.
What flexible working looks like in practice
Flexible working in this context can mean a variety of things but, most commonly, encompasses condensed hours, being able to do PPA from home, working part-time or simply ‘flexing’ the school day. “The main flex that I have in my system is that I have some staff who will just leave at 3.30pm on some days of the week – and I am absolutely fine with that. If it’s not a continuing professional development day and we haven’t got any meetings booked, I’m not worried about that; I don’t require formal requests for that,” Michael explains.
“With other staff, we negotiate allowing them to take PPA home. At a primary level, I really don’t see this as an issue. With some staff, they can’t afford to go fully part-time, but what we can perhaps do instead is PPA from home and then perhaps half a day off unpaid. Whether or not they actually do their PPA that day is neither here nor there; they may be more likely to get it done in an evening or stay late another day to do it. Again, I am absolutely fine with that as long as the work gets done. I think that little bit of give in the system is quite good,” he adds.
One way the school has accommodated this flexibility is by deliberately having fewer teaching assistants (TAs) working across the school. While there are still TAs in specific roles – for example, supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities – there are no generalist TAs. “I’ve managed to take that saving, along with the fact I have no agency cover whatsoever – which is about £100,000 a year – and that affords me a few more teachers, which gives me that little bit of a buffer,” Michael explains, adding that he also works to keep his curriculum spending low.
“You can make adjustments quite easily but, definitely, in the school environment there are limits on what you can offer and for how long,” he concedes.
“We always try to make it clear that, whatever arrangement or flexible-working request is made, unless it is a formal, long-term contractual change, it has to be for a fixed period of time. And that’s something we have to evaluate based on the cohorts we have and whatever funding agreements we have going forward; it won’t necessarily be forever. That is fine for most staff, as long as they are aware of that and we are transparent about it.
“I think the key with flexible working is not being afraid to do it; it’s as simple as that. The benefits have always outweighed the negatives. It has enabled me to retain some incredibly talented staff which, in turn, has enabled me to do my job much better. And it has made my school much better by keeping them,” Michael adds.
Flexibility, culture and the bigger picture
This element of simply switching the mindset from ‘no’ to ‘let’s try to make it work as best we can’ is important, agrees James. “I think, really, it is probably about bringing a mindset and a culture of flexibility into schools. That sense, as a school leader, of saying, ‘I am going to have a mindset where I am going to encourage as much flexibility as I can’ or asking, ‘Where are the opportunities here?’” he emphasises.
“For me, whether it is PPA from home, condensed hours or whatever works, it is about ‘Can we be open-minded about how this might be possible?’ and ‘What can we do?’ But also, quite rightly, as a school leader, always balancing what your staff need and would like versus the impact on pupils. Fundamentally, your job as a school leader is to secure the very best outcomes for your pupils.
“Schools, we do recognise, are competing now in a far more flexible workforce. So, we do have to think about ‘How can I add that flexibility within my school setting?’ At the same time, it would be wrong to pretend to teachers that ‘We can make your job as flexible as some other professions’,” James adds.
There is a message in here, too, for the government, especially with the changes coming in next year. “My message for the government is: don’t think flexible working is the silver bullet,” James emphasises.
“I think there is a risk of the government putting a lot of eggs in the flexible-working basket and thinking it is going to be the key to solving the recruitment and retention crisis. I think that’s naive.
“Flexible working, sure, can be part of the answer, but if we really want to solve recruitment and retention, it is about all the other stuff – pay, workload, intensity and accountability. So, NAHT’s message to the government is: absolutely, we will be helping schools to develop flexible working as much as we can, but don’t see it as the silver bullet solution unless you are prepared to fund it,” James adds in conclusion.
Flexibility, culture and the bigger picture
This element of simply switching the mindset from ‘no’ to ‘let’s try to make it work as best we can’ is important, agrees James. “I think, really, it is probably about bringing a mindset and a culture of flexibility into schools. That sense, as a school leader, of saying, ‘I am going to have a mindset where I am going to encourage as much flexibility as I can’ or asking, ‘Where are the opportunities here?’” he emphasises.
“For me, whether it is PPA from home, condensed hours or whatever works, it is about ‘Can we be open-minded about how this might be possible?’ and ‘What can we do?’ But also, quite rightly, as a school leader, always balancing what your staff need and would like versus the impact on pupils. Fundamentally, your job as a school leader is to secure the very best outcomes for your pupils.
“Schools, we do recognise, are competing now in a far more flexible workforce. So, we do have to think about ‘How can I add that flexibility within my school setting?’ At the same time, it would be wrong to pretend to teachers that ‘We can make your job as flexible as some other professions’,” James adds.
There is a message in here, too, for the government, especially with the changes coming in next year. “My message for the government is: don’t think flexible working is the silver bullet,” James emphasises.
“I think there is a risk of the government putting a lot of eggs in the flexible-working basket and thinking it is going to be the key to solving the recruitment and retention crisis. I think that’s naive.
“Flexible working, sure, can be part of the answer, but if we really want to solve recruitment and retention, it is about all the other stuff – pay, workload, intensity and accountability. So, NAHT’s message to the government is: absolutely, we will be helping schools to develop flexible working as much as we can, but don’t see it as the silver bullet solution unless you are prepared to fund it,” James adds in conclusion.
What the new guidance says
While the new ‘reasonableness test’ will not mean flexible-working requests have to be agreed to by default, it will put the onus much more firmly on schools – and school leadership – to show the request can’t be made to work.
The DfE’s guidance, too, while non-statutory, has a clear thread running through it of schools needing to show willingness – that positive mindset again – to work through the options and, ideally, make them work, rather than simply reject them out of hand.
Flexible working, in this context, will be deemed to encompass part-time working (so job shares, phased retirement and working less than full-time hours), varied hours (so staggered start, finish and break times, compressed hours and annualised hours) and ‘in-year flexibility’ (so offering personal or family days off, time in lieu and home or remote working), the DfE outlines.
While the final decision will remain with the employer, they will have to respond to a statutory flexible-working request within two months, the guidance makes clear. Whether accepting or rejecting, it is considered ‘good practice’ to discuss the request with the employee.
“Flexible-working arrangements should not be implemented as a way of addressing excessive workload,” the guidance states.
“Schools and multi-academy trusts are encouraged to consult with education trade unions to develop a flexible-working policy. This will clarify the process and ensure transparency. The policy could outline the types of arrangements available and how requests will be processed.
“Schools may find it more sustainable, in the long term, to consider flexible working on a whole-school level, rather than considering individual requests as they arise,” it adds.
This, the DfE makes clear, could include changes such as sharing with staff the best times of year to submit requests to align with the timetabling process, reviewing arrangements for when staff can work from home and looking at how PPA time is scheduled.
The guidance does, however, also identify potential challenges for employers, which (although this is not stated outright) could be used in making an argument to reject any request.
These include parental opposition (especially in the case of, for example, job shares) and the cost of making any change (with the example of having to employ two job-share partners again highlighted).
Other potential barriers to saying yes could include concerns that flexible-working arrangements could damage pupils’ attainment or pose timetabling challenges.
“Employers may be concerned that leadership roles, such as head of department or head of key stage, are too demanding for part-time roles,” the guidance emphasises, highlighting the fact that, under the Education Act 2002, maintained schools are required to have a head teacher at all times.
Any impact on the performance of the requester or the staff team will also need to be closely considered, as will the question of whether “employees will request a high number of personal or family days, which may be challenging to manage”, it states.
What the new guidance says
While the new ‘reasonableness test’ will not mean flexible-working requests have to be agreed to by default, it will put the onus much more firmly on schools – and school leadership – to show the request can’t be made to work.
The DfE’s guidance, too, while non-statutory, has a clear thread running through it of schools needing to show willingness – that positive mindset again – to work through the options and, ideally, make them work, rather than simply reject them out of hand.
Flexible working, in this context, will be deemed to encompass part-time working (so job shares, phased retirement and working less than full-time hours), varied hours (so staggered start, finish and break times, compressed hours and annualised hours) and ‘in-year flexibility’ (so offering personal or family days off, time in lieu and home or remote working), the DfE outlines.
While the final decision will remain with the employer, they will have to respond to a statutory flexible-working request within two months, the guidance makes clear. Whether accepting or rejecting, it is considered ‘good practice’ to discuss the request with the employee.
“Flexible-working arrangements should not be implemented as a way of addressing excessive workload,” the guidance states.
“Schools and multi-academy trusts are encouraged to consult with education trade unions to develop a flexible-working policy. This will clarify the process and ensure transparency. The policy could outline the types of arrangements available and how requests will be processed.
“Schools may find it more sustainable, in the long term, to consider flexible working on a whole-school level, rather than considering individual requests as they arise,” it adds.
This, the DfE makes clear, could include changes such as sharing with staff the best times of year to submit requests to align with the timetabling process, reviewing arrangements for when staff can work from home and looking at how PPA time is scheduled.
The guidance does, however, also identify potential challenges for employers, which (although this is not stated outright) could be used in making an argument to reject any request.
These include parental opposition (especially in the case of, for example, job shares) and the cost of making any change (with the example of having to employ two job-share partners again highlighted).
Other potential barriers to saying yes could include concerns that flexible-working arrangements could damage pupils’ attainment or pose timetabling challenges.
“Employers may be concerned that leadership roles, such as head of department or head of key stage, are too demanding for part-time roles,” the guidance emphasises, highlighting the fact that, under the Education Act 2002, maintained schools are required to have a head teacher at all times.
Any impact on the performance of the requester or the staff team will also need to be closely considered, as will the question of whether “employees will request a high number of personal or family days, which may be challenging to manage”, it states.
Built with Shorthand