Flexible Working (Quality of Life) Bill - Clause 1

The amendment seeks to prevent employers from defaulting to 'no' without engaging in proper discussion with employees, ensuring consistency across organisations. It also allows for a second statutory flexible working request within 12 months to accommodate changing circumstances and reduces the response time to two months to facilitate quicker adjustments. The amendment aims to remove the requirement for employees to explain potential effects on employers, making it more accessible to those who may not have extensive experience or strong articulation skills.

Asked Yasmin Qureshi to clarify the meaning of 'consult' in the legislation and its implications for employers, seeking details on whether it involves a conversation or a formal meeting.

Supports the Bill, citing its importance beyond politics and party lines. Argues that flexible working became more important during the pandemic due to technology advancements. Emphasises the need for open dialogue between employers and employees regarding flexible work requests. Supports reducing the decision period from three months to two months to reduce undue delay for employees. Also supports removing the requirement for employees to explain the impact of their request on the employer, as it can be challenging for some workers.

Observed a one-minute silence to mark the anniversary of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Did not contribute to the debate on the amendment/clause.

Supports the Bill, emphasising its role in modernizing working regulations and aligning with Conservative values of free markets. Points out that 45% of employers report having 'hard to fill' vacancies, indicating a need for flexible work arrangements to attract talent. Supports reducing the decision period from three months to two months and requiring proper engagement before rejecting requests. Argues that this helps find mutually beneficial arrangements between employers and employees.

Mr Bell supports the Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Bill, highlighting its sensible and proportionate changes that reflect the modern workplace. He emphasises the need for flexibility to accommodate constituents with complex lives such as single parents or those with caring responsibilities. Mr Bell also notes the importance of retaining older workers in the workforce due to their wisdom and experience which can boost productivity. He supports the day one right introduced by the Bill, stating that it enables employees to move between employers without feeling tied down to a specific arrangement.

James Daly supports the Bill, acknowledging the deficiencies in the current system and highlighting the importance of flexible working for individuals with autism. He praises the efforts to improve access to the labour market for those on the autistic spectrum but also raises concerns about the impact of removing a significant portion of the workforce from urban centres during the pandemic. Daly emphasises the need for flexibility to support excluded workers while recognising that certain sectors and small businesses may require employees to be physically present in an office due to productivity and business needs. He agrees with the principle that the law should not impose unrealistic requirements on employers who cannot afford flexible working arrangements.

Supports the Bill but raises concerns about creating a two-tier system, where higher-income workers have more flexibility than lower-wage earners. Emphasises the need for apprentices to learn from experienced colleagues and highlights the benefits for disabled workers who require workplace flexibility. Jo Gideon mentions that 52.3% of disabled people are employed compared with 82% of the general population, and believes this legislation will be helpful in increasing employment opportunities for disabled individuals.

Supports flexible working but warns against over-reliance on remote technology. Emphasises the need for a balance to ensure career development and business continuity, particularly regarding childcare needs and local businesses. Highlights productivity issues in processing driving licences during the pandemic as an example where remote working was not feasible.

Congratulates Yasmin Qureshi on her Bill and shares his own experience with flexible working during the pandemic. Mentions that more than three-quarters of those surveyed in Buckinghamshire found the transition to remote working simple, demonstrating its feasibility. Emphasises the need for transparency in the working environment through consultation between employees and employers, ensuring a balance beneficial to both parties. Highlights the Bill's provision allowing two flexible working requests within 12 months and reducing the deadline for employer decision from three to two months. Discusses how flexible working can help remove barriers such as high-cost accommodation and overcrowded trains, while also considering broader impacts like reduced footfall in town centres. Supports the societal benefits of flexible working, including retaining experienced workers and enabling parents to spend more time with their children.

Ms Hopkins supports the Bill, arguing that it will help many people balance work with caring responsibilities. She highlights statistics showing a significant gap in employment flexibility affecting women more than men, leading to reduced pension entitlements and barriers to career progression. She also mentions that one-third of flexible working requests are turned down, impacting those responsible for family members. Hopkins believes the Bill is a step towards breaking down workplace barriers but calls for greater protections, advocating for flexible working as an employment right from day one.

Mr Daly questions whether Labour’s stance would be enforceable in small businesses due to financial constraints. He is concerned about the implications of legislative requirements on flexibility in business operations.

Mr Bacon expresses confusion over Labour's position, suggesting that it seems identical to what the Bill seeks to achieve. He questions the necessity of further legislative intervention if the current bill adequately addresses employers' flexibility.

Ms Gideon expresses scepticism about Labour's assumption that businesses do not have their employees' interests at heart, questioning the need for enforced flexibility if it is already a priority in many organisations.

He emphasised that this Bill supports a diverse range of work arrangements, which can be key in retaining people and keeping them productive. He cited the post-implementation review of the Flexible Working Regulations 2014 finding improvements in staff motivation and employee relations due to flexible working. Additionally, he noted reduced absenteeism and lower staff turnover as benefits alongside potential economic growth opportunities unlocked through flexibility.

[INTERVENTION] Mr. Smith emphasised the importance of ensuring all employers are aware of working parents' needs so that businesses can gain their skillsets through flexible hours, benefiting both enterprises and the wider economy.

While not explicitly stating a position on the bill or any amendments, Nigel Evans congratulated Yasmin Qureshi for her work.