Elouisa Crichton ( pictured ) is an employment law partner at Dentons. More input from managing development process development attorney Tracey Summerell and construction law partners Akin Akinbode and Mark Macaulay
As an improvement to existing right to ask versatile working, the government recently announced plans to grant employees the right to demand a four-day working year.
There are eight predetermined company reasons an company may decline a request, which the majority of construction companies would likely think they had defend.
The proposals assume workers will work ( and be paid ) for full-time hours ( or at least full-time output ), compressing the work into four, rather than the standard five, working days.
In the construction sector, the length of a stored year is highly dependent on the kind of job being done.
Architects and engineers, for example, could possibly perform their roles across four pressed days ( and in fact some now do ), without any significant disruption.
A stored four-day week would probably be more difficult for those performing manual occupations on site because the job requires being present on the construction site.
Four-day weeks may be appropriate if the market wants to attract talent in a field that is currently experiencing ability and labor shortages.
How versatile is design?
In the UK, all people already have the right to request versatile functioning. The assumption that such demands will be granted is what is changing.
A study from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors for 2021 revealed the mostly positive outcomes of pilot projects for flexible working in design.
In recent years, some of the world’s leading design firms have also implemented flexible working practices.
However, empirical evidence points to the lack of common flexibility in the sector and the general skepticism of development professionals regarding the viability of a four-day week.
There are legitimate reasons for these doubts, not the least of which is that the construction sector operates on constrained margins and tight timelines, making it particularly sensitive to changes that might affect its price construction.
For example, a one week absence from a four-day more than five-day month has a far greater impact in terms of time lost. Additionally, contractors will be unwilling to reduce the number of time available to get the build back on track or paid the increased extra that comes with compressed times if a job is hampered by wind or other factors.
Additionally, guide construction jobs are actually demanding, which raises questions about the safety and well-being of staff members who work long shifts every day.
Many construction projects may include requirements imposed on the construction, such as time limits on noise levels. This may restrict the ability to work longer days.
Scheduling overlaps between various contractors and various construction stages would also be more challenging on a four-day working week schedule, especially if not all companies agreed to the same working schedules.
Are design firms required to offer four-day workweeks?
The government has stated that it will make accommodating employment the norm for all employees, excluding situations where it is” not reasonably possible.”
This might think that building companies would need to provide compelling evidence before rejecting a demand.
Most development companies would likely think they could defend their position by eight prescribed company reasons why an employer may decline a request.
These include additional costs, the inability to reorganize work among the existing staff, the negative effects on quality, the ability to meet customer demand, the inability to hire more staff, the negative effects on performance, insufficiency of work during times when employees propose to operate, and planned structural changes.
Businesses have a two-month glass to respond to requests, but they are not required to accept them. However, they may demand the individual before refusing.
Ensuring impartiality
Construction companies must be mindful of maintaining justice when choosing to allow for more freedom in working patterns.
If more experienced, very paid jobs lend themselves to flexible working more readily than lower-skilled, manual occupations, widening the gap between working conditions and possibly opening up employment opportunities for construction employers to tribunal claims.
Construction employers will have to take into account flexible working patterns carefully because they may get more requests to acquire new ways of working in the future.
