Home > Workplace diversity > Work-life balance

WORK-LIFE BALANCE

The PS Commissioner’s Directions require agency heads to:

• put in place measures directed at ensuring that employment and workplace arrangements take appropriate account of employees who are seeking to balance individual needs and the achievement of organisational goals
• assist employees to balance their work, family and other caring responsibilities effectively by encouraging the development of mutually beneficial work practices in the agency.¹⁴

In addition, agency WDPs are required to include measures directed at ensuring that ‘workplace structures, systems and procedures assist employees in balancing their work, family and other caring responsibilities’.¹⁵

The APS Commission’s evaluation of written WDPs found that issues relevant to work, family and caring balance were included to some extent in all of the agency WDPs included in the sample for the evaluation. Nine WDPs were assessed as having extensive work and family measures (see excerpt from FaCS’s WDP at Figure 8.12); 13 as having a moderate level of measures; and two as having limited measures. Many of the WDPs had extended the concept of work and family balance to balancing work and life in general.

Overall, the WDPs demonstrate a high level of acknowledgement of employees’ desire to better balance work and other activities and responsibilities. There is clearly room for more agencies to do so. In addition, some WDPs suggest that agencies conceive of work-life balance as belonging exclusively in the realm of HR, and do not recognise the mutual benefits of measures for work-life balance. There was little evidence that the cost-benefits of work-life balance measures had been assessed by agencies in their WDPs. There was also little evidence in the written WDPs that the measures agencies have in place are in response to the demonstrated needs of the workforce or the agency.

Some of the work-life balance measures included in WDPs were:

• provision of flexible work arrangements such as flexible hours, part-time work, job sharing, or home based work
• provision of flexible leave arrangements such as maternity and paternity leave and purchased leave
• assistance with caring arrangements such as financial assistance with family care, elder care kits, the provision of a carer’s room and breast feeding facilities
• assistance with broader life-balance issues such as study assistance, ‘health weeks’ and bereavement kits
• other general support, such as employee assistance programs.

Figure 8.12: Work-life measures in FaCS’s workplace diversity program

OBJECTIVES: Everyone in FaCS is supportive of work-life balance. Work-life balance enables people at FaCS to contribute to maximum capacity.		STRATEGY: Build an organisational framework to support worklife balance.
ACTIONS: 1. Include flexible work options in certified agreement. 2. Collect and analyse data on the number of employees utilising flexible work options. 3. Provide development and support for Diversity Contact Officers and Business Support Units to disseminate information and receive inquiries on flexible work options and other work-life balance issues. 4. Assess how well flexible work options meet the needs of employees from a culturally and linguistically diverse background by a targeted survey and develop new options as needed. 5. Review flexible work option strategies through monitoring and evaluation. 6. Utilise the orientation process to promote awareness of flexible work options. 7. Utilise learning, development and awareness raising mechanisms when making any changes to flexible work option policies.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: • A range of flexible work option strategies is in place to support the development of policy and management of programs at FaCS. • An increase in the number of employees utilising flexible work option strategies. • Positive and constructive feedback is received about the implementation of flexible work option strategies.

Source: FaCS Diversity Plan 2002-2004

MATERNITY LEAVE

One of the measures that help women with young children balance their work and family responsibilities in the APS is access to maternity leave, both paid and unpaid. This measure is a key one for agencies in encouraging the retention of their female employees.

There has been an increase in the total number of women completing a period of maternity leave from 1445 in 2002—03 to 1960 in 2003—04.¹⁶ This follows a slight decrease in 2002—03, with no particular trend emerging since 2000, when the current methodology for collecting maternity leave figures was implemented in APSED. Most women combine their paid maternity leave with other forms of leave, including recreation leave and long service leave, to extend the period of paid leave before returning to work. Many also use unpaid maternity leave and other forms of unpaid leave.

The effectiveness of allowing leave to be used flexibly as a retention strategy is reflected in the return to work rates for women who have completed a period of maternity leave. Of the 1445 women who completed a period of maternity leave during 2002—03, only 162 (11.2%) had separated from the APS by 30 June 2004.

CARER RESPONSIBILITIES

The employee survey asked respondents about their caring responsibilities. Thirty-six per cent of employees said that they had carer responsibilities, a similar proportion to last year’s survey. Carers were most likely to care for children between 5—16 years old (60% of carers) followed by children under five years old (26%) and aged parents (19%). Carers were much less likely to care for disabled dependants (3%) or grandchildren 16 years or under (1%). Nine per cent of employees indicated they had other carer responsibilities. The most common ‘other’ response was dependent children over the age of 16. There was a wide variety of other responses including spouses, aged relatives other than parents, other extended family members, and people with a disability who were not directly related.

More women than men had carer responsibilities (42% compared to 30%), a change from 2003, when the rates for women and men were closer (37% and 35% respectively). Women and men had similar likelihoods of caring for children, but women were more likely to care for aged parents (23% compared to 12%).

As in 2003, Indigenous employees were more likely to have carer responsibilities than other employees (50% compared to 36%). Indigenous carers were also more likely than other carers to care for children under five (51% of Indigenous carers compared to 25% of non-Indigenous carers).

People with a disability were less likely than other employees to have carer responsibilities (29% compared to 37%). However, for those employees with a disability who did have carer responsibilities, there were no significant differences in their likelihood of having particular types of carer responsibilities.

Employees from non-English speaking backgrounds were more likely than other employees to have carer responsibilities (48% compared to 35%). There was no significant difference in their likelihood of having particular types of carer responsibilities.

Carer responsibilities were also associated with:

• employment status, with ongoing employees more likely to have carer responsibilities than non-ongoing employees (36% compared to 27%)
• working hours, with part-time employees more likely to have carer responsibilities than full-time employees (61% compared to 34%).

Most carers had only one form of carer responsibility (83%). Seventeen per cent of carers had two or more different types. Women were more likely to have more than one form of carer responsibility than men (19% compared to 14%).

Carers were asked how often over the last 12 months they had personally used leave or some other arrangement at short notice to care for those for whom they were responsible. The results are shown at Figure 8.13. Carers were most likely to take between 1—5 days of carer’s leave (or similar arrangement) (63%) with only 12% taking no such leave.

Figure 8.13: Proportion of carers reporting days used for carer’s leave or similar arrangements

Source: Employee survey

Female carers were slightly more likely than male carers to take at least some carer’s leave (91% compared to 85%). Differences for other EEO groups were not statistically significant.¹⁷

FLEXIBLE WORKING ARRANGEMENTS

A wide range of flexible working practices are used in the APS, reflecting both the needs of employees and agencies’ business needs. This was reflected in the evaluation of agencies’ written WDPs, which showed that many agencies have incorporated options for flexible working arrangements, such as home-based work, job sharing, part-time work and flexible working hours.

Data on part-time work from APSED, presented in Chapter 2, shows a substantial increase in part-time work over the last ten years (see Figure 2.6). In 2004 the proportion of ongoing staff working part-time increased again to 10.2%, compared to 9.4% in 2003. Women are much more likely to be employed part-time (16.6% of women employed as ongoing employees were working part-time compared with 2.9% of men). Female non-ongoing employees are more likely to work part-time than any other group, with over one quarter of non-ongoing women working part-time. Employee survey results show that the rate of coverage by AWAs of full-time and part-time employees is similar–13% of full-time employees, compared to 11% of part-time employees.

While there has been continual growth in part-time work, the number of non-ongoing staff fell considerably in 2003—04, by 18.1%. The share of non-ongoing staff in the APS has been falling proportionally for most of the past decade. While this is likely to largely reflect a decline in lower level and unskilled jobs, it also suggests a reduction in the range of flexible options available to employees in the APS. While there has been a general reduction in non-ongoing employees, the impact has had greater implications for women who make up almost two-thirds of non-ongoing employees, and particularly for women aged between 30—44 (38.1% of non-ongoing women are aged in this age group compared to 32.4% of non-ongoing men). The numbers of female nonongoing employees decreased by 20.4% in 2003—04 compared to 13.9% for men. A reduction in the use of non-ongoing employment could also limit flexibilities for older employees who may be interested in returning to the APS on a temporary basis to undertake particular projects.

Satisfaction with supervisor support for the use of flexible work practices

An important measure of work-life balance is whether employees are satisfied that their supervisor would support their use of flexible work practices. The APS continues to perform well against this measure. Eighty-one per cent of respondents to the employee survey were satisfied that their supervisor would support the use of flexible work practices such as flex-time, personal leave, flexible working hours, and part-time work. The result was similar in 2003. Nine per cent were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, and a further nine per cent were dissatisfied.

The strong satisfaction level in the APS is high compared to a similar survey conducted in Victoria. The Victorian Government’s People Matter Survey 2003 found that 67% of respondents agreed that their manager offered practical ways to achieve work-life balance.¹⁸

The APS employee survey results suggest that satisfaction with support for flexible work practices is related to the type of work undertaken by the employee, and the effectiveness of their supervisor’s management skills. In particular:

• APS 1—6 employees (83%) were more likely to report satisfaction than EL employees (76%), who were again more likely to report satisfaction than SES employees (62%)
• those working more than their standard or agreed number of hours were less likely to be satisfied than other employees (86% of employees working around their standard or agreed number of hours were satisfied, compared to 82% of those reporting they worked more than their standard or agreed number of hours, and 71% of employees who reported working significantly more than their standard or agreed hours were satisfied)¹⁹
• ninety per cent of employees who gave their supervisor a high rating for effectiveness in managing people, also reported satisfaction with their supervisor’s support for flexible work practices, compared to 63% of employees who rated the effectiveness of their supervisor at managing people as low.

Other factors associated with employees’ satisfaction with their supervisor’s support for flexible practices were:

• age, with the lowest satisfaction among those aged 35—44 years (79%), and the highest satisfaction among those aged 45—54 and over 55 (84%)
• sex, with women (83%) slightly more likely to report satisfaction than men (80%)
• disability status, with people with a disability less satisfied (73%) compared to other employees (82%).

There was no significant difference in the likelihood that carers or non-carers would report satisfaction with their supervisor’s support for flexible work practices. However, carers were slightly more likely to report dissatisfaction (11% compared to 8%) because of a lower ‘neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ response.

There was no relationship between satisfaction that supervisors would support the use of flexible work practices and Indigenous or NESB1 status.

The large agency with the lowest satisfaction rating had a satisfaction rating of only 51%, with other agencies more closely grouped between 70% and 90%. ABS and FaCS both had satisfaction levels significantly higher than the APS average.

Employees made a number of comments about flexible working arrangements, both positive and negative. These included:

Happy with the flexible hours and personal leave as per the current Enterprise Agreement.

One key reason for applying for the position in the [agency’s name] was the acknowledged flexibility of this agency in granting part-time work if applied for.

I am completely satisfied with my working/personal life balance.

Flex time, flexible working hours, part-time work are not available to me. Working hours are dictated by industry, not by my employer. Employer tries its hardest to accommodate my personal leave requests.

My SES is very good and accommodating with flexible work hours, however it is not a real possibility except for emergency situations as the work just keeps piling up.

As a part-time EL1 I feel pressured to work as if I'm full-time (i.e. case load). I think that it is often forgotten that the administration and training needs are the same as a full-time employee. I also feel as if I shouldn't take carer's leave as it 'looks bad'. Flex is utilised instead, even for unplanned absences.

[Work-life balance is] very hard to achieve at SES level in the APS in the positions I have held.

AVERAGE HOURS WORKED IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS

The high satisfaction rates for support for flexible working arrangements are particularly important for employees in balancing their work and outside work commitments, given that many continue to report working long hours. Fifty-eight percent of employees reported working more (40%) or significantly more (19%) than their ‘standard or agreed’ hours, or for SES employees a ‘reasonable’ number of hours, on average over the last six months. This was, however, down slightly from 2003, when 62% of employees reporting working more than standard/ agreed or reasonable hours. This reduction was because of a reduction in those reporting significantly more hours (19% compared to 23% in 2003).

Not surprisingly, the number of employees who reported working more or significantly more than their standard/ or reasonable agreed hours generally increased with classification, with EL and SES employees working longer hours than APS employees (see Figure 8.14). While the results for EL employees are slightly higher than for SES employees, this result may have been influenced by the different wording used for the question for this group.

Figure 8.14: Proportion of employees working more, or significantly more than a standard or agreed number of hours on average over the past six months

Source: Employee survey

Working more than standard/agreed or reasonable hours was associated with:

• employment status, with full-time workers more likely to work more hours (60%) than part-time workers (38%)
• job satisfaction, with workers scoring higher on the job satisfaction index less likely to work more hours than other employees (for example, of workers scoring 9—10 on the job satisfaction index, 57% worked more or significantly more than standard/agreed or reasonable hours, compared to 70% for workers scoring 1—2 on the job satisfaction index).

Carers were more likely than other employees to state that they worked significantly more than their agreed or standard hours (22% compared to 17%).

There was a wide variation among large agencies in the proportion of employees reporting that they had worked significantly more than their standard or agreed hours. The result ranged from a low of 10% to a high of 52%.

Comments by employees on the subject of long hours included:

Although unreasonably long and irregular hours are an inevitable feature of the type of job I currently hold, I am happy to do them at my stage of life and career.

I often work more than standard number of hours, but use flex time to compensate. I find it a satisfactory arrangement.

It is an accepted fact that working in the [agency name] entails high workloads. In general, [agency name] staff accept this and do their best.

My department does not offer flex time and expects many people to work many more hours than the agreed hours, especially around budget time. Time off in lieu (if they receive it) is barely adequate for the extra hours that they work.

14 Clauses 2.11(1) and 3.2(2), PS Commissioner’s Directions.

15 Clause 3.3(b), PS Commissioner’s Directions.

16 APSED records both the maternity leave start date and the maternity leave completion date. The financial year of completion is often not the same as the financial year in which the maternity leave was started. The date of completion was chosen as there is less chance of underestimating the number of women who then chose to separate from the APS.

17 In this context the results were not statistically significant at the 95% Confidence Interval (see Appendix 2 for more information on confidence intervals).

18 See <http://www.ope.vic.gov.au>. Caution should be exercised in comparing the results because of the differences in wording of the questions, and differences in methodologies between the two surveys.

19 SES employees were asked to report on whether they had worked more than ‘a reasonable number of hours’.