A request to work from home two days a week, change start times around school hours or compress a five-day week can look straightforward. It can, however, affect staffing, service delivery, pay, childcare arrangements and workplace relationships. Flexible working is therefore an area where clear communication and a legally sound process matter for both employees and employers.
For employees, the key question is often whether an employer can say no. For employers, it is how to assess a request fairly without creating unnecessary legal or employee-relations risk. The answer depends on the role, the evidence available and the way the request is handled.
What flexible working means
Flexible working describes a change to when, where or how someone works. It is wider than homeworking. Common arrangements include part-time hours, job shares, term-time working, flexitime, staggered hours, compressed hours and working from home for some or all of the week.
Some arrangements are permanent changes to the employment contract. Others may be agreed as a time-limited trial or an informal arrangement. That distinction should not be overlooked. A manager who agrees a new working pattern casually may still create expectations that are difficult to reverse later.
The appropriate arrangement will depend on the job. A customer-facing role with fixed opening hours presents different issues from a project-based role that can be performed remotely. Fairness does not always mean every employee receives the same arrangement. It means requests are considered consistently, objectively and with proper regard to the circumstances.
The statutory right to request flexible working
In Great Britain, employees have the right to request flexible working from the first day of employment. This is a right to make a request, not an automatic right to have the requested arrangement approved.
An employee may make up to two statutory flexible working requests in any 12-month period. The request should be made in writing, state that it is a flexible working request and set out the date it is made. Employees no longer have to explain the likely effect of the change on the employer or suggest how any impact could be managed, although providing practical detail can still assist constructive discussion.
An employer must deal with a request reasonably, consult with the employee before rejecting it, and reach a decision within two months of receiving the request, unless a longer period is agreed. The Acas Code of Practice provides useful guidance on what a fair process should look like, including meaningful consultation and an opportunity to appeal.
Employers may refuse a statutory request only for one or more recognised business reasons. These include the burden of additional costs, a detrimental effect on ability to meet customer demand, an inability to reorganise work among existing staff, an inability to recruit additional staff, a detrimental impact on quality or performance, insufficient work during the proposed working periods, and planned structural changes.
A refusal should identify the relevant reason and explain how it applies to the employee’s role. Generic wording or a bare statement that homeworking is unsuitable can leave an employer exposed to challenge.
How employees can make a stronger request
A well-prepared request gives an employer enough information to assess the proposal without forcing them to make assumptions. It can help to explain the proposed pattern, start date, whether the change is intended to be permanent, and how key responsibilities would continue to be covered.
This is not about proving that a request causes no inconvenience. Most workplace changes involve some adjustment. It is about showing that the proposal has been thought through. For example, an employee seeking compressed hours could address meeting availability and handovers. Someone requesting homeworking could explain how client contact, supervision and confidential information would be managed.
Employees should also be clear about whether an informal solution might meet their needs. A temporary arrangement, a phased return, or a trial period may sometimes be more realistic than an immediate contractual change. Where a request relates to childcare, disability, pregnancy, religion or another protected characteristic, the employee should consider whether this should be raised. It may be relevant to the employer’s legal duties.
Keep copies of the request, meeting notes, outcome letter and any emails. If a dispute arises, a clear record of what was requested and discussed will be valuable.
Handling flexible working requests fairly as an employer
A compliant process is not simply an administrative exercise. It is an opportunity to understand what is needed, test workable options and make a decision that can be properly explained.
Employers should acknowledge a request promptly and arrange a discussion with the employee. The discussion should cover the proposed arrangement, operational concerns and possible alternatives. If the exact request cannot work, a different pattern, temporary trial or partial homeworking arrangement may provide a practical solution.
Decision-makers should assess evidence rather than rely on assumptions. If there is concern about customer coverage, workload, performance or supervision, identify the specific issue. Consider whether it could be addressed through rota changes, clear availability requirements, technology or a trial period. A trial is not compulsory, and it may not suit every role, but it can be a sensible way to test a proposal where the concern is uncertain rather than established.
Consistency is essential, but it should not become rigid uniformity. Previous arrangements can be relevant, yet each request must be considered on its own facts. A different decision may be justified where roles, team capacity, personal circumstances or the evidence of operational impact differ. The reasons should be recorded.
When refusal can create legal risk
A refusal of flexible working is not automatically unlawful. However, risk increases where the employer has not followed the statutory process, has relied on a reason that does not fit the facts, or has failed to engage with alternatives.
An employee may bring a tribunal claim where an employer has failed to deal with a statutory request in a reasonable manner, wrongly treated it as withdrawn, rejected it for an impermissible reason, or based its decision on incorrect facts. Tribunal compensation for a statutory flexible working claim is limited, but the wider consequences can be more significant.
Flexible working decisions can also give rise to discrimination claims. A requirement to work full-time, at particular times or solely from the workplace may place people with certain protected characteristics at a disadvantage. For instance, women may be disproportionately affected by an inflexible working pattern because they continue, in many cases, to bear greater childcare responsibilities. Disabled employees may need changes to hours, location or working arrangements as a reasonable adjustment.
These claims are fact-sensitive. Employers do not have to accept every request, but they may need to show that a requirement is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate business aim. This involves more than saying that a particular arrangement is preferred. It requires a careful assessment of the business need and whether a less discriminatory option was reasonably available.
Contract changes, pay and practical safeguards
When a flexible working request is accepted, the outcome should be confirmed in writing. The written terms should state the new hours, place of work, pay where relevant, start date, review arrangements and whether the change is permanent or temporary.
Reducing hours will usually reduce pay, although this should never be assumed without checking the proposed agreement and contractual terms. Changes may also affect holiday entitlement, pension contributions, bonus arrangements, benefits and overtime. Employees should understand those consequences before agreeing to a new pattern.
For remote or hybrid arrangements, employers should also consider health and safety, data protection, equipment, expenses, supervision and wellbeing. A workable policy sets clear expectations on availability, attendance, homeworking standards and how performance will be managed. It should support managers to make sound decisions rather than replace individual judgement.
If a request is refused or the process breaks down
Employees should first ask for clear written reasons and consider using any appeal process offered. An appeal can address missing information, challenge factual assumptions or put forward a workable alternative. Raising a grievance may be appropriate where there are broader concerns about discrimination, inconsistent treatment or the conduct of the decision-maker.
Employers should seek advice early where a request has potential discrimination implications, where there is a disagreement about a contractual change, or where a refusal is likely to lead to formal action. A considered response at the outset is usually less costly and disruptive than defending a dispute later.
Flexible working works best when neither side treats it as a favour or a demand. A clear proposal, an honest discussion about the role and a decision grounded in evidence can protect workplace relationships while giving both parties confidence about what happens next.