Flexible working request: answering one without creating a precedent you regret

A flexible working request is an employee asking to change when, where or how much they work — compressed hours, a shift in start time, two days at home, a reduction from five days to four. In a growing number of jurisdictions this is not a favour you grant but a statutory process with a deadline, a defined list of business reasons for refusal and a right to appeal. Employers who treat it as an informal chat tend to discover the formality only when the answer is no.

What a flexible working request should contain

• The change asked for, stated precisely — which days, which hours, from when, and whether it is permanent or for a fixed period.
• The date the request was made, because the clock for your answer starts there.
• The employee’s view of the effect on the work, and any suggestion for handling it.
• Whether they have made a previous request, and when.
• Whether the request relates to a disability, caring responsibility or religious observance — not as a hurdle, but because a duty to make reasonable adjustments may run alongside the flexible working rules and is a stronger obligation.

Deciding it properly

1. Acknowledge in writing immediately, with the date by which you will answer.
2. Meet the employee unless you are simply agreeing — a conversation surfaces variants that a form does not.
3. Test the request against the work, not against the person. The question is whether the pattern can be covered, not whether this individual deserves it.
4. Consider a trial period where you are unsure. It is the most useful tool in the process and the most underused.
5. If refusing, give the actual business reason from the permitted list, in writing, with the facts behind it.
6. Offer an appeal, and hear it with someone who was not the original decision-maker.

Consistency is the exposure. Two similar requests answered differently, with nothing on file explaining why, is the shape of a discrimination claim — particularly where one requester has caring responsibilities or a disability and the other does not. The defence is a record of what was tested, not a memory of good intentions.

What to write down, and why

• The request as received, unedited.
• What was considered: coverage, customer hours, the effect on colleagues, whether a trial was possible.
• The decision, the reason and the date, against the statutory deadline.
• The outcome of any trial, with what was actually measured rather than an impression.
• Where granted, whether the change varies the employment contract permanently or temporarily — this is the detail most often left ambiguous and most often disputed later.

Where the request lives

Ettex Forms gives the request a consistent shape — the change, the dates, the proposed handling — so every request arrives with the same information and the response clock is visible from the moment it lands. The decision and reasoning attach to the same record, which is what makes a set of requests reviewable side by side rather than one at a time. Ettex is not an HR advisory service and cannot tell you whether a refusal is lawful; the statutory deadlines and permitted reasons differ by country and you should check yours.

Where requests to work partly from home become the norm rather than the exception, answering them one at a time stops making sense. A hybrid work policy sets the default — which days, what notice, what is expected of managers — so that individual statutory requests become the exception they were meant to be.