"How does giving your staff the day off fit in with Labour’s avowed intention of raising productivity and growth?" asks Kelvin Mackenzie
Frankly, I could hardly believe my ears. There was a head teacher calmly explaining to a none too inquisitive presenter on Radio Four’s Today programme why he was putting his staff on a nine-day fortnight where they didn’t have to come to work and could either catch up on school stuff or put their feet up.
It would be up to them. You can be sure they would make the latter choice. And they wouldn’t have to sacrifice a day’s money. Who wouldn’t want that deal?
He explained he was giving the teachers the day off as there was a problem in the Dixon Academy Trust (11 secondary schools in Bradford, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester) in retaining staff, specifically mums in their 30s, and he thought this would make keeping them easier.
I suspect it’s only a matter of time before this idea spreads to other state industries. Train drivers would probably head the queue, civil servants are already there, women doctors wouldn’t dream of doing a three-day week (treating sick patients all day makes you ill!!) and you can be certain traffic wardens will be demanding we bring our cars round to their homes to be checked.
I don’t doubt being a teacher has its trials and tribulations but so does all kinds of work. But they do receive 13 weeks of holidays, which fits family time fabulously, plus there’s no shift work and no weekend work.
And what happens to the running of the school with 10 per cent of the staff missing over time? Since the number of pupils remains the same, I presume the Academy will have to bring in freelancers. There is a cost and you, the taxpayer will be sent the bill.
The reality is that teachers work 39 weeks a year. If they are to get an extra holiday day ( that’s what it really is) every fortnight then over a year they will be receiving another 19.5 days off. That is four extra weeks' holiday. Fully paid. Has anybody thought this through?
How does giving your staff the day off fit in with Labour’s avowed intention of raising productivity and growth? In order to produce more, you have to be at work. Even the National Education Union would agree with that. Or would they?
What is becoming clear is that Starmer’s plan is to allow more and more of the state to WFH and then over time throw in the four-day week believing not unreasonably that the SIDS (Skint, Idle, Dim, Socialists) would vote for them in 2029.
What happens when it becomes clear that if you WFH you do less? So, the bosses turn to the staff and say you all have to come back in. And the staff simply refuse saying they are better off because they no longer have to spend £2,500 a year commuting and can save a fortune on child care.
Plus, they are thinking of moving to Herefordshire where you can buy a detached house for fourpence.
There’s a front-page story in The Times this morning saying ministers are quietly ignoring rules requiring civil servants to be in the office three days a week, saying they have no interest in policing home working.
Business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, who has no background in business having worked for the council and been an assistant to an MP before turning his hand to politics, claimed flexible working would boost productivity and make staff more loyal to their employers.
He may be right, but suppose he’s wrong and productivity goes down because of this experiment. How would we put it right?
What I don’t like is that there appears to be no measurement. Stats on the occupancy of Whitehall departments which were published regularly by the Tories have been halted and there are no plans to resume.
While the state is going in one direction, Amazon, a huge commercial success is going in another. It has ordered all its white-collar staff to go back to five-day working. Also, hot desking is over at Amazon.
Certainly, if I had to back one organisation over another, I would put Amazon miles ahead of either Socialists, teachers or civil servants.
I forecast an atrocious ride under Labour before they are thrown out with the same swing which brought them in. Let’s hope there is a nation worth saving at the end of the experiment.
