Work-Life balance in Emirates Group - Essay Example

?Work-Life Balance in Emirates Group Introduction This report explores the adoption of work-life balance provisions as an integral feature of the Human Resources (HR) policies of the Emirates Group. The term work-life balance (WLB) is simply defined by Kumar and Chakraborty (2013) as equilibrium between work and non-work schedules. This implies a point of equipoise or stability between two equally demanding things – in this case, work life and family life. People have a natural inclination to seek challenge and achievement as much as the desire to enjoy family relationships and the leisurely company of other people they have an affinity for. WLB is now considered as one of the most important qualities of the workplace, second only to the pay rate, because the physical and psychological stability of workers and employees directly impact on the performance of business firms. The usefulness of WLB in enhancing the operations of firms has been the topic of many academic researches, with varying outcomes. WLB has been known to impact positively on workers’ levels of job satisfaction and morale, reduce stress in both work and family life, enhanced organisational efficiency and effectiveness, and reduction in problems experienced in both areas (Kumar & Chakraborty, 2013). As beneficial as WLB sounds, the practice, while gaining legitimacy as a general principle, has received less than enthusiastic response at the execution level. WLB has not been effectively implemented in many organisations; the causes were determined in a survey conducted by Kumar & Chakraborty (2013), some of which are as follows: Negative or indifferent attitude on the part of top management Lack of faith of supervisors in the effectiveness of WLB benefits Uncertainty and reluctance among employees in adopting WLB in their work schedules Stringent work schedules Dictatorial behaviour of supervisors and top management, and their refusal to plan out flexible work schedules Unavailability and inaccessibility of WLB tools and techniques for workers to implement flexible work schedules. Unsupportive organisational culture for the implementation of WLB Bureaucratic procedures and delay in the formulation and execution of WLB policies and practices. Poor structural framework of the planned WLB programme Inconsistency in infrequency of interaction between management and workers in order to assimilate WLB as a transformative element in organisational life. The foregoing enumeration of impediments to what should be an effortless adoption of WLB is evident in many companies, and will likely continue to pose obstacles to its implementation. According to Smith (2010), however, each succeeding generation of workers tend to come to a greater understanding and acceptance of WLB, thus as they advance in the organization into the supervisory and managerial levels it is expected that the attitude of management towards WLB will also eventually change. So far, what has not appeared to be evident to management is the strategic usefulness of WLB as a competitive advantage, in terms of improved quality of work, improved job performance, ethical decision-making and long-term job satisfaction (Smith, 2010). Four areas for flexible work or leave arrangements Industrial Relations Victoria (IRV), a government sub-unit under the Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development, is tasked with monitoring industrial relations in the State’s public and private sectors, and with supporting innovations to address the increasingly competitive business environments without engendering additional industrial (IRV, 2013). According to the IRV, a compilation of the research of several government agencies have identified 27 model family friendly clauses that were directly included in various collective agreements. The 27 clauses (which represented the best practices in the industry) may be classified into four based on their nature and subject. They are as follows Services – This refers to the provision of service options by the employer organisation for the benefit of their employees. Four practices/ clauses are classified under Services: Child access to the workplace, wherein employees are allowed to bring their children to the workplace when other options are impractical; Employer-sponsored childcare, wherein organisations provide for and administer childcare facilities where children of employees may be entrusted during the course of the working day; or those options where organisations subsidises the care of employees’ children. Prioritised or reserved childcare places, in lieu of funding childcare facilities, may be contracted by the organization with a childcare provider for a pre-arranged number of children of its employees After hours dependent care may be provided for in the form of reimbursement for any additional expenses incurred by the employee for the care of a dependent when the employee is required to attend work, training, or meetings beyond normal work hours (IRV, 2013). Leave – The provisions here are intended beyond the legal entitlement of employees to a number of days of paid leave in a year (for the Australian Fair Pay and Conditions Standard, or AFPCS, ten days are allowed for personal leave including sick and carer’s leave; in other countries, the number of days may be more or less than ten). Beyond what has been mandated by law, organisations have given leave for additional purposes including the following: Annual leave provided in single days Antenatal or pre-adoption leave, to enable pregnant women and their partners to attend the routine pregnancy-related medical visits or pre-adoption appointments In vitro fertilisation leave, for routine IVF-related medical visits Cultural or ceremonial leave, which may be paid or unpaid, to allow an employee to take part in their community’s cultural or religious activities that may coincide with his work hours Compassionate (bereavement) leave, in the form of paid leave from work after the death or serious or sudden incapacity of a family member Exceptional circumstances leave, which is usually an unpaid leave for employees to cope with extraordinary circumstances or events in their family life Parental leave, which includes paid or unpaid leaves for maternity or paternity, adoption, foster care, child rearing, permanent care order; this is beyond the 12-month unpaid leave mandated by law Purchased leave variations, allowing an employee to purchase additional leaves within the year Work environment – These clauses provide for space in the workplace to help employees meet their needs to care for their family members. These are comprised of: Carers’ room Early closing, just before significant community or cultural events like Christmas Lactation breaks and facilities for nursing mothers Telephone access for family related calls Flexible work options – These clauses are additional measures that allow for flexibility in work arrangements for employees to better realize work and family balance, such as: Flexible working hours, allowing employees to flexibly begin and end work within an agreed upon range, provided they comply with a fixed number of hours in a day or a week Job share is a form of permanent part-time work, allowing work responsibilities, as well as hours, pay, and benefits equivalent to one full-time job, to be shared by two employees Keep in touch program where employees on extended leave could remain connected to their workplace, thus reintegrating more quickly upon their return Part-time work is for employees who work for fewer hours and receive a pro-rata amount of benefits than that received by full-time employees Self-rostering or employee choice rostering, enables employees, in consultation with management and within set guidelines, to take responsibility for designating shift arrangements Telecommuting (i.e. home-based work), pertaining to a formal, regular and ongoing arrangement where employees perform their customary functions away from the regular workplace (IRV, 2013). The foregoing clauses provide the options from which the FWB for each of the representative work groups may be fashioned, with the goal of enhancing company productivity, addressing people’s worries and stresses about family and community, and creating a favourable work environment for all. Prior to applying the foregoing clauses to the particular needs of the organisation, it is best to know the organisation first and the specific needs of its groups of employees. The next section will describe the company The Emirates Group The organisation which shall be analysed is the Emirates Group Companies, a Dubai-based international air carrier with revenues of US$18.4 billion. The Group is comprised of dnata, arguably the largest global air service provider, and the award winning international carrier, Emirates Airline. It flies to more than 125 destinations in 6 continents with a fleet of 180 modern wide-bodied aircraft. Emirates employs more than 50,000 employees, comprised of more than 160 nationalities which allows the firm the competitive advantage of a diverse workforce. Already, Emirates employees receive a tax-free salary and an impressive benefits package, and are provided professional development opportunities. The huge workforce manning the Emirates include many expert, technically proficient and highly skilled personnel who perform complex work and, therefore, deserve and want some support by way of work and family balance. This holds true particularly for those employees who travel constantly or have to work 24-hour shifts to get people and cargo to their destinations. Representative Work Groups in the Emirates Group The Emirates Group website names more than twenty careers into which it categorizes the vital functions and services required in running its operations. For the purpose of this analysis, the careers shall be categorized into three representative groups, based on the degree to which the hours worked conform to the convention of a regular working day, the relative safety of the nature of the job, the regularity of the venue, and the implications of these on the home and family life of the individual employee. Based on these criteria, the representative groups may be divided into (1) pilots and inflight service personnel; (2) ground crew and airport service personnel; and (3) administration and office staff personnel. Each of these groups are comprised as follows: (Emirates Group, 2013): Group 1: Pilots and inflight service personnel This representative group has the greatest exposure of the three to the perils of flight and the irregularity of working hours compared to the notion of the regular working day – that is, people who perform these functions do not expect to go to work from 8 or 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and clock in eight hours a day every day in the work week. They are in the aircraft for the duration of the trip to and from destination sites, and for that duration they are physically removed from any fixed base or location (i.e., the denotation of home vis-a-vis workplace is of no relevance to their working situation). They expect to be inaccessible to their families and homes for long stretches of time, and would therefore naturally have made more permanent arrangements for a carer for their dependents. Leaving work temporarily for cultural events or to meet an emergency is out of the question due to their physical separation from these events. On the other hand, in between flights there is the expectation that they would have more liberal use of their time while they are at home base or at the destination prior to the flight back. This group includes: Pilots Cabin Crew Jobs Service Delivery (backroom support to cabin crew) Inflight Catering and Retail Group 2: Ground crew and airport service personnel This representative group is located at the airport or in airport-related or adjacent areas, because their functions are intrinsically linked with the actual flight service and their services are targeted at the flight passengers and the implements or equipment involved in the flight. Their places of work are therefore at or close to the take-off and arrival points, and their hours of work are demanded by the flight schedules which, due to delays and contingencies, may be expected to be irregular. Since their functions are grounded and their hours, while irregular, may be regularised by designating shift schedules, these personnel have a reasonable expectation to be at home with their families are relatively regular intervals, and may be expected to have care responsibilities towards their dependents. They may also have reasonable expectations to attend cultural affairs or respond to emergency events related to their families. These employees include those designated to perform: Flight operations Airport Operations and Services Cargo dNata Travel Services Engineering Information Technology Group security Leisure & Tourism Group 3: Administration and office staff personnel Finally, this is the group who may be categorized as regular office workers in the conventional sense. Their work venue is the office, whether the main office or a secondary office, and the environment is one that is comparatively safe and predictable. Work is structured and working hours are also regular. Save for the occasional overtime, working conditions would allow for these staff to have commitments to their family to be present at regular times, and to be responsible for the care of dependents (i.e. children, senior family members, and physically or mentally disabled members), such that contingencies at work that extend beyond regular work schedules and venues could easily interfere with these commitments to family. Unlike ground crew and airport service personnel (Group 2), Group 3 personnel for the most part perform jobs wherein contingencies and emergencies are rare, and workers would normally expect to work eight hours per day, and plan on it. These employees fall within this representative group: Planning and Research Commercial Finance, Accounts and Audit Procurement and Logistics Corporate Communications Human Services Corporate Services Health Services Training Legal On the basis of this categorization and their implications upon the employees’ relation to their family and home life, the WLB clauses are assessed in the following discussion. Flexible work or leave arrangements Group 1: Pilots and inflight service personnel 1. Clauses applicable Services – None; due to the length and irregularity of work hours, the worker may be expected to make his/her own permanent arrangements for the care of dependents Leave – None, aside from the regularly schedule leave and paternity/maternity leave. Scheduled flight duties may be traded between co-employees performing the same function if contingencies call for it. Work environment – None Flexible working options – None; flights follow a strict schedule, while in-between flight hours are already necessarily liberal towards the employee. 2. Cost-benefit considerations There is barely need for cost-benefit estimates because WLB clauses based on contingencies. seldom apply to flight personnel, who are expected to be regularly inaccessible to their families and would have made more permanent arrangement. The added personal encumbrance should be imputed in terms of a much higher regular pay range for these employees, for the overall higher risk and commitments to the job. Group 2: Ground crew and airport service personnel 1. Clauses applicable Services – None; children cannot be physically accommodated in the work environment. If any, subsidies for services may be accommodated on a case to case basis. Leaves – All clauses are applicable. The employees may reasonably be expected to have regular commitments to their families which may coincide with working hours. Work environment – Some clauses are applicable but some are not, depending upon the specific circumstances of the job. As a rule, ground crew and airport service jobs are real-time and customer-directed, and as such are not consistent with allowing family members to be in the premises. Flexible work option – Generally not applicable except for self-rostering in arranging for shift assignments with the knowledge and consent of the supervisor. 2. Cost-benefit considerations The applicable clauses would fall within personal leaves and therefore the enjoyment thereof (i.e., except for parental and compassionate leaves) can be made contingent upon the quality of performance of the individual worker seeking the leave, and subject to limits, that would ascertain that costs to the company (i.e., of hiring a substitute) would be less than the benefit of maintaining the person based on merits. Group 3: Administration and office staff personnel 1. Clauses applicable Since this representative group is no different from conventional office workers, all clauses in the IRV list are considered applicable, and therefore cost-benefit estimates will have the greatest relevance to this representative group. 2. Cost-benefit estimates Increased spending in WLB must be viewed in terms of the cost to the company and the mutual benefit realized to both the company and employees. Employee productivity for the airline, in terms of revenue per employee, increased by 19.1% to AED 1.7 million AED (UAE Dirham), which amounts to approximately 463,000 USD. Capacity per airline employee rose by 6.5% to ATKM (available tonne kilometre) 1,059 thousand, and load carried per airline employee increased by 9.8% to RTKM (revenue tonne kilometre) 730 thousand (Emirates Group Annual Report 2011). As for costs, the employee costs in the Emirates in terms of AED is about half (varying between 49.6% to 58.4%) of all total operating costs (inclusive of salaries and wages, mandatory benefits, etc.), making employee costs the largest single component of operating costs. Because employees are so highly valued to the company, all other things being equal, the slight additional cost associated with WLB considerations would well justify the retention of each single employee. The size of the workforce continues to grow, and since WLB adoption would be impacting more seriously on the “other” employees (see table below), the additional measures will be relatively minor compared to the revenues earned by each employee for the company, and the load her/she carries. The cost of finding and retraining a replacement, as well as lost revenues that would attend the separation of skilled personnel, would further give justification to the adoption of WLB practices in Emirates. Emirates average number of employees Source: Emirates Annual Report for 2010-2011, p. 46 References ‘Industrial relations Victoria’ (2013) ACCC transition website. Available at: http://transition.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/593290/fro... [Accessed 10 April 2013] Emirates Group (2013) ‘Explore our Careers – Employee Benefits’. Available at: https://www.emiratesgroupcareers.com/english/Careers_Overview/opportunities/emp_benefits.aspx [Accessed 10 April 2013] Emirates Group Annual Report 2011. Available at company website. Green, C., Kler, P., & Leeves, G. (2010). Flexible Contract Workers in Inferior Jobs: Reappraising the Evidence. British Journal Of Industrial Relations, 48(3), 605-629. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8543.2009.00742.x Hayman, J. R. (2009). Flexible work arrangements: exploring the linkages between perceived usability of flexible work schedules and work/life balance. Community, Work & Family, 12(3), 327-338. doi:10.1080/13668800902966331 Kroll, K. M. (2009). Flexible Work Arrangements Can Work. Rural Telecom, 28(5), 20-25. Kumar, H., & Chakraborty, S. (2013). Work Life Balance (WLB): A Key to Organizational Efficacy. Aweshkar Research Journal, 15(1), 62-70. Leslie, L. M., Tae-Youn, P., Si Anh, M., & Flaherty Manchester, C. (2012). Flexible Work Practices: A Source Of Career Premiums Or Penalties?. Academy Of Management Journal, 55(6), 1407-1428. doi:10.5465/ami.2010.0651 Masuda, A. D., Poelmans, S. Y., Allen, T. D., Spector, P. E., Lapierre, L. M., Cooper, C. L., & ... Moreno-Velazquez, I. (2012). Flexible Work Arrangements Availability and their Relationship with Work-to-Family Conflict, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions: A Comparison of Three Country Clusters. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 61(1), 1-29. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00453.x McNall, L. A., Masuda, A. D., & Nicklin, J. M. (2010). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions: The Mediating Role of Work-to-Family Enrichment. Journal Of Psychology, 144(1), 61-81. Olmsted, B. (1995). Flexible Work Arrangements: From Accommodation To Strategy. Employment Relations Today (Wiley), 22(2), 11-19. Smith, K. T. (2010). Work-Life Balance Perspectives of Marketing Professionals in Generation Y. Services Marketing Quarterly, 31(4), 434-447. doi:10.1080/15332969.2010.5107 Stavrou, E., & Kilaniotis, C. (2010). Flexible Work and Turnover: an Empirical Investigation across Cultures. British Journal Of Management, 21(2), 541-554. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00659.x Toshiba (2013) ‘Complete Guide to Flexible Working’ Weybrdige, Surrey: Toshiba Information Systems (UK) Ltd. Read More