See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266268558

Future Horizons for Work-life Balance

Article · January 2009

CITATIONS READS

14 2,129

2 authors:

Terence Hogarth Derek Bosworth

Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini The University of Warwick
64 PUBLICATIONS   761 CITATIONS    121 PUBLICATIONS   1,573 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The implications of climate change mitigation policy for European employment View project

Methodological issues in estimating returns to education: literature review View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Derek Bosworth on 18 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Future horizons for work-life balance

Terence Hogarth and Derek Bosworth

Institute for Employment Research, University of Warwick

January 2009

Introduction
Work-life balance can be defined from a legislative point of view drawing upon statutes
and case law, and from an economic perspective where individuals make trade-offs
between the amount of time given over to leisure and work given the market price for
their labour. The following definition provides a fairly clear context for the present
discussion:
“„Work-life balance‟ is meant to articulate the desire of all individuals – not just
those with families or caring responsibilities – to achieve and maintain a „balance‟
between their paid work and their life outside work, whatever their „life‟ involves,
from childcare and housework to leisure or self-development.”1
Labour economics have focused on certain aspects of work-life balance, such as the
number of hours of work that individuals wish to supply at the going wage and overtime
premium, as well as the times of day (or week or year) when they prefer to supply their
labour.2 The theory also shows that length of day and time of day wage premia develop
in the market or through collective bargaining to reflect the degree of the unsocial length
or timing of work, with jobs that incorporate more unsocial lengths and times of work
being paid higher wages, other things equal. However, the tendency for wages to reflect
the unsocial work-life balance of particular jobs – and, thereby, offer some degree of
compensation for unsocial work patterns – is not the same as demonstrating that the
market offers individuals jobs that offer an optimal work-life balance. Indeed, the
theoretical framework highlights the existence of sub-optimal outcomes for individuals
when they can only find work where the number of hours is longer or shorter than they
would ideally like or where the time of day (or week or year) at which they are required
to supply their labour is not entirely suited to their lifestyles.3

1
Jones, A. (2003) About Time for Change. The Work Foundation, in association with Employers for
Work-life Balance. London, Work Foundation. p4
2
Bosworth, D.L. and Dawkins, P.J. (1981) Work Patterns: An Economic Analysis. Aldershot, Gower
Press
3
Bosworth, D.L., Dawkins, P.J. and Stromback, T. (1996). Economics of the Labour Market. Harlow,
Addison Wesley Longman, pp.24-25

1
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

The State recognizes that, left to its own devices, the market is unlikely to deliver a
work-life balance that is equitable or indeed fair, however that may be defined, across
the population. In other words, the social costs for the country as a whole outweigh the
aggregate private returns obtained by employers and (some) individuals delivered by the
market in the absence of regulation. The balance the State has sought between work
and life has changed over time such that the scope of regulation has broadened from a
relatively narrow focus on health and safety and protecting women in the workplace to
encompass a wider set of issues that has to some extent loosened the constraints upon
the choices all individuals may make about the time they want or need to spend
working.
Historically, work-life balance has been viewed with respect to either working time
defined in weekly, monthly, or annual hours in formal employment, and the extent to
which regulation such as that relating to maternity rights allows people to remain
attached to the labour market. Increasingly, there is recognition that work is not
limited to formal employment because individuals have, for example, caring
responsibilities which they choose to take on themselves, for a variety of reasons, rather
than purchasing care from the market. These caring responsibilities occur at different
points over an individual‟s life-course, as do a range of other preferences individuals
have about the time they want to devote to work. So now work-life balance is being
viewed more and more from a lifetime perspective in recognition that the trade-offs
individuals may want to make between work and leisure will vary over their life-course.
The right for an employee to request reduced working hours from their employer is, in
part, acknowledgment of this fact.
Policy makers have been determined to show that work-life balance policy in its current
form approaches optimality: employers enjoy both a quantitative and qualitative
improvement in the supply of labour available to them because work-life balance affects
the individual‟s productivity at work and helps retain their attachment to the labour
market, whereas, in the past, they may have chosen to drop-out; and individuals are
better able to balance the various demands made upon their time resulting in a
qualitative improvement to their lives. There is no shortage of research literature that
purports to show the business and social case for work-life balance and some employers
have been almost evangelical in their promotion of it. But work-life balance is a fragile
concept insofar as it is predicated upon a strong demand for labour of all types, whereas
in fact the demand for certain types of labour is relatively weak, and some employers at
least are concerned that it imposes too high a cost upon their activities. Overall,
however, work-life balance as a concept is seen as bringing private and social benefits to
employers, individuals, and the State.

Keywords: work, economics, employment, home, childcare, lifestyle

The Evolution of Work-life Balance

The history of work-life balance begins in the latter half of the 19th century when
reformers successfully campaigned against long factory hours and were able to
demonstrate that reductions in working hours had no impact upon levels of output.4
During the early part of the 20th century the campaign to reduce working hours
continued through a series of pioneering studies that demonstrated the relationship
between time spent at work and the level of output was a complex one.5 These studies
also took account of the importance of motivation and morale, fatigue, concentration,
and attention to reveal that there were conditions under which a reduction in working
time led to increased production, and there were optimum arrangements for the length
of working time and intervals for rest pauses, in particular circumstances.

4
Cole, G.D.H (1925) Robert Owen.
5
Myers, C.S. (1924) Industrial Psychology in Great Britain. London, Cape

2
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

During the 1960s and 1970s, though the term work-life balance had yet to be coined, a
number of factors can be identified that eventually gave rise to the current policy mix.
These included:
• health and safety at work;
• international competitiveness;
• equality; and
• the flexible labour market.
During the 1960s the debate was very much about the extent to which paid overtime
was “manufactured”6, as explained below. The analysis focussed upon informal work
group organisation and the joint regulation of working practices, within a framework of
collective bargaining. The approach was at the heart of the report of the Royal
Commission on Trades Unions and Employers Associations in the late 1960s7. The
analysis built on the productivity bargaining experiences of the previous decade.
Productivity bargaining recognised that groups of manual workers often exercised
unilateral informal control over many aspects of their working practices. Case after case
revealed that the control included the regulation of working hours where overtime was
paid at premium rates. Long overtime hours were often not necessary but
“manufactured” to boost earnings. The consequence was a low productivity culture,
associated with low hourly rates of pay and long hours of work. The answer was to
negotiate new productivity packages, which included major changes in work organisation
and working practices – including flexible patterns of work organisation – increasing
basic rates of pay and curtailing overtime working.
The 1970s proved to be a turning point brought about by a wide range of factors, such
as increased international competition, changes in technology, new forms of
organisation, increased female participation, as well as changing and more diverse
working-time needs of individuals.8 It was during the 1970s that regulation also began
to recognise the importance of equality with the introduction of the Equal Pay Act in
1970 and the Sex Discrimination Act in 1975. Since then issues relating to social equity
and justice have multiplied and become more prominent and explicit.9 It is argued that
long working hours among men in the child rearing years have disadvantaged women in
two ways: they have made it less possible for men to share in childcare and home
building, leaving the onus upon women to carry those responsibilities; they have made it
less possible for women to compete for more senior jobs if a major criterion for
promotion is commitment to the job, as demonstrated by long hours at work.
During the 1980s the political focus was very much upon liberalising the economy,
including the labour market. At the heart of labour market reform was the introduction
of more flexible patterns of work – frequently referred to as “atypical forms of
employment” (increased temporary/fixed-term employment, etc.). This took place at a
time of a major structural shift in the labour market with employment moving from the
production to the service sector, which tended to favour female employment at the time.
The introduction of more flexible forms of work was an important strand in improving
labour supply because it potentially allowed groups of individuals otherwise unable to
enter the labour market the opportunity to do so. It was only during the 1990s,
especially the latter half of the decade, that Government began to play a more
interventionist role to give employees (and potential employees) certain rights with
respect to establishing a work-life balance that suited them.

The Current Work-Life Balance

Since 1997, there have been a number of regulatory changes that have been driven by a
desire to make the labour market more equitable, efficient and safer given that the

6
Whybrew, E. (1968) Overtime Working in Great Britain. Research Paper No. 9, Royal Commission on
Trades Unions and Employers Associations. London, HMSO.
7
Donovan, (1968) Royal Commission on Trades Unions and Employers Associations. London, HMSO.
8
European Foundation, 2003
9
Hogarth, T. et al, 2000.

3
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

work-life balance agenda has some of its origins in a desire to improve health and
safety. The Working Time Regulations have their origin in the European Union, where
successive UK Governments have been amongst their less enthusiastic supporters,
reflected in the UK‟s desire to retain the opt-out.
From a regulatory perspective work-life balance encompasses:
Maternity rights – all pregnant employees are entitled to 52 weeks of maternity leave
regardless of their length of service.i Mothers are also eligible for Contractual (Company)
Maternity Pay, as agreed with their employers, or Statutory Maternity Pay for 39 weeks, plus
other potential welfare benefits.ii
Paternity leave – an entitlement to a father to take a short period of paid leave to look after
iii
his baby or support the mother following birth.
Adoptive leave – an eligible employee adopting a child can take time off when the child is
placed for adoption for 52 weeks and may be eligible for Statutory Adoption Pay for 39
iv
weeks.
Parents’ and carer’s right to request flexible working – an employee with a child aged under
six, or a disabled child aged under 18, and carers of adults, can request to work flexibly. The
employer has a statutory duty to consider the application and refuse it only on the basis of
clear business case for doing so.v
Time off for dependants in an emergency – this right enables an employee to take the
necessary action to deal with an unexpected or sudden problem concerning a dependant
and to make any necessary longer term arrangements. Whether the time off is paid or not is
vi
at the discretion of the employer.
These all relate to the Government‟s campaign to promote work-life balance and are all
concerned with the care of young children or other family commitments in one way or
another.
Work-life balance, however, is about balancing time between work and activities outside
of work which will include time spent looking after young dependants but many other
activities, both frivolous and important, too. In this respect, perhaps the most important
statutes are the Working Time Regulations because they establish the maximum number
of hours that an individual may work (provided the individual has decided not to opt-out
from the regulations).
Working Time Regulations – a central provision of the regulations is to set a maximum 48-
hour working week, averaged over a 17-week period, though other basic rights and
protections provided for in the Regulations include a:
o limit of an average of eight hours work in 24 which night workers can be required to
work
o right for night workers to receive free health assessments
o right to 11 hours rest a day
o a right to a day off each week
o right to an in-work rest break if the working day is longer than six hours at one
stretch
o right to four weeks paid leave a year.
Additionally, from a regulatory perspective if improving work-life balance is seen as
reducing the constraints upon individuals‟ work-leisure choices, then there are other
regulations (including proposed regulations) to consider.

4
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

“Flexible working” describes the various work patterns adapted to suit the needs of
employees, but which may also have important benefits for the employer. vii Common
types of flexible working are:

part-time – working less than the normal hours of full time workers and, while
there is no absolute value of hours, a full time worker usually works 35 hours or
more a week
flexi-time – where the employee chooses when to work, bearing in mind there is
normally a core period during which the individual must be present
annualised hours – set the hours that an employee is expected to work over a
year – if the employee works more than average hours over some period, this is
compensated by lower than average hours at some other time of the year
compressed hours – involve working the agreed weekly hours normally worked
over, say, five days a week, over fewer days (e.g. 36 hours over four days)
staggered hours – allow different start, break and finish times for different
employees in the same workplace
job sharing – occurs where a job designed for one person is shared between two
or more people
home working – involves carrying out part or all of the work from the employee‟s
place of residence.
Currently there are plans to extend provisions already in place following the Walsh
Review, principally the right to request flexible working for parents of children aged
under 16 (currently the age cut off is six, and 18 if the child is disabled). 10

In addition, the Government is currently considering providing employees with the right
to request time off to train:
“The right to request time to train would work by giving an established employee
a legal right to ask their employer to give them time away from their mainstream
duties to undertake relevant training, which their employer would be required to
consider seriously.” (DIUS, Time to Train, p5)
As with the Right to Request Flexible Working regulation employers will be obliged to
give serious consideration to any such request.
The regulations listed above in many respects represent the core of work-life balance
once a person is in employment. There are, of course, many other factors which relate
to finding work in the first place, lest individuals end up viewing work-life balance from
the abject position of being involuntarily out of work. Levels of employment demand,
the welfare system, skill levels, and anti-discrimination laws are all related to work-life
balance insofar as they affect the individual‟s ability to find (any) work, and find work in
those sectors of the economy where they are likely to be afforded some form of work-life
balance that suits their needs.

The Incidence of Work-life Balance

Historically, in comparison with the European Union, the UK has been a country with
relatively long working hours. Figure 1 shows the trend in total working hours over the
last decade, based on Labour Force Survey data, which shows that there has been a
gradual reduction in working hours for both men and women, but, for some groups in
the labour market, long hours of work remain the norm. It has been estimated that one
million people work sustained long hours; that is, over 48 hours a week on average for a
17-week period (the limit specified in the Working Time Regulations). This figure is not
limited to senior managers – where the divide between work and non-work activities is

10
BERR (2008) Right to Request Flexible Working: A review of how to extent the right to flexible
working to the parents of older children. London, DTI, May 2008

5
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

somewhat blurred when, for example, social functions are factored in as time at work –
but also includes manual workers.11 The data go on to reveal that the business need for
long hours working was manifest in some cases, but there was also evidence that, it in
some cases, it arose from custom and practice unrelated to the production process.

Figure 1: Trends in Average Total Hours of Work, 2001 - 2008

47
46
45
44
average hours

43 UK ft hrs
42 UK m ft hrs
41 UK f ft hrs
40
39
38
37
2

2
q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0

q0
01

01

02

02

03

03

04

04

05

05

06

06

07

07

08
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
Source: Labour Force Survey / Eurostat

There are often cultural factors that lead to either long hours of work – which by
definition is neither a flexible form of working nor one consistent with work-life balance
unless the individual freely chooses to work in that manner – which are unrelated to
business need. “Presenteeism” is one such factor by which employees demonstrate their
value to the business by their almost constant presence which, in turn, has a contagion
effect such that other people feel the need to mimic the practice. 12 Employers, however,
can and do find innovative alternatives to a dependence upon long hours, although it
needs to be borne in mind that changing working time arrangements, particularly where
they are linked directly to payment systems, can prove both difficult and protracted. 13
The Work-Life Balance (WLB) Surveys, conducted in 2000, 2003, and 2007, provide
information about the extent to which employers provide flexible forms of working.
Figure 2 shows the results from the second and third WLB surveys.

11
Hogarth, T., Daniel, W.W., Dickerson, A. and Campbell, D. The Business Context to Long Hours
Working Department of Trade and Industry, Employment Research Series Report No.23, DTI, London
12
Purcell, K., Hogarth, T. and Simm C. (1999) Whose Flexibility? The Costs and Benefits of Non-
Standard Employment Contracts. York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation
13
Hogarth et al. ibid

6
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

Figure 2: Provision of Flexible Working Time Arrangements by Employers, 2003 and

2007

100
90
80
70
% respondents

60
WLB2
50
WLB3
40
30
20
10
0
Part-time Term time Job share Flexitime Reduced Work from Compressed
only hours home working
week

Source: Work Life Balance Employer Surveys; Hayward et al., 2007

The data show an increase in the provision of flexible working time arrangements by
employers, with 84% of employers providing at least two or more flexible working time
arrangements in 2007.14 The incidence of provision increases with the percentage of
women in the workplace, and it is larger establishments and those in the public sector
that are most likely to report provision. Provision is not the same as take-up, and the
evidence points to take-up not increasing at the same pace as provision. Where
employers do not provide any flexible working time arrangements – 4% in 2006 – it
tends to be because it is not compatible with the business. The WLB3 Employer Survey
also reveals that 40% of employers had received a request from an employee to work
flexibly and 90% had agreed to that request.
A representative sample of employees can provide a more detailed picture of take-up.15
Figure 3 shows results from the WLB3 Employee Survey and compares employer
provision with actual take-up by employees. Take-up refers to the percentage of staff
taking up a flexible working time arrangement where it is provided by an employer. It
can be seen that relatively few employers allow working from home on a regular basis,
but, where it is provided, a substantial percentage of employees take it up. The data
show that some flexible working time practices, such as reduced hours for a short-period
or a compressed working week, are taken up by relatively few employees. Overall, 90%
of employees said flexible working time arrangements were available to them and 62%
reported that they were working flexibly. The percentage of employees that had
approached their employer about working flexibly was 17% in 2007, the same as in
2003, and 60% said their request had been fully met and a further 18% said it had been
partially met.

Figure 3: Take-up of Flexible Working Time Arrangements by Employees, 2007

14
Hayward, B., Fong, B. and Thornton, A. (2007) The Third Work-Life Balance Employer Survey: Main
Findings, Employment Relations Research Series No. 86, BERR, London, December
15
Hooker, H., Neathey, F., Cassebourne, J. and Munro, M. (2007) The Third Work-Life Balance Employee
Survey: Main Findings, Employment Relations Research Series No. 58, BERR, London, March

7
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

80
70
60
% respondents

50
Available
40
Took up
30
20
10
0

e
e

e
ly

s
m
ur
im
ar
tim

on

ee

ur
ho
sh

ho

ho
it

w
rt-

ex
tim

m
ed

ng

d
Pa

Jo

Fl

fro

e
c

ki

lis
m

du

or

ua
k
r

Re

or
Te

n
W

ed

An
ss
e
pr
m
Co

Source: Third Work Life Balance Employee Survey; Hooker et al., 2007

In relation to policies aimed more directly at parents, evidence reveals that 34% of
workplaces reported a female employee being pregnant over the past twelve months,
with 94% going on to take maternity leave.16 There are differences between the
proportions of workplaces reporting a female employee being pregnant in the public and
private sectors, with 56% of the former reporting a pregnancy and 30% in the latter. 17
Why this should be the case is unknown, but there are a number of possibilities: women
thinking of becoming pregnant may choose to select the public sector, the public sector
may have more job opportunities for women of child bearing age, or pregnant women in
the private sector may be more likely to leave employment before becoming pregnant.
The EOC investigation into discrimination during pregnancy revealed few differences in
incidence between private and public sectors. 18 Employers overall appear to be
increasing the provision of childcare support, with 14% providing some form of support
or guidance about support in 2007, compared to 4% in 2003.

Developing an Effective Work-life Balance for the Future

There is a wide body of evidence which suggests that work-life balance favours both
employers and employees.19 These relate to overall effects on business performance or
assisting particular groups of workers. For instance, an early study demonstrated how
the provision of flexible working time arrangements allowed older people, many of whom
were of post-retirement age, to re-enter the labour market because they were able to
choose when they worked in the light of their other commitments and their ability to
work.20 Ultimately the success of work-life balance is dependent upon employers being
able to implement the practices so that, at worst, they do not impose an unsustainable

16
Hayward et al., 2007
17
Although the data are not directly comparable over time, there is tentative evidence that the
percentage of employers reporting a pregnancy has increased in the public sector and decreased in
the private sector.
18
Adams.L., McAndrew, F. and Winterbotham, M. (2005) Pregnancy Discrimination at Work: A Survey of
Women. Manchester, Equal Opportunities Commission
19
Eaton, S.C. If you can use them: flexibility policies organisational commitment and perceived
performance. Industrial Relations, 42 (2), pp.145-167; Dex, S. and F. Schiebl, Flexible and family
friendly policies, Journal of General Management, 24 (4), pp 22-37
20
Hogarth, T. and Barth, M. (1992) The Costs and Benefits of Hiring Older Workers: The B&Q Case
Study. International Journal of Manpower, 9 (2)

8
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

cost on their businesses. If it were to impose an unsustainable cost, then the likely
outcome is some form of regulatory avoidance, such as not recruiting people who may
demand some of work-life balance assistance. To date, the evidence about the
introduction of flexible working time arrangements and leave entitlements appear to
have been largely beneficial to employers, even if the percentage of employers reporting
a positive impact appears to be declining over time (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: Perceived Effects of Flexible Working and Leave Arrangements

100%
90%
80% 47
42 42
49
41
48
38
54
% establishments

57
70% 58
69 Positive Effect
71
60%
No Effect
50%
39 Negative Effect
40% 33 40 35 23 35
28
30% 27 27
27 DK/NA
12 17 12
20% 4 5 5 6 5 10 10 9
5 3 5
10% 13 11 11
15 13 13 15 16 13 13 13
10
0%
WLB2 WLB3 WLB2 WLB3 WLB2 WLB3 WLB2 WLB3 WLB2 WLB3 WLB2 WLB3

Employee Employee Recruitment Labour Productivity Absenteeism

Commitment Motivation turnover
and

Source: Work Life Balance Employer Surveys; Hayward et al., 2007 Figure 9.2,
p.65

There remains evidence that the take-up of work-life balance is uneven across the
economy and that some demand from employees has not been met. Women, for
example, are much more likely to take up flexible working time arrangements than men,
even though an increasing number of men find themselves in the role of secondary
earner in their household. Also, take up is much greater in large establishments and the
public sector. In looking to the future the key question is how work-life balance can be
extended to a wider group of people and employers.
The Government has responded over time, by increasing the range of people who fall
within the scope of existing regulations, such as extending the right to flexible working
to carers in 2006, and proposing to further increase the scope of this regulation by
making it available to all employees with children aged under 16 years. Regulation is
very much family focussed, but there is an intention to broaden the scope to include
time off for training such that individuals can pursue, within limitations, their intellectual
interests. In other countries, study leave is also available (eg Denmark) and the UK
Government is currently considering making this provision available. Improving the take
up of education and training seems an essential step towards lifelong learning, reducing
inactivity rates and improving productivity amongst older individuals. At the present
time, male employees aged 16-17 are nearly three times more likely to receive training
than those aged 50-64.21
As noted in the introduction, in order for Government to justify intervention, the net
social benefits of doing so need to be demonstrated. In the case of family focussed
interventions, the argument is made with reference to the burden of family care being
disproportionately borne by women. There are two principal social benefits from
assisting women – and men – to meet the costs of family care: (i) increasing the current

21
Bosworth, D.L. (2008) An Ageing Population: the Challenges Facing the UK. Contribution to Skills in
England, Learning and Skills Council.

9
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

supply of labour; and (ii) ensuring a future supply of labour by reducing any employment
barriers to childbearing. There are also issues of equity that form a further aspect of
social benefits22: (i) equality of opportunity – everyone has the same opportunity to use
their talents, and society should mitigate the effects of race, gender, inheritance, etc. (ii)
equality of process – people in the same situation should be treated in the same way (iii)
equality of outcome – everyone should have an equal share of resources produced by an
economy.
It is likely that, for the foreseeable future, the work-life balance from a public policy
perspective, will be focussed mainly on the family rather than a wider set of issues
relating to how individuals want to balance their time between work and the rest of their
lives. Aside from a right to time off to train, it is unlikely that work-life balance from a
regulatory standpoint in the UK will be expanded much beyond the area Government has
mapped out for it since the late 1990s. That said, progress since the late 1990s has
been substantial, with a range of issues previously regarded as matters to be decided
between employees and their employers now falling within the remit of public policy.
The evaluative evidence, insofar as it exists, suggests that the benefits to employers,
employees and the State derived from the current set of regulations are sufficiently large
that they are unlikely to be repealed or made more limited in scope.
Where there is room for further extension of work-life balance is in relation to the take-
up of existing policies. There are several issues of interest here:
whether there is ignorance amongst employers and employees about the scope for
introducing work-life balance – as the Walsh Review suggests – such that it will be possible
to further roll-out practices across the economy with the assistance of some form of advice,
guidance and information; or
whether there is a selection issue, where those employers that have taken up work-life
balance are those that are capable of doing so (or find it in their own interests to do so) and
those that remain face difficulties doing so.
There is an analogy with the high performance work practices literature. Such practices
are self-evidently beneficial to the employer and employee that it is puzzling why so
many employers have failed to do so. The answer is likely to a mix between ignorance
and lack of applicability (the selection issue) but it is not clear about the extent to which
either is the case.

This document has been commissioned as part of the UK Department for Children,
Schools and Families’ Beyond Current Horizons project, led by Futurelab. The views
expressed do not represent the policy of any Government or organisation.

i
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Moneyandworkentitlements/Parentalleaveandpay/DG_10029285.
ii

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Moneyandworkentitlements/WorkAndFamilies/Pregnancyandmat
ernityrights/DG_10029290.
iii

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Moneyandworkentitlements/Parentalleaveandpay/DG_10029398
.
iv

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Moneyandworkentitlements/WorkAndFamilies/Adoptionrightsinth
eworkplace/DG_10029406.
v
http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/employment/employment-legislation/employment-
guidance/page35663.html.

22
In Rawls‟ Theory of Justice he suggested that decisions should be made according to the veil of
ignorance test. If we did not know, in this case, whether we were a man or woman then would we
choose policies that discriminated against women?

10
 www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk

vi
DTI [now BERR], Time Off for Dependants: A guide for employers and employees. URN 99/1186.
London: Department of Trade and Industry. http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file11419.pdf.
vii
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/WorkingHoursAndTimeOff/DG_10029491.

11

View publication stats