Flexible working arrangements are still underused in public administration throughout the Czech Republic, acording to a recent study. The level of part-time work in public administration, for example, is just 2.3%, a much lower figure than the Czech and European averages. Regarding the underuse of flexible working arrangements, the institutions surveyed cited organisational factors such as the need to have staff working during public hours and a lack of demand.
Jobs in public administration are considered dependable and rarely involve overtime work. For this reason, employment in such institutions is often deemed as the ideal choice for parents in the Czech Republic. However, a questionnaire-based survey has revealed that the use of flexible working arrangements – an important tool for supporting work–life balance – is minimal in the country’s public administration institutions.
About the survey
The questionnaire-based survey, which was carried out by the Institute of Sociological Studies (Institut sociologických studií) of the Faculty of Social Sciences of Charles University in Prague in 2006, examined working conditions in 10 different public administration institutions located in three regions of the Czech Republic. Regional authorities and labour offices in all regions and in three ministries were also examined.
Data was acquired from a total of 52 institutions employing some 9,073 employees. The questionnaire focused mainly on the extent to which male and female employees make use of a range of different flexible working arrangements: namely, part-time work, job-sharing, flexitime, the compressed working week and work from home. Where appropriate, the study also examined the reasons why a particular work regime was not used.
Main findings
Part-time work
The research showed that 88% of the institutions surveyed allow the option of part-time work. Among the institutions which do not offer this arrangement, one regional authority is planning to introduce this form of work, while five authorities are not considering this arrangement. The reason most frequently cited by the institutions that do not offer part-time work is the lack of demand on the part of employees. This finding is confirmed by data from the institutions surveyed which allow the option of part-time work: just 2.3% of the employees work part time, which is far below the Czech average of 5%, as well as the European average.
Table 1: Use of part-time work in public institutions, by sex and type of institution, 2006| Surveyed institutions | Number of employees | % employed part time |
|---|
| Total | Women | Men | Total | Women | Men |
|---|
| Ministries | 4,237 | 2,425 | 1,812 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 0.9 |
|---|
| Archives | 416 | 278 | 138 | 4.8 | 6.8 | 0.7 |
|---|
| Financial offices | 243 | 200 | 43 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.0 |
|---|
| Customs offices | 287 | 98 | 189 | 1.4 | 3.1 | 0.5 |
|---|
| District courts | 325 | 296 | 29 | 3.1 | 3.4 | 0.0 |
|---|
| Land offices | 48 | 27 | 21 | 2.1 | 3.7 | 0.0 |
|---|
| District social security offices | 886 | 813 | 73 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 1.4 |
|---|
| Regional public health offices | 552 | 432 | 120 | 8.5 | 8.1 | 10.0 |
|---|
| Regional veterinary offices | 248 | 134 | 114 | 7.7 | 8.2 | 7.0 |
|---|
| Labour offices | 432 | 364 | 68 | 3.0 | 2.7 | 4.4 |
|---|
| Regional authorities | 1,399 | 991 | 408 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.0 |
|---|
| Total | 9,073 | 6,058 | 3,015 | 2.3 | 2.8 | 1.4 |
|---|
| Employed in Czech Republic (CZSO LFS) | | | | 5.0 | 8.7 | 2.3 |
|---|
| Employed in EU27 (Eurostat) | | | | 18.1 | 31.2 | 7.7 |
|---|
Source: Hezlarová and Tenglerová, 2006; Czech Statistical Office, Labour Force Survey 2006 (CZSO LFS); Eurostat, Persons employed part-time, by sex, 2006
Job-sharing
The survey showed that job-sharing arrangements are mainly used by women, with 87% of female employees using this working arrangement option. Some 10% of the institutions surveyed allow this form of work, while 63% consider it inappropriate. The remainder (27%) cited ‘other reasons’ for not allowing for this type of working time arrangement, although the majority did not specify what these reasons were. Among the arguments that were cited for not allowing job-sharing options were the times when the institutions are open to the public, the employees’ responsibility for the tasks assigned to them when working with personal data and the employer’s reluctance to offer such arrangements.
Flexitime
The survey findings reveal three types of approach to flexitime among the public institutions analysed:
- flextime is available to 95% or more of the employees in 59% of the institutions;
- flexitime is only available to particular employees in 6% of the institutions;
- flexitime is not allowed in 29% of the institutions.
Organisational factors were mainly cited as the reason for refusing flexitime arrangements: these include the need for staff during public opening hours and also the lack of demand for flexitime among employees, a reason which was frequently cited. Interestingly, similar type institutions did not always display the same attitude; for example, while 13 regional authorities use flexitime for the majority of their employees, one authority does not allow this option on the grounds of public opening hours.
Compressed working week
The compressed working week arrangement is used by a total of 25 employees in three institutions. The majority (92%) of these employees are men. In terms of the attitudes to this form of work, 71% of the institutions surveyed consider this form of work unsuitable. Some 16% of the institutions have other reasons for refusing to allow the compressed working week arrangement: the most frequently cited reason is public opening hours; in one case, the employer did not want to introduce this form of work.
Working from home and telework
Only one regional authority has an employee working remotely, while just one labour office intends to introduce this form of work in the future. Otherwise, the prevailing attitude to this form of work is negative. The most frequent argument cited by the institutions surveyed is that working from home could compromise or prevent the availability of services to citizens. The institutions’ dependence on their computer networks was another frequently cited reason.
The survey did not comprise any specific question regarding data security issues when working from home or teleworking. However, it can be assumed that practical issues – such as access of workers to computers and internet connection, computer network administration, software installation at computers which employees have at home – are considered to be a barrier rather than data security issues.
Conclusions
There are essentially two ways to interpret the data obtained from the survey. One conclusion could be that assisting work–life balance through flexible working arrangements is complicated in Czech public administration institutions, particularly as the attitudes to such arrangements and awareness of their advantages differ between the institutions. Alternatively, it could be concluded that flexibility does, in fact, exist in public institutions but is not officially reported; in other words, so-called ‘grey flexibility’ exists, whereby such arrangements depend on individual agreements between the employee and their manager.
Reference
Hejzlarová, E. and Tenglerová, H., Je státní správa family-friendly? [Is public administration family-friendly?], Veřejná správa, No. 49, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University of Prague, 2006.
Eva Hejzlarová and Hana Tenglerová, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University of Prague