When an employee requests an adjustment to their work schedule, the company cannot simply say no. It must review the request, negotiate, and justify its response. The problem arises when the requested schedule leaves the very time slot for which the employee was hired unfilled. In these cases, the company may object, but it must do so properly.
Requests to adjust work schedules related to caring for children or family members
are becoming increasingly common. This reality forces companies to manage
sensitive situations in which they must balance two equally legitimate interests: the
right to a work-life balance and the organizational needs that allow the business to
continue operating.
However, there is a widespread misconception. The fact that an employee can
request an adjustment to their work schedule does not mean they have the right to
freely choose the hours they wish to work.
A right that must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis
Article 34.8 of the Workers’ Statute (ET) recognizes the right to request adjustments to the distribution of the workday, the work schedule, or even the way work is performed when such adjustments facilitate work-life balance.
However, the provision itself requires that these requests be reasonable and proportionate, considering both the employee’s family needs and the company’s organizational or production needs. Therefore, the company’s response cannot be automatic—either in favor of or against the request.
The company must review each request individually. Ignoring or rejecting it without prior evaluation may increase the risk of legal dispute.
Adjusting one’s work schedule is a right to request, not an absolute right to obtain exactly the schedule requested. The company is obliged to review the request, initiate a negotiation process, and assess whether there are alternative solutions that would allow both needs to be met. If this is not possible, the company may deny the request, provided there are objective and sufficiently justified reasons.
Example
Consider a dental clinic that hires an assistant to work from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., a time slot that coincides with the day’s final appointments, instrument sterilization, and the administrative closing of the workday.
Two months after starting the job, the employee requests to adjust her schedule to work from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., citing the need to pick up her children from school and fulfill certain family obligations.
The company must review the request and evaluate possible alternatives. However, if the initially agreed upon schedule is specifically designed to cover the work required between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., the requested change would leave an essential part of the service uncovered.
In this context, the company’s refusal could be justified, provided it is adequately justified.
If the requested change leaves the time slot for which the position was created uncovered, the company may object to the adjustment.
The Importance of Negotiating in Good Faith
One of the most common mistakes is simply responding that “it is not possible for organizational reasons.” Such a generic explanation is often insufficient. Before making a final decision, it is advisable to meet with the employee and explore other alternatives. For example:
- Allow a temporary adjustment for certain months.
- Consider minor adjustments within the initially agreed-upon schedule.
- Examine whether there are any vacancies compatible with the requested schedule.
- Establish flexible arrangements at specific times.
Even if it is ultimately not possible to grant the request, this process will serve as evidence that the company acted in good faith and attempted to reach a balanced solution.
Prior negotiation can be decisive if the company’s decision is later challenged in court.
The response must be properly justified
When the company decides to reject the request for accommodation, the notification must be in writing and contain specific arguments.
It is not enough to simply state that there are organizational needs. It is necessary to explain:
- What business need justifies initially agreed-upon schedule?
- What duties would be neglected if the proposal were accepted?
- What alternatives were considered during the negotiation process?
- Why are those alternatives not feasible in this specific case?
The more specific and detailed the justification, the greater the legal certainty of the decision reached.
If you found it interesting, share it on social media. Thank you!
