What working parents are telling us about today’s job market
Right now, employers and job seekers are moving through the same market, but having very different experiences within it.
On one side, organisations are navigating hiring challenges with roles taking longer to fill, shortlists that don’t quite land, and increasing pressure on existing teams.
On the other, candidates are actively applying, tailoring applications, and putting themselves forward for roles they’re well qualified to do, but often without response or traction.
Both sides are engaged in the process. Both are investing time and effort.
And yet, progress feels slower than it should.
The latest Working Parents Connect Flexible Work Pulse Survey (2026) makes this clearer by identifying the gaps. Across the responses, we saw the same theme coming through: people are looking, roles are out there, but the right match isn’t always landing. Here’s what else we found.
Insight #1: A workforce ready to engage, but within different constraints
A large proportion of respondents (87%) are either actively looking or open to new opportunities. That signals intent, energy, and willingness to move.
At the same time, many describe a search experience shaped by trade-offs. Roles appear available, but fewer feel viable. Opportunities surface, but don’t always fit the practical realities of daily life.
For working parents in particular, participation in the workforce is closely tied to how work fits around existing responsibilities. The question is less about whether they want to work, and more about whether the role can work for them.
Even when candidates feel well matched on skills and experience, that alignment doesn’t consistently translate into momentum in the hiring proces, suggesting friction beyond capability alone.
Insight #2: Flexibility as a defining feature of role viability
Flexibility features prominently across the data, shaping both preference and decision-making.
Many respondents (56%) indicate openness to full-time roles under the right conditions , particularly where flexibility is embedded into how work operates day to day.
What comes through strongly is the definition of flexibility itself. It extends beyond location and into:
- how hours are structured
- how workload is managed
- how autonomy is supported
In this context, flexibility becomes part of how a role functions, rather than an added benefit. It influences whether a role feels sustainable, and whether candidates can fully engage once they step into it. A number of repsondents also expressed concern around the bias associated with flexibility, and in particular, part-time roles.
“Just because you can’t work full time doesn’t mean you can’t provide value or be an asset to a team.”
Insight #3: Where friction shows up in the hiring experience
Candidates point to several recurring pressure points throughout the application process.
Competition is one factor, but it sits alongside:
- limited availability of flexible roles
- unclear or evolving role expectations
- differences between job advertisements and actual responsibilities
- minimal communication or feedback during the process
Each of these on its own may seem manageable. In combination, they create a level of friction that slows decision-making, reduces confidence, and makes it harder for candidates to stay engaged over time.
The experience becomes less about assessing mutual fit, and more about navigating uncertainty.
Insight #4: Experience and capability are under-recognised
A strong theme across open responses is the depth of experience within this talent pool.
Many candidates bring:
- years of professional experience
- transferable skills across industries
- a willingness to learn and adapt
There is also a clear desire to contribute meaningfully, through roles that recognise both capability and current life context.
At the same time, some respondents describe feeling overlooked or filtered out before their experience is fully considered. Career breaks, non-linear paths, and different working preferences appear to shape how candidates are assessed, often before a conversation begins.
This creates a narrowing effect, where capable candidates remain outside the process despite strong alignment in skills and potential contribution.
Insight #5: The cumulative impact of the hiring experience
Beyond role design and access, the tone of the hiring experience itself carries weight.
Candidates speak about the time invested in preparing applications, the effort taken to tailor responses, and the lack of visibility into what happens next.
Silence, automated responses, and limited feedback shape how the process is perceived. Over time, this influences not just individual applications, but willingness to continue engaging at the same level.
As one respondent put it, there is a desire to “bring the human back into human resources.”
That sentiment reflects a broader expectation around communication, transparency, and respect for the effort involved on both sides.
What this means for employers
Taken together, the responses describe a market where capability, intent, and opportunity are all present.
The challenge lies in how these elements come together in practice, through role design, communication, and hiring processes.
For employers, this creates an opportunity to look more closely at:
- how roles are structured and presented
- how flexibility is defined and operationalised
- how candidates experience the process from first interaction through to outcome
Small shifts in these areas can change how accessible and attractive a role feels, particularly for experienced candidates managing competing priorities.
Because on the other side of this data sits a highly capable, motivated group of people who are ready to contribute when the conditions allow for it.
If your organisation needs a new approach to hiring, or you would like to discover new ways to attract this group of skilled professionals, get in touch with our team to discuss.