Early retirement/buy back-down...?

[Thunderthighs]

I noticed around Christmas time, some forms given to fellow workers, which had "ticky boxes" regarding Early Retirement/Buy back-buy down of hours.
As a Part Timer, I was NOT given this form, and NO ONE mentioned it...it was left on a fellow workers frame for a short time.

So...Should I have been included in this process, at 25hrs per week, 10yrs service and in my late 50's, or was this ONLY for Full Timers.

I feel that it was wrong to not include me, and if I was legally allowed to be include, why wasn't I?

I'm very interested in this scheme, and would welcome the opportunity to have a choice asap.
Thanks....

[rehabron]

I noticed around Christmas time, some forms given to fellow workers, which had "ticky boxes" regarding Early Retirement/Buy back-buy down of hours.
As a Part Timer, I was NOT given this form, and NO ONE mentioned it...it was left on a fellow workers frame for a short time.

So...Should I have been included in this process, at 25hrs per week, 10yrs service and in my late 50's, or was this ONLY for Full Timers.

I feel that it was wrong to not include me, and if I was legally allowed to be include, why wasn't I?

I'm very interested in this scheme, and would welcome the opportunity to have a choice asap.
Thanks....

This is known as a preference exercise and is normally issued if your unit has surplus employees or for a headcount reduction.
In order to accommodate surplus employees it is basically an exercise to find out if employees if approved would be willing to reduce their contracted hours ( Buy Down) or request voluntary redundancy.
Dependant on the amount of surplus employees or based on a reduced management budget the offer if approved is based on seniority and therefore the exercise for instance may have been first tested with the top ten on the seniority list to find the response before offering further down the seniority list.
So in this instance it may have not become necessary to inform you but a word with your union rep can clear up your concerns.

[baldrick]

dingo recently posted that Delivery Offices do not have to offer EVR/VR to Part Time staff if it is only FT hourage that they are looking to cut.

[fishtank]

In the vast majority of offices the only surplus hours will be indoor hours so part-time buy-downs and VR would be pointless for the business...however.

The legal position is a bit murky but the business would argue that it is making the full-time role (including indoor work) redundant which differs from the part-time role, whether that would hold up in an Employment Tribunal if in a rare case a part-timer was more senior is difficult to know for sure, especially if that part-timer was female.

It's kind of the reverse of a business singling out part-timers and making them redundant which is a very dangerous game unless you can show a rock solid business need. I would rate the decision not to include part-timers at least in the preference exercise to be legally "iffy" at best.

[IloveMYredTROLLEY!]

But what about in depots where part time OPGs start at the same time as full timers, covering the days off of full time staff i.e where PT staff work 3/4 day weeks to satisfy their contracts?

They are expected to do the same indoor work as the OPGs they are covering for.

[fishtank]

But what about in depots where part time OPGs start at the same time as full timers, covering the days off of full time staff i.e where PT staff work 3/4 day weeks to satisfy their contracts?

They are expected to do the same indoor work as the OPGs they are covering for.

That's a relatively new attendance pattern so it's unlikely any 3 day week part-timers would carry enough seniority to be considered for VR. It's much more likely that at some point the business will try to move these part-timers onto a 5 day week. I think it's already happening in some offices. There's no doubt in my mind the business is regretting allowing some of the new attendance patterns and things like the 4 day week, 9 day fortnight and even 1 in 4 Saturdays will come under attack in the near future.

They would like us all on a 5 day week, easier to manage, more efficient and less trapped costs.

[Thunderthighs]

Thanks all..But, If I can prove that someone has been offered this VR deal, and has been there for a Lesser Period than me, I can suggest its Favouritism?
I also thought that PT and FT should be Equal and The Same....in terms of Employment Law?

I was under the impression that we are ALL equal?
I'll look into it further..had just about enuf of RM's crap...

[stodgy88]

That's a relatively new attendance pattern so it's unlikely any 3 day week part-timers would carry enough seniority to be considered for VR. It's much more likely that at some point the business will try to move these part-timers onto a 5 day week. I think it's already happening in some offices. There's no doubt in my mind the business is regretting allowing some of the new attendance patterns and things like the 4 day week, 9 day fortnight and even 1 in 4 Saturdays will come under attack in the near future.

They would like us all on a 5 day week, easier to manage, more efficient and less trapped costs.

i work 23.5 hours a week,one week on ,one week off,how does this system fit in with royal mails thinking,and the upcoming resign at my office ,in your opinion -thanks.

[masterblaster]

Hmmm. Part-timers in our office book as many hours as the full timers,(they are just slow and don't even do any inward sorting) so why should it matter.

[terry2972]

I can't believe they are all slow?