Getting Rid of Part Timers

[shimmyrule]

...they want rid before any of them hit the magic 4 year mark.

Though of course the 4 year mark was agreed to be a 2 year mark.
And employment law offers them certain rights after 12 months I believe.
Another fine mess ............

Clash, we are hearing that the cwu is hoping to test employment law in regards to part timers and the 12 month ruling(whatever that is?), as we have about 20 people in my d-o, in this bracket, and its rumoured they are all to be given the bullet after xmas,

[clashcityrocker]

Unfair selection for redundancy
Redundancy is a form of dismissal. If the reason you are selected for redundancy is unfair then you will have been unfairly dismissed.

I think after 12 months a FTC employee has the same legal right as any other permanent member of staff regarding dismissal.
But the law is complicated and I'd best leave it to someone who knows what they are talking about.

[fishtank]

Any dismissals that are made solely on the grounds of avoiding a fixed-term employee acquiring permanent status are likely to be unfair and in breach of the regulations. A decision not to renew a fixed-term contract is expressly regarded in law as a dismissal.

Fixed-term staff with more than a year's service are entitled not to be unfairly dismissed. Whatever their length of service, fixed-term employees can bring claims in relation to any treatment that is less favourable than that offered to comparable permanent employees (unless that treatment can be objectively justified).....What is objectively justified?...and can it be argued that these dismissals are made solely on the grounds of avoiding a fixed-term employee acquiring permanent status?

If they bypassed the union entirely and simply paid these FTCs minimum redundancy terms would that be treating them less favourably?
This could get messy.......

[RetroJunkie]

well i can see me being on my ass once the office revision fully kicks in, where all the full timers where in a hour meeting kicked off that bringing it in before xmas was to soon, they decided to extend my contract by 3 months.

theirs guys 6 years plus without there own walk, so i cant see there being a duty for me to even cover who knows.

but if i am let go, its not gonna bother me this job is nothing at all like it use to be, no incentive to do the job anymore what so ever.

[london sub]

Another way of subracting the numbers in the work force by releasing temporary contracts, especially the part time staff. I think RM knew this was coming and is probably all legal by extending peoples contracts for as long as they can. By doing this though, is probably far easier for them to say your contract is up, sorry but we will not be extending it.

It's a crying shame that RM does not put themselves in a position to stick to a plan and stick with it for the foreseeable future. Changing the goal posts every day does not only lower staff morale, it makes you wonder if you'll have a job to go to the next day. When i first started, I was on a 6 month trial period to see if i was cut out for the job...6 months went by and they offered me a permanent contract, which at the time i happily accepted.

I think the theory is once they ask you at the interview can you work overtime? (pretty much all the time) have you got a car?, then your in with a job, but what frustrates me the most and i am in the same boat as many others is once they have you part time they will not promote you to full time as its a costly afair. Its far cheaper to give over time to a part timer than a full timer, and when there is no work available then RM don't have to fork out those expenses. If no one did any overtime, then more part timers would be made up to full time, and because of this mess it will never happen.

Sorry for the rant and a bit off topic, but had to get that off my chest.

[RetroJunkie]

Another way of subracting the numbers in the work force by releasing temporary contracts, especially the part time staff. I think RM knew this was coming and is probably all legal by extending peoples contracts for as long as they can. By doing this though, is probably far easier for them to say your contract is up, sorry but we will not be extending it.

It's a crying shame that RM does not put themselves in a position to stick to a plan and stick with it for the foreseeable future. Changing the goal posts every day does not only lower staff morale, it makes you wonder if you'll have a job to go to the next day. When i first started, I was on a 6 month trial period to see if i was cut out for the job...6 months went by and they offered me a permanent contract, which at the time i happily accepted.

I think the theory is once they ask you at the interview can you work overtime? (pretty much all the time) have you got a car?, then your in with a job, but what frustrates me the most and i am in the same boat as many others is once they have you part time they will not promote you to full time as its a costly afair. Its far cheaper to give over time to a part timer than a full timer, and when there is no work available then RM don't have to fork out those expenses. If no one did any overtime, then more part timers would be made up to full time, and because of this mess it will never happen.

Sorry for the rant and a bit off topic, but had to get that off my chest.

i agree with u totally mate, its a f***ing shambles, i wish i could roll back time to when my dad first started in 1989 to see the best years of this place.

[realitybites]

Got into my office today and the Rep was telling some of the PT'ers that they may be laid off if RM have their way!!

[mailmonkey]

Is this how RM are hoping to acjieve the 75%/25% FT/PT split?

[fishtank]

Is this how RM are hoping to acjieve the 75%/25% FT/PT split?

I don't honestly think that RM are in the slightest bit interested in the 75%/25% split...that's a union pipe dream.
Royal Mail are only interested in headcount and how much that costs.

[dvbuk55]

Is this how RM are hoping to acjieve the 75%/25% FT/PT split?

I don't honestly think that RM are in the slightest bit interested in the 75%/25% split...that's a union pipe dream.
Royal Mail are only interested in headcount and how much that costs.

And I think you're right - it was a National split highly loaded in one direction and there wasn't a national solution to maintaining it and who was keeping count? - RM? and they of course was going to be more than truthful - I mean it never was 75/25 - it always said about 75/25 so there never was a fixed figure.

[mailmonkey]

No no, don't get me wrong, I don't think RM give a flying feck about ANYTHING from the "agreement"...