Who is the more...

[Dogs of War]

Hi in are office the duty's are going up in the board for a resign. The problem is there's part time workers with 25 years service and full time workers with 15 years service. The question I wanted to ask who is the more senior the part time worker or the full time worker. Are boss says the full time worker. But i think he's wrong.

[Phantom]

It goes on length of service and thats it!

[Dogs of War]

He says it doesn't. Full timer works more hours than the part timer and thats why he's more senior.

[mandelsons_toenail]

He says it doesn't. Full timer works more hours than the part timer and thats why he's more senior.

if thats the case my offfice is the opposite

i got shafted by less senior men,

[gb93]

He says it doesn't. Full timer works more hours than the part timer and thats why he's more senior.

PT with 25 years is more senior and would get pick before 15 year FT
But doesn't mean PT can pick FT job if none extra have been created.

[sidewinder]

Our resign is going on suitability not seniority whatever suitability means. Managers brown noser? Still I won't be around to see this genius idea implemented as I'm off elsewhere.

[fishtank]

He says it doesn't. Full timer works more hours than the part timer and thats why he's more senior.

Using contracted hours to measure seniority is discrimination and unlawful.
A saturday only part-timer with 25 years service has exactly the same seniority as a full-timer with 25 years service.
Anything else could see your DOM looking for alternative employment.

[postie222]

I think you would have to pick in bands ie: 25 hour contracts pick on senority in there band same as 40 hours. So you do not end up with senior 25 hour people picking all the 40 hour duties. Which would mean that the 25 hours people picking forty hour duties would need 15 hours extra per week and the 40 hour people displaced to a 25 hour duty costing the bussiness 15 hours per week. If this happend a 25 hour duty and a 40 hour duty would cost the bussiness 95 hours per week to cover if they could not use the surplus hours elswhere. Not cost effective

[Dorset Plodder]

We've got a similar problem in our DO. Postie makes an interesting point but in our DO it's been made clear by DIM that PTers won't be able to bid on FT duties. This doesn't really matter as most of our PTers are fairly new guys who've joined in the last 2 years or so.

FT Duties that have become vacant in that period have been filled by PT staff, we're now understaffed, so our "Seniority Problem" mainly concerns who will be given the opportunity to be made up to FT. IF They get made up to FT then they can "Join" the FT seniority list and squabble over which duty they'd like

Pity the Union didn't issue official guide lines, they must have known these changes would be effecting all offices

[gb93]

I think you would have to pick in bands ie: 25 hour contracts pick on senority in there band same as 40 hours. So you do not end up with senior 25 hour people picking all the 40 hour duties. Which would mean that the 25 hours people picking forty hour duties would need 15 hours extra per week and the 40 hour people displaced to a 25 hour duty costing the bussiness 15 hours per week. If this happend a 25 hour duty and a 40 hour duty would cost the bussiness 95 hours per week to cover if they could not use the surplus hours elswhere. Not cost effective

Its a lot more simple than that(or should be).
Start with senior guy and go down the list, if you have a 25 hour guy senior than a 40 hour guy the duty he picks becomes a 25 hour duty.
No need for more or less hours to be put in.