1in4 sats off or 75%25% its a trade off

[Dorset Plodder]

I bet I know which of the options the 23 PTers are hoping for! Unfortunately most people are out for what they can get out of the deal for themselves.
Surely we should should be trying to move towards a FT (as far as possible) workforce? PT should be seen as an option chosen by those who want it. NOT just a cheap option used by RM to promote a "Work Hungry" workforce of PTers who are really after FT, and often take a lot more s**t than they would do if they had the correct T & Cs.
Plenty of evidence on this site showing how divisive the present balance of duties are. RM must love us slagging each other off instead of sticking together.

[Cedar_Room]

I bet I know which of the options the 23 PTers are hoping for! Unfortunately most people are out for what they can get out of the deal for themselves.
Surely we should should be trying to move towards a FT (as far as possible) workforce? PT should be seen as an option chosen by those who want it. NOT just a cheap option used by RM to promote a "Work Hungry" workforce of PTers who are really after FT, and often take a lot more s**t than they would do if they had the correct T & Cs.
Plenty of evidence on this site showing how divisive the present balance of duties are. RM must love us slagging each other off instead of sticking together.

Nail on head.

The fact they are now employing people on 6-month contract's is also a f***ing sham.

They know that these people are easier to manipulate & screw over,especially when the carrot of a perm' contract is dangled.

[belle smith]

I bet I know which of the options the 23 PTers are hoping for! Unfortunately most people are out for what they can get out of the deal for themselves.
Surely we should should be trying to move towards a FT (as far as possible) workforce? PT should be seen as an option chosen by those who want it. NOT just a cheap option used by RM to promote a "Work Hungry" workforce of PTers who are really after FT, and often take a lot more s**t than they would do if they had the correct T & Cs.
Plenty of evidence on this site showing how divisive the present balance of duties are. RM must love us slagging each other off instead of sticking together.

I bet i know what option the F/t staff want as well!

[coxie]

you will give up your 1 in 4 saturdays off then your dom will not honour his part of the deal, stay well clear they are lying bastards.

the agreement does say 75% FT staff but that doesnt mean at your office that means thats the national target.

[peterloo]

you will give up your 1 in 4 saturdays off then your dom will not honour his part of the deal, stay well clear they are lying bastards.

the agreement does say 75% FT staff but that doesnt mean at your office that means thats the national target.

To be honest RM would not even commit to making any of those full time upgrades permanent even in line with turn over i.e if one permanent F/T left job temp full time made permanent. How can you base a decision based on temporary contracts.From what i have seen from other posts it does not seem unresonable to have both 1 in 4 sats and full-time upgrades

[belle smith]

you will give up your 1 in 4 saturdays off then your dom will not honour his part of the deal, stay well clear they are lying bastards.

the agreement does say 75% FT staff but that doesnt mean at your office that means thats the national target.

To be honest RM would not even commit to making any of those full time upgrades permanent even in line with turn over i.e if one permanent F/T left job temp full time made permanent. How can you base a decision based on temporary contracts.From what i have seen from other posts it does not seem unresonable to have both 1 in 4 sats and full-time upgrades

@If thats the deal hopefully your office will vote NO!