Family Friendly

[gerardy]

Hi all,

I am hoping that someone on here will be able to help with an issue concerning family friendlies.

There are a couple of people on family friendly work hours in my office and have been on them for a number of years now. Most of these people never had to fill in the official forms but they were all accepted by previous managers, there is documentation to prove this fact and there has never been any issue until rercently. Due to a new manager these members are all getting refused the family friendly work hours they have become acustomed too even though it is supposed to be a permanent change to contracted hours.

Can Royal Mail do this?

Has anyone got a copy of the family friendly forms of old as some believe that there was never a mention of a review date on them, and some of the people involved say that they never agreed to any review of their family friendly work hours yet managers are arguing that all family friendlies are to be reviewed annually?

What action can these members of staff take now regarding this issue as the system seems to be corrupt?

Any advice would be greatly appriciated and welcomed THANKS

[whisperstar24]

Royal mail flexabile working application forms do exist and should be filled out correctly.We have had our revision in our office recently and some people had to do them.
With regard to the duration ,if someone is successful in getting family friendly it is only a temporary status and they revert to their old duty and times when for example a child has reached 17 and a child care issue no longer is the cause.Caring for a elderly releative or spouse may be another example but once that issue has been dealt with then the duty goes back to the normal times.All applications should be looked at if you have a reason for requesting family friendly but the business does not have to accomodate you .You can only request a family friendly every 2 years.

[scirocco'r']

Flexible working requests should lead to a permanant change in the employee's contract.
This probably did not happen because H.R and D.O.M's are invariably lazy and incompetent.
Most importantly though this is a good examply of the C.W.U, unlike other unions, failing to use the law to help members.
For to long back room deals with insufficiently rigorous evidence have been standard operating procedure for the C.W.U.
A modern union is top heavy with employment lawyers.
It is about time the C.W.U followed suit.
In addition following an unsuccessful flexible working request you must wait one year not two before you apply again

[dvbuk55]

Think I'll apply - my youngest child is 30, so I could do with FF hours that suits me better rather than the business and if it is permanent maybe the hours will last until he retires!! There would have to be compelling reasons to extend the FF hours beyond what could reasonably be expected for child care etc. This is a business and not a welfare centre.

[liamlayor]

Think I'll apply - my youngest child is 30, so I could do with FF hours that suits me better rather than the business and if it is permanent maybe the hours will last until he retires!! There would have to be compelling reasons to extend the FF hours beyond what could reasonably be expected for child care etc. This is a business and not a welfare centre.

Let's hope that none of your family ever becomes disabled and needs care. I suppose you would do the 'decent thing' though and give up your job altogether to care for them - no worries about your financial status or the fact that getting out to work can frequently be the only 'social' life a carer has.

There can be compelling reasons why people need family friendly hours and Royal Mail, as with all employers, has a duty to consider giving them to people who request them but their consideration seems only to be for the cost to the company and rejection is the usual outcome, whatever problems the applicant is facing.

Think yourself lucky you're not in that position and have a little compassion for those who are, I never thought that I would end up being a carer but I do the best I can in spite of the obstacles RM have put in my way.

As to the OP, look at the law surrounding written, verbal or implied variations to contracts and consider the support the CWU should be giving to help these people. there is enough in our joint CWU/RM agreements to cover this but this is not being used.

As for RM valuing diversity, equality, dignity and respect - they don't know the meaning of the words.

[gand]

Think I'll apply - my youngest child is 30, so I could do with FF hours that suits me better rather than the business and if it is permanent maybe the hours will last until he retires!! There would have to be compelling reasons to extend the FF hours beyond what could reasonably be expected for child care etc. This is a business and not a welfare centre.

Let's hope that none of your family ever becomes disabled and needs care. I suppose you would do the 'decent thing' though and give up your job altogether to care for them - no worries about your financial status or the fact that getting out to work can frequently be the only 'social' life a carer has.

There can be compelling reasons why people need family friendly hours and Royal Mail, as with all employers, has a duty to consider giving them to people who request them but their consideration seems only to be for the cost to the company and rejection is the usual outcome, whatever problems the applicant is facing.

Think yourself lucky you're not in that position and have a little compassion for those who are, I never thought that I would end up being a carer but I do the best I can in spite of the obstacles RM have put in my way.

As to the OP, look at the law surrounding written, verbal or implied variations to contracts and consider the support the CWU should be giving to help these people. there is enough in our joint CWU/RM agreements to cover this but this is not being used.

As for RM valuing diversity, equality, dignity and respect - they don't know the meaning of the words.

Don't think he was talking about disabled people tho. Think he was talking about people who Choose to have lot's of kids and then want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us!

[fishtank]

Don't think he was talking about disabled people tho. Think he was talking about people who Choose to have lot's of kids and then want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us!

Don't knock the baby farms.
We're all going to need them later in life.
It's those that have no kids or just one that are really selfish.
Think of the future.

Anyway ...more to the point.

want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us

How the f**k does that work?

[gand]

Don't think he was talking about disabled people tho. Think he was talking about people who Choose to have lot's of kids and then want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us!

Don't knock the baby farms.
We're all going to need them later in life.
It's those that have no kids or just one that are really selfish.
Think of the future.

Anyway ...more to the point.

want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us

How the f**k does that work?

Ok works like this. Why should someone who has chosen to have kids get preferential treatment over someone who has chosen not to have kids? Sounds like discrimination to me maybe i'm wrong tho

[fishtank]

Ok works like this. Why should someone who has chosen to have kids get preferential treatment over someone who has chosen not to have kids? Sounds like discrimination to me maybe i'm wrong tho

Define preferential treatment.

[liamlayor]

Don't think he was talking about disabled people tho. Think he was talking about people who Choose to have lot's of kids and then want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us!

Don't knock the baby farms.
We're all going to need them later in life.
It's those that have no kids or just one that are really selfish.
Think of the future.

Anyway ...more to the point.

want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us

How the f**k does that work?

Ok works like this. Why should someone who has chosen to have kids get preferential treatment over someone who has chosen not to have kids? Sounds like discrimination to me maybe i'm wrong tho

Because it is written down in law, but there seems to be little use in pointing that out to a person as discriminatory as you, and, as someone mentioned earlier, it will be all these children who pay for our pensions when they start to work - or perhaps you'll decline to accept yours??

[gand]

Don't think he was talking about disabled people tho. Think he was talking about people who Choose to have lot's of kids and then want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us!

Don't knock the baby farms.
We're all going to need them later in life.
It's those that have no kids or just one that are really selfish.
Think of the future.

Anyway ...more to the point.

want to have there work some how passed on to the rest of us

How the f**k does that work?

Ok works like this. Why should someone who has chosen to have kids get preferential treatment over someone who has chosen not to have kids? Sounds like discrimination to me maybe i'm wrong tho

Because it is written down in law, but there seems to be little use in pointing that out to a person as discriminatory as you, and, as someone mentioned earlier, it will be all these children who pay for our pensions when they start to work - or perhaps you'll decline to accept yours??

That's great so because i can't have kids and you can i should just get on with the rest of my working life having less working rites than you!

[liamlayor]

What makes you think I have children? I am a carer for a disabled spouse but I believe firmly in the rights of others, which are protected by the laws of the country, and also in the wisdom of the law lords who have given them these rights.

[fishtank]

That's great so because i can't have kids and you can i should just get on with the rest of my working life having less working rites than you!

Define working rights...
Anybody can apply for Flexible Working.
The only difference with parents and carers is that their application is statutory and the process for granting or refusing the request has to be treated formally but the reasons for refusal are exactly the same.

Never fear because the constant bitching from certain quarters has won the day and the Government intends to proclaim that everyone can apply for flexible working on an equal footing shortly.

Unfortunately rather than give everyone statutory entitlement to the formal process they have removed it entirely and given employers nothing more than a gentle duty to consider it which probably means no-one will get it.

If i'm not getting it no-one is race to the bottom style.
Job done.

[liamlayor]

Well said, Fishtank!
Straight to the point, as usual.

[dvbuk55]

Well that may bring a level playing field which has been missing for a long time over a myriad of subjects.