Part timer's read this...

DocketLefty · Post by **DocketLefty** » 04 Feb 2016, 20:43

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/em ... rkers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Does this give us any grounds to request a full-time contract if we have been working full-time (or more) hours over a certain period of time? If they get pro-rota holiday pay etc then we should too!

'The Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001 aims to:

Ensure that a part-time employee cannot be treated less favourably than a comparable full-time employee regarding conditions of employment'

DocketLefty · Post by **DocketLefty** » 04 Feb 2016, 20:47

'Part-time work: Generally, the annual leave for part-time workers is calculated using the 3rd method, that is, 8% of hours worked. If you work full time for some months and the rest of the year you work part time, you should calculate the leave for the full-time and the part-time periods of work separately'

DocketLefty · Post by **DocketLefty** » 04 Feb 2016, 21:07

and this...

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 04 Feb 2016, 21:15

There is no grounds to that insist Royal Mail give you a full time contract(or greater hour contract), rm will review your contract if you are regularly working extra hours, though be ware that if the review shows extra hours are required in the office they will go to the most senior part time who wants them if they can take them, not necessarily the person who had been working them before the review

The annual leave though yes you should be getting pro rata for that though, though you may need to take term to court yourself to insist on it

DocketLefty · Post by **DocketLefty** » 04 Feb 2016, 21:23

Seems like they are breaking employment law ?

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 04 Feb 2016, 21:31

DocketLefty wrote:Seems like they are breaking employment law ?

for annual leave potentially yes, as far as I know it's still being discussed between union and RM since the court ruling last year (maybe year before) but yes rm may be breaking employment law in this regard, a part timer would need to take rm to court over the matter, union probably won't as they are still discussing the implications of the court ruling as far as I know

Jpro747 · Post by **Jpro747** » 04 Feb 2016, 22:15

What about when your office has several part timers each covering full time rounds during all or some days of the week?
i.e. The full time hours avaiable are being 'shared' between the part timers but not one individual part timer is getting enough to warrant an increase in contract hours.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 04 Feb 2016, 22:37

Jpro747 wrote:What about when your office has several part timers each covering full time rounds during all or some days of the week?
i.e. The full time hours avaiable are being 'shared' between the part timers but not one individual part timer is getting enough to warrant an increase in contract hours.

you need to basically be doing the extra hours all the time, other problem is if your covering the outdoor element of a duty then chances are there's a duty that needs filled rather than hours to be shared out so rep should be pushing for vacancies to be filled in line with way forward agreement ie after 6 months or if over 5% vacancies

Post by **bustedflush** » 05 Feb 2016, 01:34

zx135 wrote:There is no grounds to that insist Royal Mail give you a full time contract(or greater hour contract), rm will review your contract if you are regularly working extra hours, though be ware that if the review shows extra hours are required in the office they will go to the most senior part time who wants them if they can take them, not necessarily the person who had been working them before the review

The annual leave though yes you should be getting pro rata for that though, though you may need to take term to court yourself to insist on it

Yes there are - under the WFA signed by CWU and RM, just to prevent this sort of abuse. If those increased hours DON'T go to the person who had been working them, that person should have their holiday/rota week pay earned that period reflect those hours, not basic contract hours. An EU ruling has ben made to that effect, although under appeal/review in the UK so not applied yet. When it is, all PT'ers royally ripped-off for sustained periods of months or years whereby they haven't been paid average hours on time-off will find a nice backdated wedge coming their way. Some PT'ers will potentially receive thousands judging by some of the extreme examples on here - assuming the spirit of the EU ruling IS eventually applied here.

madmax1 · Post by **madmax1** » 05 Feb 2016, 19:55

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 05 Feb 2016, 19:59

madmax1 wrote:I used to work in the health service. They introduced the holiday pay element years ago. Not sure of the exact calculations but basically they took an average of the actual hours worked over any given period (probably the previous month), worked out how much extra annual leave that should have accrued and then paid you the equivalent cash in your wages rather than adding on bits of leave each month. Some people who were doing extra nights on top of their 37hrs were getting a fair bit, so if it is back-dated RM will have to splash a fair bit of cash to the boys and girls who've been working their a***s off for years on O/T. That's probably why the company are fighting it. If they had any decency they would have coughed up years ago.

its a 13 week average thats supposed to be used also the court case specifically said it didnt need to be back dated unfortunately

Post by **bustedflush** » 05 Feb 2016, 20:39

zx135 wrote:
madmax1 wrote:I used to work in the health service. They introduced the holiday pay element years ago. Not sure of the exact calculations but basically they took an average of the actual hours worked over any given period (probably the previous month), worked out how much extra annual leave that should have accrued and then paid you the equivalent cash in your wages rather than adding on bits of leave each month. Some people who were doing extra nights on top of their 37hrs were getting a fair bit, so if it is back-dated RM will have to splash a fair bit of cash to the boys and girls who've been working their a***s off for years on O/T. That's probably why the company are fighting it. If they had any decency they would have coughed up years ago.

its a 13 week average thats supposed to be used also the court case specifically said it didnt need to be back dated unfortunately

It does if it was SA. But I believe they've paid some back already.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 05 Feb 2016, 20:43

bustedflush wrote:
zx135 wrote:
madmax1 wrote:I used to work in the health service. They introduced the holiday pay element years ago. Not sure of the exact calculations but basically they took an average of the actual hours worked over any given period (probably the previous month), worked out how much extra annual leave that should have accrued and then paid you the equivalent cash in your wages rather than adding on bits of leave each month. Some people who were doing extra nights on top of their 37hrs were getting a fair bit, so if it is back-dated RM will have to splash a fair bit of cash to the boys and girls who've been working their a***s off for years on O/T. That's probably why the company are fighting it. If they had any decency they would have coughed up years ago.

its a 13 week average thats supposed to be used also the court case specifically said it didnt need to be back dated unfortunately
It does if it was SA. But I believe they've paid some back already.

No not even for sa, only last few months before any claim made, same time limit for an unlawful deduction of wages claim at a tribunal, not the years worth people were expecting

korky · Post by **korky** » 06 Feb 2016, 17:22

isn't the link above for Eire?
sure they'll have different laws to the UK

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 06 Feb 2016, 21:32

korky wrote:isn't the link above for Eire?
sure they'll have different laws to the UK

Yes it is for Ireland however it's about an EU ruling on working hours that was made last year, that ruling aplies to all countries,