Full time contracts given to less senior individuals

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 17 Jun 2016, 19:21

OK. Been with Mail for 5 years on various contracts temp 25hr, perm 23.5 hr, temp 31.5 hr, perm 23.5hr and now currently on a perm 30 hr contract which has been in place since October. It is the PTer position on a van share job so I do have my own duty.

Today not long after walking in I overhear the manager telling a less senior postie (by 12 -18months or so) that HR will be sending him his temp FT contract in the next few days (he's going from 3-day reserve to 5-day reserve).
Cue me being somewhat miffed about this...I was under the impression that the Way Foward agreement states that unless it requires a specialist skill jobs should go to the most senior individual who wants it

Other postie and I talked about it in the van, and he was horrified that I hadn't been offered at all, he had reasonably assumed that I had been offered and refused as are a few others who have found out about the situation.

Now before I kick off in the DOMS office in the morning I wanted to check that I'm right to be annoyed, so a two-part question...

I've just been reading the Way Forward and page 27 para 14.9 would suggest that actually as I have signed for a duty I have to stay exactly as I am, so is there technically no issue at all?
Or
Even if I cannot move duty to become a FT reserve, as the real change for me would be the addition of 1hr 48mins of indoor time, could that not have be offered to me which I would spend on IPS, prepping lapsing or whatever else needs doing and then move on to my duty at the designated start time?

Hope that makes sense.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 17 Jun 2016, 20:50

simple way to fight it, was the vacancy put up for everyone who wanted it to sign for it?

if no(as it sounds) the get rep to lodge a stage 1 disagreement over it. Don't worry whether you could or could not sign for it (you could anyway)

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 17 Jun 2016, 22:32

Cheers, just wanted to be clear that I do have a case to fight here because the of the bit about having to stay on a job for 12 months, assume that is there to stop FTers hopping duties at every opportunity until they finally land on one they like? Whereas my situation involves a brand new contract so that doesn't apply?

Annoyingly I will have to fight this one on my own as far as I can as I suspect the rep is the reason I didn't get a look in.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 17 Jun 2016, 23:02

Yes the bit about the contract doesn't apply, but it's a bad idea to fight it this way, best way to fight it is simply to get rep to disagree on the grounds that the vacancy wasn't put up for everyone to sign for, this is clear and cut, where as you saying you personally didn't get it could lead to dom trying to go down the road you mentioned earlier re you signing a new contract recently

also be careful fr what you wish for, if you go from your permanent pt contract to a temporary ft contract there is no guarunteed that you would get a new contract at the end of it as you would have intentionally gone onto a temporary contract

rehabron · Post by **rehabron** » 18 Jun 2016, 06:02

Better to be on a permanent contract rather than a temp.contract with more hours as this can altered at anytime whereas the one you are on is written in stone and can only be altered with your consent. The grass is not always greener on the other side.

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 18 Jun 2016, 17:55

The deal would be that my 30hr perm contract would remain in place and it would be topped up by 9 hrs to FT, although I am aware I may have to give up my duty and become a reserve., which may make placing me a little tricky if it doesn't become permanent.

This is what the other chap is getting, he's currently a 3-day float and will become a FT reserve for the duration of the temp contract, It might go permanent but if not he'll go back down to his current hours.

Well, for the first time in the 5 years I've been there our office is in a real mess with our DOM being shipped out with no notice and a temp in place trying to deal with the fall out of lots of posties suddenly quitting or choosing to drop days or hours all over the place.

I know that this isn't the fault of the poor sod sitting in the chair this week so raising the issue naturally resulted in games of "how quick can we pass the buck" and "if I tell enough lies, one of them might put someone else in the line of fire"... but the result is that it has been agreed that I should have been offered the FT contract and with yet another handing in notice this week there is a really good case to apply for another Temp FT position, which could easily turn into permanent.

I will have to keep standing up for myself on this one, can't use the rep.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 18 Jun 2016, 18:43

Why can't you use the rep? as fighting for you being offered the position is a far weaker fight than fighting for the vacancy to be filled correctly through the union

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 18 Jun 2016, 20:35

zx135 wrote:Why can't you use the rep? as fighting for you being offered the position is a far weaker fight than fighting for the vacancy to be filled correctly through the union

From what I have been able to gather, rep has some responsibility in the contract bypassing me.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 18 Jun 2016, 22:53

crazyshrew wrote:
zx135 wrote:Why can't you use the rep? as fighting for you being offered the position is a far weaker fight than fighting for the vacancy to be filled correctly through the union
From what I have been able to gather, rep has some responsibility in the contract bypassing me.

then go above him, also just to be clear, the contract didn't bypass you it is not a case it is offered by seniority to people on an individual basis, it goes up for everyone to be able to sign and then after everyone has had a chance to sign for it the most senior person who wants it gets it, you never know a more senior ft person may have wanted it, unlikely but they should have had the opportunity to apply as well

Martin Walsh · Post by **Martin Walsh** » 19 Jun 2016, 09:12

It is important that people understand the Agenda for Growth review and how part timers get to become full time.

Under the agenda for growth agreement it is the duty which is the important issue , does the duty need more hours if it does than it should be filled by the most senior part timer. This does mean that the part timer who wants more hours than has to do this duty. Equally the unfortunate issue is that the part timers who has signed for a part time duty but may have worked full time hours against this duty for months will be displaced as they are not the most senior part timer.

Equally If there is a full time vacancy and it is agreed under the filling of vacancies agreement sometimes known as the Stoke Agreement to recruit to full time than it is to be offered in seniority order of the excisting part timers who closest match the hours. If a part timer wants to get an increase in their contracted hours they must agree to do this duty.

The key in both it is the duty which has the increase in hours not the individual doing the job as it has to be resourced by seniority

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 19 Jun 2016, 15:27

zx135 wrote:
crazyshrew wrote:
zx135 wrote:Why can't you use the rep? as fighting for you being offered the position is a far weaker fight than fighting for the vacancy to be filled correctly through the union
From what I have been able to gather, rep has some responsibility in the contract bypassing me.

then go above him, also just to be clear, the contract didn't bypass you it is not a case it is offered by seniority to people on an individual basis, it goes up for everyone to be able to sign and then after everyone has had a chance to sign for it the most senior person who wants it gets it, you never know a more senior ft person may have wanted it, unlikely but they should have had the opportunity to apply as well

Now, this is a case of needing more hours in the office ASAP rather than Duty X needing a bod assigned to it (although we do have 3 of those now) it's more a case of we're short however many FT'ers so get the PT'ers made up, which they are already doing on OT (but missing out on A/L or if sick)
In other words cutting the amount of OT by putting the extra hours people are working into contracts.

I'm sure the specific vacant duties we have will get advertised in due course but this is a situation of trying to get the hours in to the office that we are supposed to have

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 19 Jun 2016, 15:58

dingo wrote:It is important that people understand the Agenda for Growth review and how part timers get to become full time.

Under the agenda for growth agreement it is the duty which is the important issue , does the duty need more hours if it does than it should be filled by the most senior part timer. This does mean that the part timer who wants more hours than has to do this duty. Equally the unfortunate issue is that the part timers who has signed for a part time duty but may have worked full time hours against this duty for months will be displaced as they are not the most senior part timer.

Equally If there is a full time vacancy and it is agreed under the filling of vacancies agreement sometimes known as the Stoke Agreement to recruit to full time than it is to be offered in seniority order of the excisting part timers who closest match the hours. If a part timer wants to get an increase in their contracted hours they must agree to do this duty.

The key in both it is the duty which has the increase in hours not the individual doing the job as it has to be resourced by seniority

I think this is what I'm trying to get at

filled by the most senior part timer

I am No6 on PT seniority I have found out that all PT'ers above me were asked by the rep if they wanted to go FT, most are happy to remain as they are, No5 took the opportunity. Then this chap who is No8 (two places below me) was asked by the DOM if he wanted it and he naturally said yes ( I haven't managed to speak to the postie in the No 7 slot to see if he was asked by either the rep or the DOM)
I appear to have been completely bypassed/ignored

I thought that maybe it was a case of as I signed for a duty less than 12 months ago, so cannot sign for any other duty yet.
Or maybe that I as I had most recently seen a contract increase I would have wait, but that surely can't be something in any of the agreements
And neither seem fair if it prevents someone from getting a better contract If the opportunity may not come up again for years .

If it all sound really messy and confusing, it is because it really is. Like I say the office has always worked very very well, even though it ran on secret meetings and Chinese whispers, but we always just rolled up our sleeves and got on with the job. But we are suddenly in a huge mess, everyone's getting confused and pissed off, the rep has always considered himself to be management and when he decides he's happy to speak with people it's as more of a dictator than and elected representative.

Basically, no one knows what's going on at the moment.

UnhappyGremlin · Post by **UnhappyGremlin** » 19 Jun 2016, 17:05

The 12 month rule does not apply in this situation.

As the duty is for more hours, it counts as a promotion, and therefore you can have it.

It should have been advertised for all to apply, in writing.

Get the Rep onto it ASAP. And if they aren't willing go to Area Rep.

Really, the DOM should back down after a chat with the Rep.
If not, the above advice of a stage 1 Disagreement should be your next port of call.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 19 Jun 2016, 17:31

crazyshrew wrote:
zx135 wrote:
crazyshrew wrote:
zx135 wrote:Why can't you use the rep? as fighting for you being offered the position is a far weaker fight than fighting for the vacancy to be filled correctly through the union
From what I have been able to gather, rep has some responsibility in the contract bypassing me.

then go above him, also just to be clear, the contract didn't bypass you it is not a case it is offered by seniority to people on an individual basis, it goes up for everyone to be able to sign and then after everyone has had a chance to sign for it the most senior person who wants it gets it, you never know a more senior ft person may have wanted it, unlikely but they should have had the opportunity to apply as well
Now, this is a case of needing more hours in the office ASAP rather than Duty X needing a bod assigned to it (although we do have 3 of those now) it's more a case of we're short however many FT'ers so get the PT'ers made up, which they are already doing on OT (but missing out on A/L or if sick)
In other words cutting the amount of OT by putting the extra hours people are working into contracts.

I'm sure the specific vacant duties we have will get advertised in due course but this is a situation of trying to get the hours in to the office that we are supposed to have

it doesn't matter if it's to be filled asap or not, it still goes up so everyone has the chance to sign for it,

as I said very very unlikely a ft would sign for it but they must be given chance to, what I am getting at is if you go and put in a grievance yourself rather than go down the disagreement route, if you won your grievance and the duty was given to you, a more senior ft member of staff "could" (though highly unlikely) put in a grievance about you getting the duty, and they then in turn would win that grievance also

hence why it is better to get the disagreement in about it not being put up for signing rather than a grievance about it not being personally offered to you

also in regard to the vacant duties couple of questions how many of them are there? what's your total number of staff supposed to be in office? and how long have they been vacant?

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 19 Jun 2016, 18:56

UnhappyGremlin wrote:The 12 month rule does not apply in this situation.

As the duty is for more hours, it counts as a promotion, and therefore you can have it.

It should have been advertised for all to apply, in writing.

Get the Rep onto it ASAP. And if they aren't willing go to Area Rep.

Really, the DOM should back down after a chat with the Rep.
If not, the above advice of a stage 1 Disagreement should be your next port of call.

This has cleared things up for me massively. Thankyou

zx135 wrote: it doesn't matter if it's to be filled asap or not, it still goes up so everyone has the chance to sign for it,

as I said very very unlikely a ft would sign for it but they must be given chance to, what I am getting at is if you go and put in a grievance yourself rather than go down the disagreement route, if you won your grievance and the duty was given to you, a more senior ft member of staff "could" (though highly unlikely) put in a grievance about you getting the duty, and they then in turn would win that grievance also
hence why it is better to get the disagreement in about it not being put up for signing rather than a grievance about it not being personally offered to you

So even the less attractive reserve positions have to be openly advertised internally? OK, that has never happened before in my office. Only ever seen actual walks go up

zx135 wrote:also in regard to the vacant duties couple of questions how many of them are there? what's your total number of staff supposed to be in office? and how long have they been vacant?

Walks without duty holders stands at 3, doesn't sound a lot but that is 10%,
then there's a few float/reserve positions too. Not sure about exact numbers there. We were perfectly set after our revision a couple of years ago (we must be one of the very few offices where the revision made things better!!) but there have been several contract changes since then with people dropping hours. There is talk of 15 and 20hr contracts being recruited which were never in the revision originally but obviously needed now to fill some of the gaps left by people going from 5 days to 3 or other drops in hours.

There must be lots of talk going on behind closed doors, but nothing coming out to the rest of us