full time job on the toss of a coin.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 21 Jul 2016, 15:39

a full time vacancy was decided at ours today on the toss of a coin. both posties started on the same day about 12 yrs ago. once it used to be decided by the oldest getting the job if they started at the same time. but apparently that's not allowed now as its classed as ''ageism''. rep says ''is there an easier way''? ......perhaps not, but to lose out on a coin toss seems harsh to me.

jetblack · Post by **jetblack** » 21 Jul 2016, 18:30

Losing on the toss of a coin ?
Story of my life

Unless the coin was loaded, seems pretty fair to me. I regularly decide stuff (otherwise unresolvable family stuff) on the toss of a coin.

What isn't fair is that after 12 years 2 blokes still don't have a full time position.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 21 Jul 2016, 18:50

jetblack wrote:Losing on the toss of a coin ?
Story of my life

Unless the coin was loaded, seems pretty fair to me. I regularly decide stuff (otherwise unresolvable family stuff) on the toss of a coin.

What isn't fair is that after 12 years 2 blokes still don't have a full time position.

there's one just been made up a couple of months ago, after 16 yrs in the job.

world class male · Post by **world class male** » 21 Jul 2016, 19:18

daveyeff wrote:a full time vacancy was decided at ours today on the toss of a coin. both posties started on the same day about 12 yrs ago. once it used to be decided by the oldest getting the job if they started at the same time. but apparently that's not allowed now as its classed as ''ageism''. rep says ''is there an easier way''? ......perhaps not, but to lose out on a coin toss seems harsh to me.

who says "it's not allowed" ?
guessing the elder of the 2 lost the flip, so i'd be calling the cwu hq and quoting the latest agreement to how its decided and "my own rep" changed the rules, then put in a disagreement.
what next? best out of 3 or rock paper scissors

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 21 Jul 2016, 19:35

there's 3 reps in there. and they've all mentioned it. stating its 'ageism'. don't known if it right or not though.

DB1100 · Post by **DB1100** » 21 Jul 2016, 19:40

There's always Harry Hills way.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 21 Jul 2016, 19:46

apparently under the equality act, you are protected in employment from 'ageism'. so I presume if the elder bloke had of got the job, the younger could say he was being discriminated against because of his age. toss of a coin seems daft though. must be some other way.

Vwtouran · Post by **Vwtouran** » 21 Jul 2016, 19:56

Thought is goes by alphabetical order?

Post by **Judgee** » 21 Jul 2016, 20:01

I always lose out on seniority to a guy that started the same day as me. Not sure why he has seniority it could either be age or alphabetical. I'd be happy with a coin toss. That would seem the fairest way to me when two employees have worked exactly the same time. Why should one benefit over the other purely on being one step closer to the grave or named higher up the alphabet?!

Post by **SpacePhoenix** » 21 Jul 2016, 20:14

Judgee wrote:I always lose out on seniority to a guy that started the same day as me. Not sure why he has seniority it could either be age or alphabetical. I'd be happy with a coin toss. That would seem the fairest way to me when two employees have worked exactly the same time. Why should one benefit over the other purely on being one step closer to the grave or named higher up the alphabet?!

Might just be that the other guy's details got added to the payroll database before yours

world class male · Post by **world class male** » 21 Jul 2016, 20:18

SpacePhoenix wrote:
Judgee wrote:I always lose out on seniority to a guy that started the same day as me. Not sure why he has seniority it could either be age or alphabetical. I'd be happy with a coin toss. That would seem the fairest way to me when two employees have worked exactly the same time. Why should one benefit over the other purely on being one step closer to the grave or named higher up the alphabet?!
Might just be that the other guy's details got added to the payroll database before yours

there is definitely an agreement somewhere that states to decide seniority where both started same day it goes to the elder
don't know if this as been revised since

Rumple · Post by **Rumple** » 22 Jul 2016, 07:01

Vwtouran wrote:Thought is goes by alphabetical order?

That wouldn't ge fair on Zack Zanderfeld.

crazyshrew · Post by **crazyshrew** » 22 Jul 2016, 14:32

way forward says

13.9 Where several employees start on the same day, the following factors will determine the relative order: Firstly, any periods of Post Office service on other grades,secondly date of selection, and thirdly date of birth.

So who got offered the job first?

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 22 Jul 2016, 16:49

the youngest got it because he called heads. heads it was... he has lost out twice before to the same bloke on a coin toss. once was a floater vacancy, the other was on Saturdays off. 3rd time lucky I suppose. the older one went sick today. must be well pissed off. I know I would be.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 22 Jul 2016, 16:55

probably about 4 grand a year difference in wages on the flip of a two bob bit. sickener