If you really want a pay rise do this...

r_holmes22

Mumbles moved the goalposts a few pages back when s/he [finally; halleluja!!] admitted that all s/he is doing is reducing the number of days between the end of one holiday and the start of the next and that it 'feels' like a 'virtual' pay rise, which is, in all probability, perfectly true.

This, of course, is completely inconsistent with the original post, which clearly stated that s/he has figured out "a method of working less for the same money". Better yet, this escalated in post 5 to "reducing the number of days worked between holidays actually gives you a pay rise".

BTW, at first I thought Mumbles was just being a wally, but it becomes evident as the thread wears on (and thin) that s/he is just on a wind-up. I've been loving some of the replies, though. This has been the funniest discussion I have read in years.

JimmyTheWig

elvis86 wrote: »

Only...it's not.

In your example above, in the first instance you're "at work" for 8.5 hours and have taken an hour's break. So you worked for 7.5 hours.

In the second example (ie the double shift) you've been "at work" for 17 hours, and have taken 2 hours break. Therefore you worked for 15 hours. It's exactly the same. As with mumbles' "genius" system, you're no better off (ie you haven't miraculously escaped working as long as the guy at the desk next to you or gotten a virtual payrise), you just got to eat your butties at a time that suited you. In the same situation, I might choose to work 15 hours then sod off home...:D

I'm not claiming that I'm winning any hours by doing this, just that it would be a sensible way to organise my breaks.
It's just a case of dividing up the time at work into equal sections whilst remembering that there will be one more section than number of breaks/holidays.

r_holmes22

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I'm not claiming that I'm winning any hours by doing this, just that it would be a sensible way to organise my breaks.
It's just a case of dividing up the time at work into equal sections whilst remembering that there will be one more section than number of breaks/holidays.

This is what everybody has been finding so frustrating about Mumbles' "strategy". S/he claimed form the outset that it is a way of working fewer hours for the same pay and then even escalated to claiming it as effectively a pay rise. In actual fact, all s/he is doing was arranging the leave s/he is entitled to in a way that suits her/him best.

superrug_2

r_holmes22 wrote: »

This is what everybody has been finding so frustrating about Mumbles' "strategy". S/he claimed form the outset that it is a way of working fewer hours for the same pay and then even escalated to claiming it as effectively a pay rise. In actual fact, all s/he is doing was arranging the leave s/he is entitled to in a way that suits her/him best.

But you get more holidays

JimmyTheWig

r_holmes22 wrote: »

This is what everybody has been finding so frustrating about Mumbles' "strategy". S/he claimed form the outset that it is a way of working fewer hours for the same pay and then even escalated to claiming it as effectively a pay rise. In actual fact, all s/he is doing was arranging the leave s/he is entitled to in a way that suits her/him best.

I agree.
Page 20, to me, is the important one.
The aim, as defined in post #382, boils down to sustainability.

As I say in post #395, I'm ignoring posts like the first one.

mumbles_one

I still think the best way to think of this "strategy" is to imagine you only get one day's holiday every year .

If you take 31 December every year then you have to work 364 days before you get your 1 day holiday . (except leap years)

If you take your holiday slightly earlier every year you have to work less days between holidays.

Now that's not so difficult to imagine??? or is it???

So plan your holidays so that you keep the number of days worked between holidays to a sustainable minimum.

I don't live to work. My life is what happens when I am away from work.

Away from work = Holiday

364 days between holidays = BAD
363 days between holidays = getting better
.
1 day between holidays = almost perfect

MessyMare

But if you only have one day a year, you'll never get to one day between holidays...this thread makes my head spin and doubt my powers of logic.

IndigoBlue_2

mumbles_one wrote: »

What I am trying to get at is that reducing the number of days worked between holidays actually gives you a pay rise. So I only worked 10 months then took one month paid holiday. So I was being paid for 12 months every year but only working 10 months between holdays. Its a bit like working 4 days then taking 2 days off every week .The number of days worked between holidays is 220 days on a 10 month cycle whereas on an 11 month cycle you work 242 days per year but get the same salary. Just don't work for a company for more than 10 years. But who does???

What a stupid thing to say. Plenty of people work for longer than 10 years.

real1314

mumbles_one wrote: »

I still think the best way to think of this "strategy" is to imagine you only get one day's holiday every year .

If you take 31 December every year then you have to work 364 days before you get your 1 day holiday . (except leap years)

If you take your holiday slightly earlier every year you have to work less days between holidays.

Now that's not so difficult to imagine??? or is it???

So plan your holidays so that you keep the number of days worked between holidays to a sustainable minimum.

I don't live to work. My life is what happens when I am away from work.

Away from work = Holiday

364 days between holidays = BAD
363 days between holidays = getting better
.
1 day between holidays = almost perfect

For God's sake don't ever become an accountant. You'd bankrupt everything you touched. :cool:

mumbles_one

ColleenPamela wrote: »

But if you only have one day a year, you'll never get to one day between holidays...this thread makes my head spin and doubt my powers of logic.

"imagine" you only get one day per year like they had 500 years ago.

which day would you take???? same day every year OR move it earlier every year??? which is better???

this is only to help you to better understanding