Staff refusing to work overtime because of tax credits.

property.advert

13 years of gorging at the largesse delivered up by Labour has left a pathetic system whereby most of the country are on benefits and billions are wasted taking taxes only to give them straight back in social payments. I don't blame the people, they are scared of losing the benefits which they have become accustomed to and which will take some years for a sensible Tory government to wean them from.

dori2o

melly1980 wrote: »

Not really. You have no idea what the role entails. It may be quite specialised where casual labour isnt a possibility.

In addition you are naive if you think you can simple "man up" all year around when work may come in peaks and troughs and that level of manning may be unaffordable. Its also exceptionally poor form to employ people in such circumstances in permanent roles if you know full well that there may not be work for them in 6months time.

You have also completely ignored the significant effect of an imposed 3 day working week next week so we can all watch what are essentially posh doleys get married with our cash. The OP could not have planned for that.

As for the prior preparation and planning bobbins you have come up with, they have planned. They are being completely reasonable to expect some level of overtime to be done and if everyone was to pull their weight and do a bit rather than dumping it all on the few they would cope fine.

If I were the OP I would be making a little mental record of who exactly he can rely on within his organisation. Then, come payrise time, appraisal time, promotion time or redundancy time I would be accessing that mental piece of information with glee. Karma and all that.

Who exactly has 'imposed' a 3 day working week. If the employer is closing for the bank holidays that is their problem not the employees.

Nobody is entitled to the bank holidays off if the employer only offers 28 days holiday INCLUDING bank holidays, or they offer more than the statutory but their contract states that bank holidays are at the discretion of the employer. Neither are the employers required to pay more than the normal rate for bank holidays worked.

seven-day-weekend

The staff have every right to refuse overtime if they wish.

The employer then also should have every right not to give them any sort of bonuses or do them any special favours (such as time off because a child is sick).

If you work, you should be prepared to help out if you possibly can. I do understand that there are those who can't. But this should be for personal reasons such as childcare, or elderly relative care etc, not just because of tax credits.

All imho of course

bitemebankers

melly1980 wrote: »

Not really. You have no idea what the role entails. It may be quite specialised where casual labour isnt a possibility.

See the original post: the additional labour is required for a stock take. Hardly specialised! If it is, for some reason, very specialised, that's all the more reason to plan more carefully.

In addition you are naive if you think you can simple "man up" all year around when work may come in peaks and troughs and that level of manning may be unaffordable...Its also exceptionally poor form to employ people in such circumstances in permanent roles if you know full well that there may not be work for them in 6months time...You have also completely ignored the significant effect of an imposed 3 day working week next week so we can all watch what are essentially posh doleys get married with our cash. The OP could not have planned for that.

Again, lack of basic reading and comprehension skills on your part: the OP as already stated that this increase in work was expected. What's more, the three-day week is not mandatory and has been known about for a ages.

There are no excuses.

This is a classic lack of planning, resulting in poor performance. Blaming the staff for lack of management competence is all too common amongst British firms though, and is an unfortunate part of the avaricious, right-wing culture that pervades the management of a lot of companies.

They are being completely reasonable to expect some level of overtime to be done

Clearly not. The staff aren't prepared to do the overtime, so it wasn't a reasonable assumption, was it?

If I were the OP I would be making a little mental record of who exactly he can rely on within his organisation. Then, come payrise time, appraisal time, promotion time or redundancy time I would be accessing that mental piece of information with glee. Karma and all that.

Glee?

Seriously?

God help anyone who ends up working for you, if indeed you have a business or any experience of actually running one.

I'm all for rewarding staff who go the extra mile to help me out. But going the extra mile is exactly that: something over and above the norm, not something you can expect or rely upon when planning your resources.

If I were the OP, I would be asking myself some searching questions right now, such as why so few of my staff are willing to help out during a difficult time. A good starting point to answering this question would be to take responsibility for the fundamental lack of planning which underlies this issue.

melly1980

flea72 wrote: »

if someone has a seasonal business they should try to work their financial year around their quiet times

ie. an easter egg seller - if they had end of year April, they would have to spend extra time on stocktake as their shelves could be fuller, and some years they could have two easters fall in one tax year, and the next year with none at all

F

their financial year is fixed around the financial year for tax purposes. Are you trying to look utterly thick or does it come naturally.

melly1980

flea72 wrote: »

If you pay well,

F

If you want better pay get a better job. You are paid to do THAT job which has attached to it THAT WAGE. You should do it to the best of your ability or sod off.

dreavi

melly1980 wrote: »

If you want better pay get a better job. You are paid to do THAT job which has attached to it THAT WAGE. You should do it to the best of your ability or sod off.

But they might well be doing the job to the best ability, they just dont want to hang about after their shift has finished. Cant blame them when the weathers this nice

melly1980

bitemebankers wrote: »

Again, lack of basic reading and comprehension skills on your part: the OP as already stated that this increase in work was expected. What's more, the three-day week is not mandatory and has been known about for a ages.

.

On the contary it is a lack of comprehension skills on your part because you have failed to read the whole point.

If the work is seasonal it is still exceptionally poor form to employ someone on a full time basis to then have to jib them off. This leaves part time / casual workers only and there is every possibility that this is not suitable for this type of job.
My reasoning? Well the person is talking about stock takes and fulfilling orders making it likely that this is some kind of manufacturing operation or at the very least logistical / distribution. If it is manufacturing he may not be able to drag in any old person for short periods to do the role. You also incorrectly assume that stock take is simple. It depends on what you are stock taking and I myself have seen stock takes that not just anyone can come in at short notice and do it. So this leaves the only option as employing other people on full time, something that might not be financially viable and they may have to get rid of them after the busy period....that would be good wouldnt it.

melly1980

dreavi wrote: »

But they might well be doing the job to the best ability, they just dont want to hang about after their shift has finished. Cant blame them when the weathers this nice

thats fine as long as they understand that if orders are lost as a consequence they may not have a job to go to and they can then enjoy the weather in their back garden all day long.

bitemebankers

melly1980 wrote: »

On the contary it is a lack of comprehension skills on your part because you have failed to read the whole point.

I read it alright, but I don't deem it relevant.

As I thought I made pretty clear, the fact that the employer had - by his/her own admission - plenty of advance notice of both the volume of work and the additional national holidays negates any excuses at this point.

He/she just assumed that the staff would be prepared to work overtime without bothering to check. Regardless of anything else, this is poor resource planning. End of.