Can you be sacked for not doing overtime?

Welshwoofs

falko89 wrote: »

As for references, this may be something for fancier type jobs but certainly no one has ever asked me for my references, good job as I don't actually have any.

Look, you obviously don't like doing manual work for just over minimum wage because you want more work/life balance, but here's the facts of life for you. If you don't have a lot to offer anyone, then you don't get to make a lot of choices about what you do. Why? Because you're easily replaced.

You really don't come across as though you have much 'get up and go' - any real ambition or career goals. If I were 31 and had no references I'd be crapping myself because I'd know that it's most likely that the only employers willing to give me a shot are bad employers with high staff churn.

What's your plan? Where do you hope to be career wise in 5 years? What are you doing to get there?

thequant

Welshwoofs wrote: »

Look, you obviously don't like doing manual work for just over minimum wage because you want more work/life balance, but here's the facts of life for you. If you don't have a lot to offer anyone, then you don't get to make a lot of choices about what you do. Why? Because you're easily replaced.

You really don't come across as though you have much 'get up and go' - any real ambition or career goals. If I were 31 and had no references I'd be crapping myself because I'd know that it's most likely that the only employers willing to give me a shot are bad employers with high staff churn.

What's your plan? Where do you hope to be career wise in 5 years? What are you doing to get there?

This thread shows why we need immigrants, plenty of unemployed who say they want jobs, but when it comes to it are not willing to put in the hard work. To many think, they can stack shelves in tescos for 16 hours a week and expect to be a higher rate tax payer.

CKhalvashi

Welshwoofs wrote: »

They could do....if they wanted their CV to be lofted straight into the bin. You never put in a CV all the things you won't do or don't want to do.

This is the most true fact of the thread.

I don’t want to sound unduly harsh here, but it’s my company, and the operational needs of the employer must (within reason) come first.

The easiest way out the door is to say what you will/won’t do, especially on probation, as rubbing an employer the wrong way can have significant problems later on.

Looking at the op's previous postings, it seems to me that he's created one bloody big barrier for himself by choosing to not learn to drive when he lives in an area with poor public transparent and where everything is 'miles apart'. That is obviously going to cut down the radius of his job hunt (and therefore his opportunites) down considerably.

And this is where I’m going to sympathise with OP. On £60/week, how is one expected to be able to afford to learn to drive?

Advice for OP: Put some money aside (and possibly treat yourself as if you were unemployed financially) to learn to drive, and when you’ve passed, find an employer that could potentially be further afield.

CK

scooby088

I think that being in a job you hate for years on end is morale sapping and can be quite adverse for your mental health. I was in a job i didn't like manual and boring, I did courses like first aid, fire marshall, and even took part in the works committee just to break up the day and get a bit of extra money for the first aid. I applied for jobs and got interviews but when the question of money came up the interviewing company was always coming up short with the hourly rate, so i was stuck in a company I hated just because I was paid better and more than likely at the top of my earning potential within that industry.

OP it's entirely upto you what to do but you have the right idea in keep going to interviews.

Welshwoofs

CKhalvashi wrote: »

And this is where I’m going to sympathise with OP. On £60/week, how is one expected to be able to afford to learn to drive?

He's got lots of overtime on offer....that he doesn't want to do because it means he doesn't get to tuck his children in every night. He's upset at doing a 43 hour week.

At some point in time one has to make some sacrifices to get ahead. As I said, if I were him I'd be eating up every hour of over-time available and throwing the extra money at driving lessons. Yes, it'd mean he doesn't get to put the kiddies to bed for a few months (but there's always the weekends).....but at some point one needs to stop thinking short-term and start thinking about how to improve the position long term.

CKhalvashi

Welshwoofs wrote: »

He's got lots of overtime on offer....that he doesn't want to do because it means he doesn't get to tuck his children in every night. He's upset at doing a 43 hour week.

At some point in time one has to make some sacrifices to get ahead. As I said, if I were him I'd be eating up every hour of over-time available and throwing the extra money at driving lessons. Yes, it'd mean he doesn't get to put the kiddies to bed for a few months (but there's always the weekends).....but at some point one needs to stop thinking short-term and start thinking about how to improve the position long term.

I’d rather be putting my kids in bed than keeping about 100 people in work, but unfortunately we don’t always get what we want.

Don’t mean that in an off way, but I didn’t want the company to get as big as it’s got.

CK

Welshwoofs

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I’d rather be putting my kids in bed than keeping about 100 people in work, but unfortunately we don’t always get what we want.

Absolutely. I always wanted to marry an Octogenarian billionnaire with a heart complaint and no children. Unfortunately that didn't happen so I had to make my own way in life

Mista_C

Throughout my posts I have said "I think" and "I believe". You seem to think those words mean "This is not my opinion, I'm but a link posting sheep who cannot offer any content based from my own thoughts".

Most of what I write, type or post is my opinion. If I am providing statistical data then I will provide a reference. Fortunately most people have the good sense to understand this. There are many like you on the internet, demanding evidence for every little piece of text posted. Good grief, I am not going to trawl the net to find evidence that may, or may not, be there just to prove that something I think is fact or not. Some of us are capable of independent thought and are capable of posting our own ideas on a subject.

Re-read the thread, properly this time and instead of picking out little bits of posts to jump on, respond to them in context.

My "one bit of anecdotal evidence" was nothing of the sort. It was an example. I was attempting, with some futility, to explain what I think is a problem as you mistakenly jumped to the conclusion I was talking about behavour in school.

I can't be bothered to watch you jump about posts, picking out random text to take out of context in an attempt to put me on the defensive anymore. It's laughable.

Maybe I should put up a poll to see if the people on this forum require me to put a disclaimer in my signature explaining that my posts contain my own words and thoughts? To be fair to the majority they seem bright enough to realise that.

earthbound_misfit

scooby088 wrote: »

I think that being in a job you hate for years on end is morale sapping and can be quite adverse for your mental health.

As someone whose currently out of work on mental health grounds, I find this thread terrifying. I'm always trying to find ways to get back into making my own living (hopefully self-employed), I hate claiming benefits, but it's so hard when working part-time isn't financially viable, and now even if I can get better enough to do a full-time job, there's a risk of being called 'spineless' if I can't manage overtime! As my problems are to do with depression and anxiety, and I know quite a few people who struggle with these to a lesser degree and thus struggle to keep jobs, it doesn't seem unreasonable that stress-tolerance could be on a sliding scale... and long hours could just tip someone over the edge.
It seems we are creating a situation where more and more is demanded of employees, meaning many compromise their health and happiness. All the while, the treadmill gets faster and faster leaving more people behind and those clinging on to their jobs do so out of fear. It's awful - one should work to live, not live to work. They bang on about disabled people working, focusing on "what they can do", whilst barring their contributions by setting the bar too high.

Anyway I thought it had been shown that after 40ish hrs a week, productivity in workers actually drops?

Also, if they need people to do so much overtime, why not hire extra staff? Even if they're temps because the increased workload is temporary. If the above is true, then it'd increase productivity.
Incidentally, I remember noticing a few years ago that loads of places were advertising 2 or more identical part-time jobs, and wondered why they didn't just offer 1 full-time. I assumed there was some financial incentive for employers, but if, at the other end, they're making people do huge amounts of overtime then it doesn't make sense.

ILW

earthbound_misfit wrote: »

and happiness. All the while, the treadmill gets faster and faster leaving more people behind and those clinging on to their jobs do so out of fear. It's awful - one should work to live, not live to work. They bang on about disabled people working, focusing on "what they can do", whilst barring their contributions by setting the bar too high.

.

The "work to live" thing is a pretty recent idea.