Zero hours contracts - it's all about the oppressed workers...not

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

I'm not sure how anyone can defend someone turning up 6 times late to work as justifiable.

In this economic environment work is very scarce. Turning up late is just asking for trouble and not surprisingly was a problem.

I'm certainly not doing that.

All I'm raising is what is considered late here.

Guess I'm on my own here, but I certainly don't consider being 1 minute 13 seconds late being a disciplinary proecdure. Neither do I think that someone who is physically sick while ill in the warehouse should see half a point added to their records.

In the case of being ill, regardless of their condition they will rack up a point if they do not come into work. If they come in ill and are sick, soil themselves and have to dismiss themselves, they will rack up half a point. Worse still is they will be noted for not hitting their targets at the same time. That's just silly. You can't reasonably expect, as an employer, for ill people to come in while being physically sick and still meet their targets. Therefore I don't see how you can reasonably expect to discipline them for it.

What I'd like to see for myself and for staff, rather than such a points system is a full overview of their employment record.

If theres been a crash on the road and they have to divert, giving someone half a point (when they can only get 3 before dismissal) regardless of their previous timekeeping records appears a little harsh.

If they are late regularly....then fair cop. They will have the stats on length of employment and time keeping records. It's not hard for them to apply some common sense. But they don't. That's my point, it seems harsh.

Hence why I'd prefer to see employers actually taking an interest instead of relying wholly on points systems.

Again, staff being marked up for review due to not hitting targets is fine. But when they are marked up for review for not hitting targets through no fault of their own (like in the case where the warehouse lighting wasn't working and they couldn't physically see the shelves) it again, appearsa a little harsh and everyone would probably benefit from a little context being applied to such situations.

To me, this all just appears to be common sense. However a points system used as rigourously as Amazon use it ignores common sense altogether. IMO, it just needs tweaking, the records looked at and the points system wouldn't really be an issue and would apply to those staff who abuse their place.

If, as it seems, you all want to write me off now as some kind of work dodging lazy do-gooder who appears to think just the act of working is exploitation then fine. Not much I can do about that.

the_flying_pig

chucky wrote: »

I'm not sure how anyone can defend someone turning up 6 times late to work as justifiable.

In this economic environment work is very scarce. Turning up late is just asking for trouble and not surprisingly was a problem.

really? if they're relying on public transport [e.g. as they'd almost always have to in a busy city centre] then sometimes being more 2 minutes late is an inevitability, right?

vivatifosi

A relative of mine did Christmas temp work for Amazon last year at the new depot in Hemel. At the time he was 18 years old and not long out of school.

The work was a night shift and the pay was better for night than day shifts as they recognised that the work was anti-social. If people did well over Christmas, some were asked to apply to go permanent. For those who couldn't hack it, Amazon tried to change the routes or slightly different roles. The perception was that it was hard work, but not unfair work. He did not carry on there at the end of his contract.

I wouldn't particularly want to work there, but would if work was short and don't see them as evil.

Perelandra

the_flying_pig wrote: »

really? if they're relying on public transport [e.g. as they'd almost always have to in a busy city centre] then sometimes being more 2 minutes late is an inevitability, right?

Then catch the earlier bus- you can aim to get into work for 8.30 for a 9 o'clock start.

The points "drop-off" after 3 months. So (in the absence of any other points), you wouldn't get sacked for being late until you'd been late to work 7 times in a 3-month period.

That seems reasonable to me...

Graham_Devon

I think the professor on the programme summed it up for me.

He stated, and I paraphrase....

Using targets and pressure has it's place in the workplace. However, to do so, you need to give the employee a level of control so that psycologically they can control the pressure.

With Amazon, the employee is given absolutely no control and they are constantly, every 30 seconds, having a timer count them down and a result given to them at each pick (i.e. it beeps once for "on time" beeps twice for "over time"). They can constantly see their target slipping away. They know that someone is watching them and will pick them up at the end of their round.

The employee can do nothing. If the CD is on the wrong shelf, they can do nothing, the system will just say they haven't got the item in time and they are closer to having someone waiting to speak to them at the end.

He suggested that Amazon has used the tolls of pressure, fear and targets but give the employee absolutely no control over the environment in order to deal with that pressure or fear.

That, as he said, is psycologically dangerous.

Loughton_Monkey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm certainly not doing that.

All I'm raising is what is considered late here.

Guess I'm on my own here, but I certainly don't consider being 1 minute 13 seconds late being a disciplinary proecdure. Neither do I think that someone who is physically sick while ill in the warehouse should see half a point added to their records.

So what do they do? Make it 5 minutes? Then I know the way your mind works.... you'd be along here saying someone who was 5 minutes 13 seconds late was mis-treated.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

In the case of being ill, if they are ill and take a day off work they notch up a point. If they are ill, come into work and soil themselves, they notch up half a point. That, in my view is extreme. The points system simply doesn't work in those cases IMO. If someones ill, someones ill and if they are being physically sick in the isles, what really is the justification for adding to their disciplinary records? As much as Amazon would like them to be robots, they aren't.

What I'd like to see for myself and for staff, rather than such a points system is a full overview of their employment record.

If theres been a crash on the road and they have to divert, giving someone half a point (when they can only get 3 before dismissal) regardless of their previous timekeeping records appears a little harsh.

And, again, I know how your mind works*. You want loads of bureaucracy, and a lot of 'judgement' by the supervisors. And you'd be the first to complain that bosses are being discriminatory because employee A was late 4 times, and got the push, whereas employee B was late 7 times and got away with it....

These days, technology exists to keep things accurate and factually beyond all doubt. I very much doubt that you get a computerised letter from Amazon saying "You're Fired". They would go through some form of interview in which you would have more than adequate opportunity to mention that the road was closed, your cat died, your car wouldn't start, your kid was ill, your dog ate your shoes, or whatever six acts of god befell you (and no-one else) during the period.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If they are late regularly....then fair cop.

Yeah... maybe 6 times would do it!

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Hence why I'd prefer to see employers actually taking an interest instead of relying wholly on points systems.

Again, staff being marked up for review due to not hitting targets is fine. But when they are marked up for review for not hitting targets through no fault of their own (like in the case where the warehouse lighting wasn't working and they couldn't physically see the shelves) it again, appearsa a little harsh and everyone would probably benefit from a little context being applied to such situations.

To me, this all just appears to be common sense. However a points system used as rigourously as Amazon use it ignores common sense altogether.

On planet earth, many of us think that an accurate, objective, measurable and factual trigger for review is far more 'fair' than a trigger that allows favouritism, subjectivity, prejudice, or race/gender to be at play.

It's common sense.

* You'll probably be along to tell me I don't

Graham_Devon

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

So what do they do? Make it 5 minutes? Then I know the way your mind works.... you'd be along here saying someone who was 5 minutes 13 seconds late was mis-treated.

No, they continue using their points system.

If they are 5 mins 13 secs late and the cut off is 5 mins, they get half a point.

BUT, as I said, if that person is reviewed, they use common sense. If it's twice in 3 months, and apart from one day off sick ,the employee has an impeccible time record, is there really an issue?

Or did something simply happen totally outside of the control of the employee on those 2 days? Sh*t happens some days. It's happen to you, it's happened to me. I've ran over nails in the road and had to change a tyre at the side of the road. I'm late. Are you really so special that nothing untoward has ever happened to you?

We need to apply the context here, by the way. 3 points was dismissal. However, it was 2 points at which the employee was put on certain restrictive and (in some cases) insulting measures.

All I'm suggesting is that common sense is applied ALONGSIDE the points system.

It's not so much the points themselves, it's the level of fear this points system obviously and categorically imposed on the employees. You can talk about the points system all you like, but you have to look at why the points system was being used in the way it was......and that was the fear aspect. Amazon believed that if you instill enough fear, the workers will do better, hit more targets etc. Hence why as soon as people start hitting targets, the targets are increased.

If Amazon want robots, they should get robots. You cannot turn humans into robots though. Hence common sense has to apply. Stuff happens, people are late for totally genuine reasons. Some are late because they can't be bothered. So apply some sense, keep the points system and there really isn't any issue.

chucky

the_flying_pig wrote: »

really? if they're relying on public transport [e.g. as they'd almost always have to in a busy city centre] then sometimes being more 2 minutes late is an inevitability, right?

On time is late for me.

Whenever I get to work I get there early to make sure I am there on time. Some people have standards,

If turning up late looking at using the public transport excuse as the reason for being late maybe they need to look at a job where they won't be late or leave earlier to make sure there are no potential issues with public transport or even use an alternative route if you have to.

vivatifosi

Generali wrote: »

Walking 11 miles in 10 hours doesn't sound too demanding.

Working in a library I've worn a pedometer and done this many miles in a day on many occasions. I've also had a target of sorting and shelving a trolley of books in an hour. It is easy to shelve items at a rate faster than one every 30 seconds once they are in order, and that's without a device telling me where to find things. Similarly, it is easy to find and pick items in that timescale, providing there is no additional processing involved.

But that's ok. I work in the public sector so am clearly inherently lazy. It's a funny old world where people at Amazon can have a similar workload and yet they are employed by Satan, whereas I of course work for a Choir of Angels.

the_flying_pig

chucky wrote: »

On time is late for me.

Whenever I get to work I get there early to make sure I am there on time. Some people have standards,

If turning up late looking at using the public transport excuse as the reason for being late maybe they need to look at a job where they won't be late or leave earlier to make sure there are no potential issues with public transport or even use an alternative route if you have to.

well, it depends.

two minutes is really nothing at all, i mean really nothing.

if we're talking about a job like [say] swimming pool lifeguard or office receptionist, where physically being at your workstation for every second of the day is the key thing, then maybe, but most jobs aren't like that, rather a person's effectiveness turns on their ability to perform a high quantity & quality of work in a time period that doesn't at all need to be measured to the nearest minute or two. individual effectiveness in jobs like this tends to vary wildly betweem individuals to an extent that being two minutes late just doesn't matter. fair enough if being late is used as an excuse to get rid of someone who's, all round, a bit rubbish at their job, maybe it should be easier to get rid of people in many lines of work, but in the most part i'd tend to see nit picking over tiny things like this as totally pointlessly tyrcannical, dehumanising, whatever.