Employment contract changes

nicechap

fellwalker09 wrote: »

Hi. Looking for advice re my hubby. He's been with his company for just over 10 years now. They are forever changing the rostered shifts -every year or so, a new pattern comes in. About 2 years ago, they introduced a new contract -it was unfavourable to him as it meant less money on overtime rates, and also things such as sick pay reduced. All new employees are on this new contract. So, my husband is one of a small number who stayed on old contract. This meant everyone got new rosters, but, because he stayed on old contract, his roster is different to the new ones. Its different to the extent he has to work 9 nights every month compared to their six. Also, they have had another change and now only work about 3 proper nights , the other 3 days are slightly earlier starts so they finish around 11/12pm at night, which is far nicer.
So, now another new contract is proposed. It means he will remain on his crap work pattern, as he's checked. However, he has a medical condition (for about 18 months) and his doctor wanted him to try meds that will make him drowsy - he's an LGV driver! Doctor said it's not great as he's a shift worker, so advised him to speak to work and get occupational health on board, with a view to seeing if he can work regular days for a while.
His boss said he will see what's what, but he said that any request to work days will probably be denied, as his yard will not support that - because of work patterns of other drivers. He also asked why husband on that roster as it was for people with special circumstance, such as illness or unable to work nights - how odd! Especially as he'd just been asking about coming off nights. Husband then said, well, I wasn't told that at the time and I'm working more nights than every other person in the yard. And my husband has been there the longest.
He has now asked to be referred to occ health - boss said that's usually for people long term sick, so we'll see. He has asked about working the other roster like the others, so waiting to hear about that. It's ridiculous that such segregation can exist. Does he have any rights at all? Can anyone offer any advice please. Thanks.

fellwalker09 wrote: »

The company wanted new contracts for obvious reasons - saved on sick pay for a start.
As an example, the guys on the other roster will work 3 0r4 days maximum, and only ever do 3 days in a row on late shifts and nights. They work either early shifts, or they start at 2pm-11pm. They do 1 or 2 nights, starting at 5pm - 2pm.

My husband works 5 early shifts, (all long days, 10-14 hours), then 3 early shifts, and 2 days off. Then 4 nights, 2 days off, and 5 nights, 2 days off. Nights are 6pm - 0300, but they can keep him out for an extra 2 hours, which is usually what happens.

fellwalker09 wrote: »

What I can't understand is this:
new contracts came in 2 years ago. Husband didn't agree so didn't switch over. He had no knowledge of the negative impact on working hours/shift pattern in comparison to those on new roster & contract. Shifts were simply given to him.
Now, his boss today has said that usually, people on his roster are those with special circumstances. For instance, 1 guy has won an appeal, with union help, to only work days - elsewhere in uk.
Husbands friend, who works at another location, has also successfully been allowed to work only days as his mother is now in a care home.
Today, my husband has been told by boss that he will probably not be allowed to work days, even for a temp period to aid his health, as it will not fit in with the working patterns of his yard! It's almost like inequalities in the work force, certainly they are a divided team.
One of his colleagues, on the new contract, can't even do the full job due to a limb problem - is perhaps going to need surgery for this. But they happily allow him to carry on on, turning down certain jobs due to his injury. My husband is not getting any assistance and he really is struggling. They have him on a 6-month performance thing, because he has had too much sick time in past year having been signed off sick following head injury 18 months ago. So, while his gp wishes him to take time off now to try medication, it simply is not possible as he faces losing his job.

fellwalker09 wrote: »

Hi. I hadn't considered it to be a disability - it has lasted for 18months so far, and still going! He is in a union, the gmb, but sadly they don't have much clout as the company also has an in-house union which hold the majority of employees. However, he does at least have help to legal/employment advice.
I guess he has to wait to see if his manager will put him in touch with occupational health. It's all a waiting game. It certainly would help him if he could work day shifts for a while - even if they would consider just bringing his nigh shift time forward by a few hours, say a 2pm start, which would make a massive difference. He would at least still be going to bed by around midnight, which is better than 4am.
I must say, I am dismayed by their lack of support, a company who supposedly pride themselves on the care of their employees, always going on about work-life balance and giving them info on healthy lifestyles and mental well being- so far it's a joke. Let's hope they can at least be reasonable. Thanks to all for taking the time to offer advice. Much appreciated.

This would appear to be primarily a problem of his own making as he declined the new contract to maximise overtime potential. Is the overtime contributing to his ongoing condition? Is he prepared to move onto the new contract for the benefit of his own health?

As others have said, he needs to lean on his union to get things changed, that’s what he pays his subs for. If local level are not effective (it doesn’t matter if firm recognise them or not), he needs to get help from area or even national level, someone with experience in the kind of issues he faces. I’m not sure what you’ve described would amount to a disability, presumably he is working full time & overtime now without issue? But union will be able to package the issues in such a wAy that would mean employers duty of care to your husband woukd make them think long and hard about accommodating changes.

Undervalued

thebrexitunicorn wrote: »

If your husband is classed as having a disability under the equality act, defined as, ' a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities' then the employer has a legal obligation to make reasonable adjustments. To be a disability an impairment should last, or be expected to last, at least 12 months. An occupational health professional should be able to give an indication of whether he would be classed as having a disability, it may also be worth asking his gp or neurologist.
He could put to the employer that he believes being allowed to work an amended shift pattern to help mitigate the effects of the new medication would qualify as a reasonable adjustment under the equality act.

Whilst that is all true the crucial part is for the OP's husband to establish whether he does in fact have a disability (for employment law purposes). If he is "only" ill (sorry ghastly phrase) then the employer is not legally obliged to make any adjustments. Whilst a doctor can make suggestions on a fit note, without a disability the employer can simply ignore them and say "do your full job or go home sick".

With a disability then reasonable adjustments must be made. What is "reasonable" is of course a big question and one that can ultimately only be decided by an employment tribunal if it cannot be resolved by negotiation.

His union should be providing professional help.

ohreally

He needs to get the on-site GMB rep involved sooner rather than later. If that's not going to happen then he needs to contact his branch and have an appropriate person pick up his case.

He should be able to make a self referral to occupational health if management are dragging their heels.

I do agree to an extent that some of the issues he's having can be traced back to choices he's made in the past which he believed would be beneficial and have subsequently became an issue to resolve.

fellwalker09

Hello. Thanks for the replies. Just to clarify, when the first employment contract change came in 2 years ago, he did not refuse to sign in order to make more money working overtime. His job dictates that his employer can -and they usually do - keep their drivers out for a minimum of 2 extra hours per shift. This is classed as overtime. He does not work extra days at all. The overtime rates were slightly lower on the new contract, but that was not the problem. The issue was, that you would be paid more money each month in exchange for agreeing to work a set number of additional hours, anything between 25-30. If you did not manage to get these hours in, then you were supposed to owe the company money back. It was a ridiculous farce, and for that reason a number of workers refused to sign. A large percentage of those people actually left to work elsewhere. So it was never about greed - my husband didn't want the burden of having to work all those hours.

I have asked him to talk to the union, but he feels quite despondent about that because, as I said before, the GMB doesn't have much say there, although they can represent him at tribunals etc. Also, he's worried that if he pushes this too far, the company will do whatever to get rid of him. There are devious lengths one can go to in order to appear to be legal about it. They've done it before, many times, and had unfair dismissal's to sort out, but that doesn't help matters much when you've lost your job. He is already on a performance review for 6 months, with 2.5 months left to run, on account of his past sick time.
His condition doesn't stop him from daily living activities as such. It just stops him in his tracks when the pain strikes. He can still dress, eat, drive etc. I already looked up disabilities just to see if he fitted the criteria. It would be for his gp to advise I suppose. But there's no doubt it's a long term condition.
I listened to the conversation my husband had on phone yesterday with his manager - the guy said occupational health is only for long term illness, yet he knows my husband's history - is 18 months not long enough? It's actually defined medically as any condition lasting more than 12 months. He doesn't know the facts or law fully anyway, as he's only been an acting manager for just under 2 years. He kept saying, I'm taking notes and I will ask questions and get some answers!

I know someone here replied and said that companies can issue different contracts to employees, but one of his colleagues also didn't sign that other contract. He's on the original, like my husband, but he asked to work the new roster - the easier shifts. When my husband asked about the possibility of working days and was told it was probably not possible, he then asked about working the other roster like everyone else. Once again, boss says he will have to ask. It's infuriating & upsetting, because he's not only suffering with an ongoing condition, which is a struggle, but he's now very stressed too which creates more problems. But I will say, he hates to make a fuss and worries about rocking the boat. The problem is, if he does nothing, how long will he last in the job anyway? It really is wearing him down, this condition, and the lack of support. I personally feel quite cynical about how he's been treated, after years of doing the job well, often being thanked from management, even running the entire yard one year when they had a staffing crisis. And this is how they treat him. Force him to work proper night shifts when the other guys finish much earlier. And no, no one else has any health concerns there.

nicechap

fellwalker09 wrote: »

Hello. Thanks for the replies. Just to clarify, when the first employment contract change came in 2 years ago, he did not refuse to sign in order to make more money working overtime. His job dictates that his employer can -and they usually do - keep their drivers out for a minimum of 2 extra hours per shift. This is classed as overtime. He does not work extra days at all. The overtime rates were slightly lower on the new contract, but that was not the problem. The issue was, that you would be paid more money each month in exchange for agreeing to work a set number of additional hours, anything between 25-30. If you did not manage to get these hours in, then you were supposed to owe the company money back. It was a ridiculous farce, and for that reason a number of workers refused to sign. A large percentage of those people actually left to work elsewhere. So it was never about greed - my husband didn't want the burden of having to work all those hours.

I have asked him to talk to the union, but he feels quite despondent about that because, as I said before, the GMB doesn't have much say there, although they can represent him at tribunals etc. Also, he's worried that if he pushes this too far, the company will do whatever to get rid of him. There are devious lengths one can go to in order to appear to be legal about it. They've done it before, many times, and had unfair dismissal's to sort out, but that doesn't help matters much when you've lost your job. He is already on a performance review for 6 months, with 2.5 months left to run, on account of his past sick time.
His condition doesn't stop him from daily living activities as such. It just stops him in his tracks when the pain strikes. He can still dress, eat, drive etc. I already looked up disabilities just to see if he fitted the criteria. It would be for his gp to advise I suppose. But there's no doubt it's a long term condition.
I listened to the conversation my husband had on phone yesterday with his manager - the guy said occupational health is only for long term illness, yet he knows my husband's history - is 18 months not long enough? It's actually defined medically as any condition lasting more than 12 months. He doesn't know the facts or law fully anyway, as he's only been an acting manager for just under 2 years. He kept saying, I'm taking notes and I will ask questions and get some answers!

I know someone here replied and said that companies can issue different contracts to employees, but one of his colleagues also didn't sign that other contract. He's on the original, like my husband, but he asked to work the new roster - the easier shifts. When my husband asked about the possibility of working days and was told it was probably not possible, he then asked about working the other roster like everyone else. Once again, boss says he will have to ask. It's infuriating & upsetting, because he's not only suffering with an ongoing condition, which is a struggle, but he's now very stressed too which creates more problems. But I will say, he hates to make a fuss and worries about rocking the boat. The problem is, if he does nothing, how long will he last in the job anyway? It really is wearing him down, this condition, and the lack of support. I personally feel quite cynical about how he's been treated, after years of doing the job well, often being thanked from management, even running the entire yard one year when they had a staffing crisis. And this is how they treat him. Force him to work proper night shifts when the other guys finish much earlier. And no, no one else has any health concerns there.

At the risk of repeating myself and then I’m out. It doesn’t matter whether the company recognise the union or not, the union are there to support and act on his behalf. There’s no use taking a printout from the internet to his manager saying but so and so says this.

As there’s more to this than first declared (performance review, sick absence) he really must engage them if he is to have any hope of persuading the company to treat him more fairly. The lines the manager are spinning him are incorrect, his union can phone up the CEO and report how badly his manager is handling things.

Diamandis

If he's going to be on tablets that will make him drowsy is continuing to work as an LGV driver really a good option for him?

thebrexitunicorn

Undervalued wrote: »

Whilst that is all true the crucial part is for the OP's husband to establish whether he does in fact have a disability (for employment law purposes). If he is "only" ill (sorry ghastly phrase) then the employer is not legally obliged to make any adjustments. Whilst a doctor can make suggestions on a fit note, without a disability the employer can simply ignore them and say "do your full job or go home sick".

With a disability then reasonable adjustments must be made. What is "reasonable" is of course a big question and one that can ultimately only be decided by an employment tribunal if it cannot be resolved by negotiation.

His union should be providing professional help.

Agreed. I do think that given the symptoms described he can reasonably put to the employer that he believes he's covered under the equality act, it's ultimately for a judge to determine. Certainly the union should be providing support.

Undervalued

Diamandis wrote: »

If he's going to be on tablets that will make him drowsy is continuing to work as an LGV driver really a good option for him?

Obviously not!

Plus it is the OP's husband's legal responsibility to ensure that he is fit to drive. If he needs to be put on such medication for medical reasons, then the doctor would no doubt advise on a fit note that he OK for (say) office work but not for driving or operating machinery. It is then up to the employer either to provide work that he is fit to do or, if they wish, send him home sick. However any company sick pay is most likely discretionary so he may well only get SSP.

lincroft1710

Undervalued wrote: »

Obviously not!

Plus it is the OP's husband's legal responsibility to ensure that he is fit to drive. If he needs to be put on such medication for medical reasons, then the doctor would no doubt advise on a fit note that he OK for (say) office work but not for driving or operating machinery. It is then up to the employer either to provide work that he is fit to do or, if they wish, send him home sick. However any company sick pay is most likely discretionary so he may well only get SSP.

But if they have no office (or other suitable) work for him and he is going to be on these tablets for a long time then there is a possibility of the employer dismissing him on grounds of capability.

Undervalued

lincroft1710 wrote: »

But if they have no office (or other suitable) work for him and he is going to be on these tablets for a long time then there is a possibility of the employer dismissing him on grounds of capability.

Indeed, but it would be illegal for him to drive if medically impaired.

Ultimately it is a balance between how much he needs this medication and what alternatives are available.