Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How crazy is this?? In a surprise move, after asking the senior manager whether I'd still be eligible to start the temp part time position for the other division he manages, I got a surprise email from a supervisor in that division indicating that the training I'd been asking about for ages (and kept being told it's delayed...) is set to start soon ...in fact as soon as tomorrow and in a few sessions next week!
Wow talks about flying by the seat of your pants...so I was asked to give my availability and I need to check my email tomorrow to see when/if I'm selected to start the training. His confirmation could be as little as an hour or two in advance. This is just crazy....but I really wanted the position, not because it paid a lot (it pays less than my current position), but for the experience on my resume.. If this temp position is confirmed, it looks like working 6 days a week would become a reality, as would the prospect of 40 hrs/week...just no benefits, because it's 2 part time jobs.
Yup, I recognize that and actually agree with the manager's decision.
I also agree that I don't meet their current needs for our market's coverage in terms of scheduling. However according to my immediate manager, I did "meet objectives" for 7 out of 9 areas during my annual performance review (stuff like product knowledge, team work, knowledge of our tools, quality of communication, etc. I suggested teammates share reports and tips with each other, rather than rely on the supervisor so much for hand holding...and the supervisor agreed. They appreciate my efforts in helping my colleagues and I guess that's why I still have the second level support role.
Besides scheduling reliability, the other area that needed to improve was "productivity" - something I've made efforts to address- and they've recognized that. I now record every ticket I handle in a spreadsheet plus include quantitative stats in my weekly reports. I attach the spreadsheet to the reports, ensuring that they cannot come up with bogus numbers claiming I only handled let's say 50 tickets/shift instead of the actual 75. They're impressed by this, in fact my former team mate who got promoted used this reporting style too, and it won him accolades.
This summer's schedule seems like a Band Aid solution for them. It's obvious to me that from the meeting, the manager really values the early starts. I wish he would hire someone who can reliably cover morning shifts (part time) while I do an afternoon/evening full time shift. But that's not how it works. Manager told me that the people who can start early are the ones he'll reward with the coveted full time job. Coveted because not only is the annual salary higher, but they have a bunch of good benefits plans. Health, dental, 401K, EAP, etc. Part timers = zero benefits. Quite the disparity in conditions, even when as a part timer you have just 4-5 hrs (so half a shift) less total hours/week than your full time colleagues.
You are missing the point VAW.
This is not about a coveted role with benefits and how a manager is holding it over everyone's head. And, I don't think the company is thinking of it as a Band Aid solution-- I think they are setting you up to be able to once and for all be able to eliminate your role.
Some of the things you have stated you have done to make reports, metrics, process improvements, etc are great. HOWEVER, an employer does not really care if you are able to do this under duress (when they are speaking to you about productivity problems, etc) or an every once in awhile type of thing.
What this means is that I would rather have a steady eddy employee who is consistently at work at the scheduled time than a super star who is so completely inconsistent.
There are laws in some States mandating one day rest in seven. Still, I know someone who worked two or three weeks every day, during a scheduled factory shutdown. I think there are exceptions for such situations.
What this means is that I would rather have a steady eddy employee who is consistently at work at the scheduled time than a super star who is so completely inconsistent.
I totally agree. We have a guy who works where I work who isn't the fastest guy in the world. But he's reliable to always be in on time, and if you give him something to do, by the end of the day it's done and done correctly with no supervision required. We've had a 400% turnover in the department he works in during the past year, he's the only one who is still around because he does his job, doesn't complain about everything, isn't on drugs, and is reliable.
This is not about a coveted role with benefits and how a manager is holding it over everyone's head. And, I don't think the company is thinking of it as a Band Aid solution-- I think they are setting you up to be able to once and for all be able to eliminate your role.
I think you somewhat misunderstood the situation so I'll clarify it. The Band Aid solution I talked about is the fact that management has several resources (i.e. current team members whose total coverage is virtually around the clock ) plus some new trainees in another division who are awaiting the launch of the summer project they were hired for. All of these people are helping answer our market's customers. However I've been repeatedly told it's a temporary solution and that ultimately, by the end of the summer they want to hire a full time "dedicated" resource, someone who can fit their mold of early morning starts. They'll still need someone in the mid-late afternoon, evening and night, so I dunno if they'll shift current team members' schedules, that's to be determined.
And about setting me up to eliminate my role, I think that would be true if, after meeting with the senior manager they insisted I either comply with a morning start immediately, or face termination in, let's say 2 weeks. But I do recognize that things are getting hot under the collar and I could be on borrowed time here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovetheduns
Some of the things you have stated you have done to make reports, metrics, process improvements, etc are great. HOWEVER, an employer does not really care if you are able to do this under duress (when they are speaking to you about productivity problems, etc) or an every once in awhile type of thing.
What this means is that I would rather have a steady eddy employee who is consistently at work at the scheduled time than a super star who is so completely inconsistent.
Let's just make one thing clear here. The productivity issue was brought up in my annual performance review in January. But even then, management recognized that I had made improvements and they were happy with my efforts. They expected it to "meet expectations" by the next review session, i.e. a mid year review, which I guess would be in July. So I've got that covered.
However the "respecting my schedule" and reliability issues is the one area I have not been able to improve that much, and that's where the focus is now.
Still, management knows that I have medical issues - that's why I got the doctor's letter - it was as per my manager's request, so as much as they want me to be their #1 man in the mornings, it's highly unlikely that I will ever assume that role. For now I'll just try to keep my head down and do my best, in the time allocated, ensuring I eliminate or at least significantly reduce my incidences of lateness. Sometimes it's out of my control though and that's why for my personal situation, it would be preferable to have flex time/telecommuting, both of which were denied. Still, I recognize that for the type of workplace I'm at (web/call center), and with the type of management I have, flexibility is less available than say other types of jobs where it doesn't matter whether you come in 30 minutes late, just as long as you stay 30 minutes later and complete your tasks.
My husband was just told a day before they had to start working 7 days a week 10 to 12 hours a days. Only a30 minute lunch and don't really get all that. No day off. Is this legal.
My husband was just told a day before they had to start working 7 days a week 10 to 12 hours a days. Only a30 minute lunch and don't really get all that. No day off. Is this legal.
I would not even last a week working 7 days a week.
7 days a week if it were hourly with overtime, perhaps. Salaried? No way. That's why I'm a dead end at my job. The next step up is a salaried position where you work far more hours than what you're actually paid for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
