Employment Law.

JBuk said:
in an ideal world they both 'deserve' a rise
Click to expand...

Why? Crisp packer A is on an hourly rate. The amount of hours worked has not gone up. They have no additional responsibilty as Crisp packer B is now responsible for Crisp Packer A's work.

It could be argued that Crisp pakcer A wasn't working hard enough when packing 400 bags, therefore packing 450 bags will now represent correct utilisation of that worker.


Jeez, and you accuse Trade Unionists of being out of touch!


Neither do, it is simply a restructuring of work practices.
Click to expand...

I'd say crisp packer b does, due to an increased
in responsibility and a new type of work required (line management). Then again castiel, aren't you management? :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
amigafan2003 said:
Crisp pakcer A packs 400 bags in 7 hrs on a normal day.
Crisp Packer B does the same.
Mgmt now wants crisp packer A to pack 450 bags in the same 7hr day.
They also want crisp packer B to monitor crisp packer A's work - effectively making them a line manger, but due to the exta work, crisp packer B will only have to pack 350 bags a day themselves.

Who deserves a pay rise/promotion?
Click to expand...
Both, as both are now doing more than before ;)

packer A is packing more crisps, packer B is packing his own and checking A's ;)
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Both, as both are now doing more than before ;)

packer A is packing more crisps, packer B is packing his own and checking A's ;)
Click to expand...

What if A was slacking?

In your job, do you not have continuous improvement targets? If you meet those targets do you get a consolidated payrise?
 
amigafan2003 said:
I'd say crisp packer b does, due to an increased
in responsibility and a new type of work required (line management). Then again castiel, aren't you management? :p
Click to expand...

Indeed I am, which is why the comment was (slightly) tongue in cheek.

I would agree with you in reality, the Line Supervisor would require a minor increase in remuneration due to the increased responsibility.

However, it would be expected that wastage would decrease and quality control increased to justify the restructuring, of course.
 
amigafan2003 said:
In your job, do you not have continuous improvement targets? If you meet those targets do you get a consolidated payrise?
Click to expand...
We don't have targets, because we aren't in that kind of industry (it's nigh-on impossible to have improvement targets for developers) but yes, we are constantly rewarded for our improvements.

No idea what you are referring to as "consolidated payrise" by the way. That sounds like another bit of management waffle trying to oversell something.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
No idea what you are referring to as "consolidated payrise" by the way. That sounds like another bit of management waffle trying to oversell something.
Click to expand...

Bonus = non consolidated (i.e. you get it once and once only.

Pay rise incorporated into salary = consolidated (i.e. you benefit from that pay rise every year you are in that employment + counts towards pensions).

First time I've heard "consildated" being accused of being a management tool - - it's usually a term thrown around by Unions during collective barganing negotiations.

(it's nigh-on impossible to have improvement targets for developers)
Click to expand...

Wait until your job goes to an Indian code factory!

we are constantly rewarded for our improvements.
Click to expand...

More peanuts?
 
My last job did, and the it came back again when they were to proven be an utter shambles. As is the emerging trend for a lot of work that was "off-shore"

"consolidated" in that context is completely wrong then, surely? Consolidated is amalgamated, untited, combined, etc. Not "repeated" nor "permanent". It's a payrise, not a bonus. Management waffle. :)

Have you tried setting "improvement targets" for development? I'd love to hear what they were. :)
 
Last edited:
Dj_Jestar said:
My last job did, and the it came back again when they were to proven be an utter shambles.

Have you tried setting "improvement targets" for development? I'd love to hear what they were. :)
Click to expand...

I haven't but my employer does. I'm management grade but have no staff responsibility currently (neary all our staff are now redundant and replaced by code factory workers in India and Romania).
 
Can't say i've ever heard of 'consolidated payrise'. As all payrises are as you mention, something you benefit from year on year.

did you mean to say consolidated bonus and payrise? (not that i've heard of that either).
 
amigafan2003 said:
Crisp pakcer A packs 400 bags in 7 hrs on a normal day.
Crisp Packer B does the same.
Mgmt now wants crisp packer A to pack 450 bags in the same 7hr day.
They also want crisp packer B to monitor crisp packer A's work - effectively making them a line manger, but due to the exta work, crisp packer B will only have to pack 350 bags a day themselves.

Who deserves a pay rise/promotion?
Click to expand...

I would sack the Mgmt who came up with this stupid and typical idea, I am now paying more money to get the same amount of products out. Cheers managers you have cost my company money, Your fired.
 
amigafan2003 said:
I haven't but my employer does. I'm management grade but have no staff responsibility currently (neary all our staff are now redundant and replaced by code factory workers in India and Romania).
Click to expand...

And how exactly do you performance target manage them? Other than saying 'was x provided by y date'?
 
Let me get this out of the way, give the "law" crap a rest, you have worked for this company for 10 years, you have worked hard for them and been adaptable, I assume if you've worked there 10 years they respect you for this, act like an adult and decide what you want to do.

If you feel the extra work is harder say you expect a pay rise, if it's above your current job level expect a promotion, if you don't want to do this work say that your job description doesn't cover it and if they want you to do it, you will need a new contract and the position and salary that reflects it.

Why is it that these days as soon as anyone has any sort of problem they immediately go for the "Is this against the law? CAN I SUE FOR LOTS OF MONEY?!" approach.

Where you stand is in a job you've been in for 10 years, you have happily done extra things that you weren't specifically hired for, this leads me to assume you LIKE your job, if you enjoy doing this extra work then for just do it and expect your employer to be realistic. Also, in what way have you been "coerced" into training? Did they strap you to a chair, glue your eyes open and not let you go?

Seriously be realistic, it's you who decided to do this work, it's you who agreed to do this training, your employer is not some evil empire trying to squeeze you dry.

Oh and yes, they can change your job description, however they would need you to sign a contract agreeing to do it, they can also fire you if you refuse.
 
Last edited:
Fenris said:
Let me get this out of the way, give the "law" crap a rest, you have worked for this company for 10 years, you have worked hard for them and been adaptable, I assume if you've worked there 10 years they respect you for this, act like an adult and decide what you want to do.

If you feel the extra work is harder say you expect a pay rise, if it's above your current job level expect a promotion, if you don't want to do this work say that your job description doesn't cover it and if they want you to do it, you will need a new contract.

Why is it that these days as soon as anyone has any sort of problem they immediately go for the "Is this against the law? CAN I SUE FOR LOTS OF MONEY?!" approach.
Click to expand...

Haha, HIGH FIVE!!! Straight talking for the win!
 
Fenris said:
Oh and yes, they can change your job description, however they would need you to sign a contract agreeing to do it, they can also fire you if you refuse.
Click to expand...

Yes they could fire you but if the change was unreasonable you;d have grounds for unfair dismissal.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Yes they could fire you but if the change was unreasonable you;d have grounds for unfair dismissal.
Click to expand...

An employer can decide to let someone go, ie make them redundant for pretty much any reason assuming it's not discriminative etc. If they no longer need someone in your position they can just make you redundant, your lucky if they offer you another position. Unfair dismissal doesn't count for that.

If however they fired you for not doing something that isn't in your job description then yes you would have grounds for unfair dismissal.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom