Employment Contracts & On call

ecksmen

ecksmen

ecksmen

Associate
Joined
25 Jun 2004
Posts
1,277
Location
.sk.dkwop.
I work in IT, our company has gone through multiple changes over the years, as has my specific role (we've grown rapidly in the last 8 years, and recently in the last two years bought out by a bigger company and thus even more change). It's always been alluded there's an on call requirement with the support role, but for years it was very ad-hoc in its overall nature. There has always been on call rotas but what depicts a call out, or what is expected of you when called out has always been vague at best. Overtime was paid on hours worked but if you didn't answer the phone or if you were unable to provide support nothing was really ever said. Over all it was very much a if we call you, please answer and assist how best you can but no worries if not but we'll pay you if you do wok.

In the last 6 months they released a policy which states things like "you have to answer your phone within 15 minutes, we expect you to be online and actively looking at resolving the issue with 45 minutes". Straight way I told my line manager I never agreed to such strict on call details, and that I would not guarantee I can always be available with 45 minutes to look at anything they decide to call me about.

There is nothing in my contract that explicitly states I am on call, and as far as I can see it there's nothing stating I have to follow this policy when I'm at home outside of the office.

Now they want to pay us a retainer to cover the above requirement, which I do not want to be apart of.

We had a team meeting where the retainer was annouced and again I clearly stated I do not beleive I can meet their requirements and I'm not interested in this deal.

My boss then called me aside and basically told me I had to fall in line or get another job (he also said they couldn't afford to lose me and would try to create a new role without on call).

I like my job as it is, I'm happy doing on call on an ad-hoc basis supporting where and when I can. What are my rights?
 
Seems normal to me, if they pay you to be on-call as part of a rota then it's reasonable that you answer your phone and respond accordingly. I think you should be able to opt out of being in that rota though, unless otherwise specified in your contract.
 
Amleto said:
if they're changing the job role, then you can sign up, or resign by default, basically (IANAL).
Click to expand...

But are they changing the role. Or are they just changing policies.

You need to check your contract. There may be a "as and when the company needs you to" clause


Our employment contracts state 8 hrs per day. But are not specified hours. We currently work early evening to late night. Needs of the business may change and we may need staff to start earlier or later.
 
Last edited:
Several considerations:

1. Constructive Dismissal doesn't apply as it is a blanket change to everyone in the team, not just you (this is the biggie for Employment Lawyers).

2. If you have been in post for longer than 1yr then full Employment Law is behind you, supporting your back.


When I left University I worked for a district council who changed my job description in my 2nd week. It was an IT Technician Trainee role which was all basic unpacking computers and installing them. When I started they quizzed me and worked out that I could do far more than that (Active Directory/Group Policies, Backups, electronic repairs etc) so they adjusted my contract and role. Essentially I was doing more than the Senior Technicians at £18k less than them!

I kicked off about this, and my manager told me "We also want you to use your own car for business; and you will be expected to pay for your insurance for business usage too". On this basis I quit, and created a legal letter of intention to take to small claims on the grounds of constructive dismissal due to unfair variations in contract. They offered a 'gesture of goodwill' payment to me of 3 months salary. Next week after that, the previous Manager was fired.

I didn't rejoin the council.

In your books, i'd ask if there was a severance package for those who are unable to comply with the variation in contract due to personal/health/family reasons (vagueness here, as they may worry about potential claims about discrimination/unfairness).
 
Seems normal that's how mine works. I get a retainer, a yearly amount on top and 3hrs paid when I answer the phone. Any thing over 3hrs gets paid normally.

Sounds like you need to rethink your position.
 
We get an hourly rate for been on-call 5pm til 8am, then get paid a minimum of 1 hour for any work we do. We have to "respond" to the initial call within 1 hour, and we have a 1 hour fix where capable. Any bank holidays are double time, and we also get that day back in leave.

My only very small gripe is we don't get any help to cover our broadband or phone bill and I am forced to use my personal phone on o2 because I don't get any signal on their phone at home - could kick off a fuss but love where I am and it doesnt bother me enough to do anything about it
 
LordSplodge said:
Smiley face for employees getting their rights screwed over? Classy.
Click to expand...

If you want to look at it that way.

Or

You could look at it that it gives us business owners the chance to expand without being stuck with employees who suck the life out of the business.

What about the rights of the business owner who puts everything they've ever worked for all on the line. All the risk. The sleepless nights. NOT getting 5 weeks paid leave per year. Not being able to take time off when ill.

I'd be happier If I could sack without warning. Having a job is not a given right. Why should I be stuck employing someone who is lazy and worthless when I could give someone who would actually enhance my business a job.
 
Right now I only get paid for the hours worked when called out - but there's never been anything in my contract that said on call is required, under the new regime I'd be getting several hundred for just being on call per week so its not exactly a bad situation (something like £300 per week and £20 per hour afterwards) but there's no talk of my contract being updated accordingly.

The money is clearly good, but its not the money I object to but the scope creep and lack of 1:1 discussion over it without really having any choice in it which I feel is unfair.
 
ecksmen said:
Right now I only get paid for the hours worked when called out - but there's never been anything in my contract that said on call is required, under the new regime I'd be getting several hundred for just being on call per week so its not exactly a bad situation (something like £300 per week and £20 per hour afterwards) but there's no talk of my contract being updated accordingly.

The money is clearly good, but its not the money I object to but the scope creep and lack of 1:1 discussion over it without really having any choice in it which I feel is unfair.
Click to expand...

£300 per week +£20 per hour?

I don't know precisely what you do, but i'd just take this one on the chin. You're talking around £15k extra (gross/net?) per year. Some people have to work 5-10yrs for such a raise.

If you remain where you are, and take it; you could treat it like the manager owes you a favour in the future. If it were me, i'd be all over that like a Kelly Brook play mat. :D

If you are hungering for consultation, my advice is to get in line. Across 3 organisations i've been through shuffles, redundancies and re-applying for roles. None of which have we had any formal chats or consultations.
 
Depending on the rota (and how understanding the employer is/isn't - if they are half decent they'd be ok with the odd time you couldn't hit the 45 minutes, etc.) the terms don't sound too bad to me.

I do get really annoyed with the whole scope creep thing and general micky taking from some employers though (the reason I left my last job) and have a situation at work at the moment where I'd like to be helpful and say I can cover the 4am shift in an emergency but I know if I agree to that it will creep and I'll be called in all the time whenever they can't be bothered to organise it properly. (So ultimately they are just shooting themselves in the foot).
 
Last edited:
mattyg said:
I'd be happier If I could sack without warning. Having a job is not a given right. Why should I be stuck employing someone who is lazy and worthless when I could give someone who would actually enhance my business a job.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying running your own business isn't stressful; I admire people who do so.

I'm also not saying that some employees can be trouble/lazy/whatever, however they should be fired by following procedure. I'd rather the law favoured employees (and the individual outside of work) because it is easier for business (and government) to pick on the individuals.

It's imperfect for sure as some employees would abuse these rights, but it isn't possible to find perfect harmony here.
 
ecksmen said:
Right now I only get paid for the hours worked when called out - but there's never been anything in my contract that said on call is required, under the new regime I'd be getting several hundred for just being on call per week so its not exactly a bad situation (something like £300 per week and £20 per hour afterwards) but there's no talk of my contract being updated accordingly.
Click to expand...

Something you should bring up with them is working the next day. Or rather not, because if you're up much of the night working on a ticket then your performance the next day will be impaired and by the end of the day you will almost certainly be unfit to drive home.
 
RedvGreen said:
£300 per week +£20 per hour?

I don't know precisely what you do, but i'd just take this one on the chin. You're talking around £15k extra (gross/net?) per year. Some people have to work 5-10yrs for such a raise.
Click to expand...

Surely that money is paid for the weeks that he is actually on call? I doubt he would be on call permanently, even with a waiver surely WTD would have something to say about that!
 
ubern00b said:
Surely that money is paid for the weeks that he is actually on call? I doubt he would be on call permanently, even with a waiver surely WTD would have something to say about that!
Click to expand...

You're not working when 'on call' so I'd not expect it to be an issue.

I am 'on call' on bank holidays, but no one ever calls so it's a good chunk of cash for nothing. Obviously it does restrict what I can do on those days, but the payment is quite generous. I think it goes to £50p/h if someone does call, so I'd actually be happy if they did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom