or is my work? really need some sensible advice here

[commutingnightmares]

Have name changed for this as its sensitive.

Feel free to tell me if I'm being entitled but its really starting to stress me out and make me depressed and I need some advice about whether I have any rights or whether I just need a good talking to.

I'm a few months into a new job. Generally OK, colleagues are nice, work is interesting though the pay is worse than I was on before (long story). By and large everything is OK apart from one thing.

As part of my work I'm required to do a job from home very early in the morning (from just after 5am) which takes anything from an hour 15 mins to nearly 2 hours. I took this on readily and the quid pro quo is that I get to start an hour later than my colleagues, which suits me as it helps with my childcare drop off.

After I finish this shift I then have to get my daughter up, get her ready, get myself ready and get a bus and a train to drop her off at childcare before getting to my desk. I made clear before starting that the drop-off was non-negotiable -- my DH can't do the morning drop-off. This was accepted when I took the job.

Due to transport problems I sometimes get in a few minutes after my official start time. This varies but it works out on average that I'm about 5 minutes late most days, sometimes on time, sometimes more, but never very late.

My boss is now saying that I need to get in earlier and that I have to be in by the start time or else, ideally even earlier. I've pointed out to him that due to the fact that the lateness is always accounted for by transport problems, I can't do anything about this (my train network is really rubbish and services rarely run to time). I can't get an earlier train and still get the job done in good time and then attend to all the things I need to do to get my daughter ready, its simply not possible (I've tried).

The morning job is really really stressful for me, my daughter always wakes up in the middle of it and usually gets distressed and upset that I'm working.

I've offered to drop the morning job in order to get in earlier. Boss still isn't happy. Basically the key bone of contention seems to be that I have to be in exactly at the start time on the dot or else. If I'm even a couple of minutes late this seems to be a major problem for them, even though there are other people around and its not clear to me that it makes a massive difference, its usually pretty quiet at that time of day.

I could potentially move my daughter to another childcare provider closer to my home but this would only make a marginal difference to the commute and would be quite a wrench for her as she is settled where she is so I don't want to do this unless I really have to.

To my knowledge there aren't any other issues with my work, or at least none that I've been made aware of.

This is massively impacting my quality of life upsetting my DH and my daughter and constantly in trouble at work, I feel I can't win. I'm busting a gut every morning to get everything done on time and still seem incapable of pleasing anyone. A couple of friends one of whom is a lawyer -- have said they think the boss may be on shaky ground in terms of equal ops and should watch it. I don't want to get into anything ugly, but I can't help feeling that I'm being put under pressure that's verging on being unreasonable.

Can anyone give any advice?

While I would second biryani's suggestion that you phone acas for some advice on your situation, I would point out that they haven't got a 24 hour helpline, but they are open till 8pm during the week and 9-1 on Saturdays.

They can talk you through how you can raise your concerns with your employer and potential options.

If I left my house at 7.20 I would get the tram at 7.34 which means I could catch the 08.22 train - they are only 2 am hour. That's the stopping train so I don't get to the office till 9.45. If I leave at 7.00 & run between tram stop & train station I can catch the 07.48 & be at my desk by 08.45. Don't see why people are quibbling with the commute times tbh.

I think don't think people are quibbling with commute times - just making the point that OP is spending an awful lot of time travelling and this can't be ideal/pleasant.

Even if she didn't have this awkward morning job and worked a straight 9-5 it seems l like she'd be leaving about 6 o'clock to get there in time.

I can see your bosses point to be honest, while its only 5/10 mins to you, if he lets you come in late he's on a sticky wicket pulling anyone else up for being late. While one person running late may not be that big an issue, if half the office do it, it soon becomes a problem. Is the 5.00am job something that demands your full attention or is it starting a report running and letting it go on in the background while you do other stuff? There's a difference in, for example, needing to spend up two hours sitting at your desk/computer paying full attention for up to two hours and kicking off something that will process in the background that you just need to check every now and again.

I think much also depends on the office culture, if your colleagues are all used to working a bit of additional time each day that you can't because you have no wiggle room, the 5.00am job might - righty or wrongly - be considered your contribution to the load that everyone carries. If everyone else clock watches then your pulling more than your weight and again there's a conversation to be had.

As a general rule it's worth being careful not to agree to doing something extra that you might come to resent if you don't get concessions elsewhere. Workplaces are rarely quid pro quo, it's all too easy for workers to end up feeling taken from granted.

Could he change the day time shift to 10.15 - 5.15?

I would also count up the extra hours you do with morning and evening work that you do. Calculate your total late time for a month and present to them how much extra time you have given compared to late time.

I honestly don't care if my staff turn up 5 minutes late. 5 minutes wouldn't even register, tbh. It's their outputs I'm interested in.

Having said that when I was in catering, every minute counted and it did piss me off when people were habitually late.

maddening's suggestion seems reasonable - is there any valid business reason why you MUST be there at 10:00 on the dot?

YANBU. They are being arses. You are flexible enough to start at 5am and work until the job is done, yet they are unwilling to show you any flexibility on being in the office at 10am even though it seems it makes no difference to them operationally. If they had any sense they would realise that the morning job has far more value than giving you a 10.15 am start.

Any decent company wouldn't pull this shit.

If they don't already know that the job can take 2 hours then let them know. If they do suggest you will need stop doing the job after 1 hour whether it's finished or not. (not probably a very effective approach)

Is your work unionised? Maybe you should join one. Everyone should.

No her work aren't arses as you put it!she is late daily,that's not on
The resolution is mutually agreed working arrangement,and op being on time for that
A lot of this is op domestic stuff,kid getting dressed etc.cant the dh help?

Starting at 5am is not being late.

I really don't understand all these people on the side of shit companies who seem to think they fucking own you.

This sounds like petty bollocks to me. Effectively doing work (the early job) is making you late for work.

The obvious solution is for your core hours to be moved from 10-4 to 10.15-4.15.

Who did this early job before you did? I don't know what sector you work in, but I can imagine in many sectors it is difficult to find someone to start work at 5am.

I'd be wondering what those who spotted that the OP was 5 minutes late weren't doing that enabled them to actually notice.

OP, you mention that you're on a lower rate in this new job. I'd bet good money that your line manager is feeling threatened by you.

Starting work at 5am is not being late FFS.

I don't think it's unreasonable for the OPs employer to expect her to keep an agreement that she made with them and which seemed to benefit her in terms of managing her time and child care arrangements.

To my knowledge you need to be employed for a period of time before you can make a flexible working request (26 weeks?) so she may not be eligible. Given this, I'd try to agree something as amicably as possible that would see her get to work on time. I'd be mightily pissed off if, having taken someone on and agreed an apparently mutually acceptable arrangement that saw her starting late in exchange for a particular task, she still couldn't be at work on time. I assume she is isn't the only employee her boss has to consider and, with respect, she doesn't know what else he's trying to manage and how her persistent lateness is impacting on that.

But if the employer had said "If you start at 5 am and do this task, which will take you about 1 hr and you can then start at 10 am" and the OP agreed on the basis of being finished at 6 am then being able to get out of the house and get the earlier train, but the reality is that the task takes longer than 1 hour and makes her miss the earlier train, then surely some level of renegotiation is needed.

Absolutely but it should be done on the basis that the task takes longer than expected, not that the employer is being unreasonable expecting her to turn up on time. It may even be that there's another way to do the task in the hour allowed for it that she doesn't know yet because she's new.

I can see both sides of this, to be honest. I personally really struggle with the idea that five minutes lateness really makes that much difference in a non customer-facing role, but that's a personal thing.

On the other hand I appreciate rules are rules and need to be followed equitably. I really do get that and I don't want to piss other people off.

I suppose what I'm frustrated by is the fact that actually I've been at work for nearly two hours before these other people even get to the office doing a stressful job in stressful circumstances and it would be nice to feel that I could be given a bit of support for that by my employer especially when its such a fucking nightmare getting into the office.

But as I say, I have worked all my career in environments where no one gives a flying fairy what time you get in as long as you get the job done and I have worked really really hard and I don't have a problem with hard work, and I'm having a hard time adjusting to an environment where you have to hit a clock when you get in to prove you are working. Maybe that makes me pampered and indulged, but I think its bollocks. However, if I have to suck it up then suck it up I will.

No, it doesn't make you pampered it makes them not very good employers.

Sitting at your desk does not mean you are working.

I don't think you're pampered and indulged but it's not your employers responsibility to support your decision to take a job that's a nightmare to get to - presumably you knew that when you took the role. Even if you didn't have the early morning task I'm guessing you still would be struggling to leave the house much before you do now with a little one in tow.

If the issue is that you're working over your hours then that's the discussion you should be having with them, with clear evidence to support that the task takes twice as long as they think it should and negotiate from there.

Do you have a union at work? Take this to them. You are working well over core hours yet still being penalised, which is highly unfair.

commanderprimate no, no union. And frankly if there was I wouldn't hold out much hope that it could do much. I support unions in principle but I've never seen them help people much in practice.

I think actually moving the day shift from 10.15 to 5.15 is a pretty good suggestion. I might suggest that.

I'm confused.

You say you could get into work on time if you didn't have to do this early morning work. Isn't that like saying you could get your kids to school on time if only you didn't have to feed them breakfast first? If you need more time in the morning to get stuff done to get to work on time, just get up earlier? Get up early enough to get your own stuff done before you clock on at 5am? Does your 5am-7am job require you to be talking on the phone or something where you are stuck at it for 2 hours straight and you can't get other stuff done at home around it?

Btw I think they are taking the piss out of you if you're actually doing an extra hour's unpaid work per day and then they can't cut you any slack for being 5 min late. But that's a separate issue to actually being late, iyswim.

Basically you need to approach this with several goals:

-- stop letting them take the piss on the early morning work you do. You either work 2 hours and have it count towards your paid hours, or you work the hour they are paying you for. They can't have it both ways.

-- and if you still need to be at work for 10am, then you need to sort out your morning schedule better so you get there on time. Earlier dropoff at nursery to catch an earlier train? Or negotiate with your boss that you start at 10:05 and leave 5 min later or whatever.

Apologies OP if I sound harsh but I honestly don't understand how your morning job is making you late, unless leaving home at 7am when your job finishes makes you late for work automatically.

In response to a previous poster, if you start work at 9am, you should be there ready to turn on your computer at 9am. Not there earlier with your computer turned on ready to start at 9am. If your employer wants you there to turn on your computer before your work start time - he/she should pay you for that time.

Where I work, we have a 36 hour paid week to accommodate this with an 'at work' time 12 minutes to 9am so that we have everything on and ready to go at 9am.

Those 12 minutes a day equate to an hour a week and over a year that is almost one and a half extra weeks one would be expected to be in the office and not paid for.

I would be extremely peeved if my service managers pulled me up in the circumstances the OP described as she is regularly putting in more hours than contracted to do so.

I am happy to put in extra hours (without recompense) in my job because my children are older (and I love my job so time flies) but not everyone can do so if they have carer commitments. And they shouldn't be made to feel like shirkers if they cannot.

OP I am probably in a minority here but think your employers are either a) irritating beyond belief or b) annoyed with you for another reason and making this the stick to beat you.

I have no DCs yet but have a mum with two on my team who also lives some distance from work. After the first three months (when I realised she could do the job well) I knew it was in my interests to make things flexible for her. We have a side agreement (negotiated between the two of us and not replicable for other staff who don't have kids) that she will make up hours lost through children being sick and not in nursery by working hours at home in the evenings, or staying later on other days, which her DH picks up.

This arrangement is good for me as an employer as I know I'm getting both her loyalty and the best work possible and the hours worked, she gets the flexibility to manage her home commitments and thanks for a job well done in addition to her pay and benefits.

i think this set up sounds very old fashioned and it's probably worth looking for another job with people who are more flexible and open with you.