would you be pissed off/ fed up with this at work?

[totallyfedup2015]

So today I got 'ticked off' by my manager for being late several times recently. Not quite a formal disciplinary but a clear 'you must be in at 9am without fail' conversation

My nominal hours are 9-5. I've been in after 9 a few times recently, though none later than 09.15.

I work lunch almost every day, because I can have up to 6 hours of meetings a day which inevitably straddle lunchtime. I also stay after 5 at least once a week or more. And do monthly trips to other offices which involve me setting off before 6am, either being away overnight and getting home at 7pm next day, or coming back the same day and getting home at 10pm. I don't object to any of that but I thought there might be a little give and take...apparently not.

I'm also not a junior, I've got 20 years professional qualifications (more than anyone in my office including my manager) and feel rather resentful at getting the same level of chat I used to give office juniors who were in at 0905 and out the door at 1655!

AIBU or would this piss you off too?

I'm curious, is the manager the office manager, but not actually "the boss of you"? It sounds as if they don't understand the work you do. Is it in their remit to sack you for poor time-keeping or would anyone else have a say in it (those who gave you a glowing review, for example?)?
Anyhow, good luck with the new job hunt and I would suggest you definitely work to rule from now on, advising on paper what you are doing and why. Sad to repay such pettiness with equal pettiness, though.

Getting a new job sounds very reaonable, good luck, life really is too long to work for crap employers.

But put in a formal flexible working request in the mean time, it should be difficult for them to justify the 9am rule, and at least they would have to even if they do manage it and you might actually agree with their reasons if they come up with some.

fredfredgeorgejnrsnr - much better suggestion than mine!

I am obviously way out of touch with almost everyone on this thread but I've never worked anywhere that arriving after your official start time would be acceptable, no matter how senior your position. In fact there has always been an unwritten rule absolutely everywhere I have worked that the more senior you are, the more important it is to be there before your start time. It used to always grate with me terribly in one particular job that even though I arrived very early every day, due to only having one bus that I could get, I was frequently told I wasn't a team player because I left at 5 to get my one available bus home. Whereas colleagues who arrived at 9 on the dot but stayed an extra fifteen mins after 5 were considered to be putting in more effort.

And I've just realised that no one has posted on this thread for hours. I don't even know exactly how I managed to stumble across it.

Those folk saying start times are cast in stone - whilst some places are still like this (and I realise for, say a shop etc, people have to cover the openkng hours), manyplaces now recognise the daftness of making (for example) people having leave half an hour or more earlier every day to account for the 5-10% of times they might be 5 mins late.

In the example of the OP she is being taken to task in a really silly way that fails to recognise the fact that she's putting in extra time elsewhere. Unless there's a really good reason the working day has to rigidly within a given slot (there usually isn't), this is just silly.

YABVU and I think you're confusing different issues.

This kind of thing causes resentment and poor morale everywhere. You shouldn't presume that working through lunch or staying late can be offset against arriving late unless you have a specific flexitime arrangment. The point is, people in an organisation need to know where they stand not have one rule for one etc etc - double standards are a surefire way to piss people off.

I don't see what the quality of work has to do with it - if someone's work is crap but they're on time, is that OK then? You complain about being treated like an office junior, but what sort of example do you set to the office junior? If you can't guarantee arriving by 9am your start time should be changed to a time you can guarantee.

Saying 'why shouldn't I be a few minutes late?' is a shocking attitude. Sloppy and disrespectful.

Also I think you are deluding yourself if you think changing jobs is the answer and other employers would put up with it.

Kind of depends why you are late and quite how often you are late. I hate it when people stroll in late (regardless of the extra hours/lunch breaks missed, as that's another issue really). We have one in our office, late each morning, 15 mins here, 10 mins there but the rest of us mugs are sat working at 9am on the dot.

AsleepOnTheHay I've never had a job where the clock has been watched, people have employed me for my skills, they're purely knowledge based and whilst I meet lots of outside people it's not defined opening hours, so when I start is irrelevant. My employers have always recognised this.

They don't expect the office junior to arrive at a particular time either, there's no lack of disrespect between people by not arriving at 9am, there's a recognition that delays happen, or transport options are convenient that don't you get in either ludicrously early or unreasonably late.

The flexible working thing is extremely relevant, if you asked for your employer to be flexible on start time, then a huge number of office jobs (including the OP's from description) would not be a judgement they could decline, although of course taking a firm to an ET for such a claim would be a strong response. It's also a response that is unlikely to be required as generally the people with presenteeism are just middle managers who'll be told to wind their neck in to avoid the ET.

So, these are the facts,
You can't leave for work any earlier than you currently do,
If things go smoothly you are easily in the office in time, if things go badly you can be up to 15 mins late,
You have been given a verbal warning for lateness, and told to improve,
You are valuable to the company and (presumably) not easily replaced, especially at the salary they are currently paying you.

I would send an email above your manager's head, saying that you have been given a verbal warning for lateness and you find this upsetting. Say that you cannot leave home any earlier and therefore you will inevitably be up to 15 mins late occasionally when there are travel delays beyond your control, although you are mostly in before 9am. You dislike being 'in trouble' and don't wish to go down the route of further warnings and possible disciplinary procedures. You would hate to leave the company as you very much enjoy working there, however if (senior people) agree that the start time is now a critical part of your job then perhaps this could be clarified now to give you a chance to start looking for another job.

With any luck they will look at the work that you do and the extra hours that you put in and tell your manager to back off. If they come back and tell to get in by 9am or to go to fuck THEN you can thank them for the clarification and tell them that you will be working your contracted hours only.

I think some people here are being a bit critical of you. It's my experience of work that a decent manager is more concerned with the quality of work and whether or not deadlines are met than with the exact time that you turn up to do it, especially if you are not client facing.

I don't understand why people start 8.45 to 'switch on computer ' prep stuff for the day blah blah. That is work! Nothing until 9. As to it being petty to work to rule, petty is making sure you start at 9.

That's fine Fred though because there are the same rules for everyone. And everyone accepts that there are transport issues occasionally. But the OP says she has been late 'several times recently'.

Casimir how can it be 'petty' to have a start time and expect people to stick to it? I find that completely baffling. Isn't it just basic common courtesy?

Find a boss / organization that values quality output over abitrary start and finish times. With mobile working this is not how the world works if you're a professional. Time to move on. Unless you're a teacher or similar where there is a real reliance on you being on time.

I was a team leader for years, on a technical helpdesk. The phone lines opened at 8 and it was expected that, at 8, staff were at their desks, logged into their phones and computers, ready to handle calls. Nothing petty about it, just a requirement to provide a good service to our customers, and to show consideration to your colleagues.

I know the above isn't how every office works, but I'd be pretty confident that if there is a requirement for you to be on time, it's not an unreasonable quirk of your bosses, there will be a reason for it, as otherwise it would be noted that start times are flexible.

Ime the bosses/companies who are most bothered about "bums on seats" are the ones who take extra hours for granted.

They want you in, ready and raring at 9am on the dot. But woe betide you if you want to leave on time, they dont like that. You give, they take. And without exception, morale is through the floor.

But places that understand give and take and that real life sometimes throws up problems, the morale has always been good.

There was a place I worked when my son was Joseph in the school nativity. My boss said I could only go if I hit my sales target for that week, it was last minute but I was prepared to take it unpaid if I couldnt get AL and I was not essential to the business, I had nothing booked, no one would have missed me. I didnt hit target as I was getting back into work after ML and was doing two thirds hours, yet I had a higher target than the full timers.

I was still, and had always been, the highest performer in the team, which explains the target I suppose, but not the lack of flexibility or compassion.

I was in my twenties and very cowed by her, so I missed the nativity :( . Now I would go anyway, she needed me more than I needed her, a fact that I only realised when I resigned 2 months later and she offered me a 50% raise on my basic, and 2% on my commission. I left anyway, turn over in the department had always been high but she got away with it because of the results, after they fell she was asked to resign.

My early shift starts scat 0630. I got pulled up for coming in at 0625/0627 when we're earlies. Apparently being 'almost late' is unacceptable

Work that one out

^^ now that.....that's bizarre!

I'm going through a similar situation as the OP, new manager has come in who used to be a teacher and I'm now being treated like a school kid. So I'm doing my core hours as required and nothing more, I'm also looking for another job. I've been in this role for ten years and it feels like I'm back in school.

Of course you should be there at 9. Unless you work on flexi-time then you need to be there at your start time.

I have worked in offices, shops, factories and never known lateness be acceptable for anyone from office juniors to directors.

I don't get some of the responses saying "tell your manager straight", or "give your manager two choices".....they are your manager, not the other way round.....get to work on time and stop thinking you're above the same rules for everyone else.

My boss is going to be 30 mins late this morning but to an emergency at home. I know this because she text be last night to let me know. No way she'd just turn up late despite rarely leaving the office before 6:30 and often later. You have a start time and that's when you need to be there, unless you've made other arrangements.

I getthat RedGilitter. I've had colleagues in the past who think being in the building at 9am makes them on time, then take 20 mins having a chat and a coffee. If you're working at 6:27, you're on time. If you're dashing through the door and will then need to use the loo, put your coat away and make a cuppa, you're late.

I'm not frontline support, I don't take phone calls. I'm no one's manager. If I'm there at 08.55, 07.30, or 09.02, it really makes no difference. I still have the same work, still get the same work done.

All I feel now is resentful. After 20 years I expect to have some benefits to having established a career, proved myself. But there is none apparently because being there by 08.59 is more important than anything else.

I have to do a visit to another branch shortly. I'll be leaving home at 0530am, and not home til 9pm.

I get no TOIL for that. No extra money.

I suspect most of you aren't in that position.

"After 20 years I expect to have some benefits to having established a career, proved myself. But there is none apparently because being there by 08.59 is more important than anything else."

But surely if you want some benefits then you have to negotiate them?

If it's a nine o'clock start then it is.

I find it odd that this is what has pushed you over the edge rather than the working through lunch, staying late and no recompense for visiting other branches.

You can't take it upon yourself to set your own hours. If your hours are 9-5 then you need to be there 9-5 unless your manager agrees otherwise.

My Dad worked his way up to a managerial position over 42 years at the same company. He was never late in 42 years once.