Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Aibu to tell her that she needs to do a full shift.

296 replies

DawnFawn · 02/07/2019 18:29

Hi,

Posting here for traffic to see I'd any managers/HR gurus knocking about.

I am a fairly new manager, I have been managing a department for about 2 months and all is running pretty well, however, I have an issue with a member off staff that I cant get my head around.

Let's call her Linda, she started under a previous manager who was a friend of hers. She doesn't drive and lives about 15 miles away with not great/not horrendous public transport links.

For about 18 months she got a lift to and from work with manager friend. But since manager friend left she was able to finish work earlier than the rest of the team, to get a lift home with another member of staff who finishes earlier. The stand in manager allowed this for an easy ride.

So......(thankyou if you are still reading)
In I come as a department manager, there is a festering resentment with team members that colleague is going home early, and it shouldn't be allowed. I totally agree but how do I stop this? She doesn't have any children, and doesn't require flexible working as such.

Would I be a bitch to say that she needs to be making her own way home? I'll allow a degree of flexibilty in the mornings, she can start 15 minutes later as this is when her lift arrives at the office, but she needs to finish with the rest of the team? Does she have any rights to say that she has been doing this for a while and should be allowed to continue?

OP posts:
CaravanHero · 02/07/2019 23:13

Plenty of people would take a tiny paycut to go home half an hour early

In a £16k job, leaving half an hour early every day would cost you over a grand a year.

It’s not a ‘tiny’ paycut by any means and I doubt it’s an option most people would take unless they needed to.

pelirocco123 · 02/07/2019 23:17

I would be surprised if your job role has the 'power' to allow staff to work less hours then they are contracted to , you may well be putting your job at risk for allowing this

Coyoacan · 02/07/2019 23:21

I hate begrudgers, I don't really think you should sacrifice Linda to appease the others.

I worked at a job where everyone worked independently and slacking by others did not affect the amount of work anyone else did. It was not an important job and I was not a slacker myself but the number of workmates complaining about the slackers was unbelievable.

Bluerussian · 02/07/2019 23:26

How much earlier does she leave? Does she take less of a lunch break to compensate? If she leaves half an hour early but only has a half hour lunch each day, I'd say that was OK.

People being resentful is not on, I'd be inclined to tell them it doesn't do them credit and if they had travelling difficulties in the future, you would try to similarly accommodate them.

Namechangeforthiscancershit · 02/07/2019 23:34

Sounds like her colleagues spend quite a lot of time bitching about Linda tbh.
They sound like a bigger problem than she is.

So Linda agreed this with her previous manager and you have a reduced wage bill. I can't see why you would want to change it. It seems like a good solution all round. I'd check with HR that it has been agreed and then tell the colleagues to pipe down.

We'd all like extra time in the week. It almost never happens.

expat101 · 03/07/2019 00:12

If you don't do something about Linda, you run the risk of losing Janet and George. They might not be aware Linda isn't being paid the same amount of hours as them, but if it means there have been times they have ''needed'' to leave earlier and couldn't because that leaves the team even shorter staffed, then my focus would be on looking after them.

I base this on my former workplace of a 3 person team. We were on monthly salaries with rotating starting hours. The finishing time was up to the computer and how quickly we could process the work. On one occasion I was still at work 15 hours after starting due to computer server malfunction in the main state, when the next ''shift'' walked in, so considered myself a considerate employee, looking out for my employer's best interests. However during our overlapping working hours, what peeved me off the most was how much the other two went outside for a ''smoke''. Not only would I have to leave the office unattended to fetch smoker if required back in the building pronto but then would fall behind in my own work with no assistance. You can imagine how quickly that escalated into being resentful towards my co-workers. Their answer to the Boss was to let them smoke indoors instead!

I ended up leaving.

SorryDidISayThatOutLoud · 03/07/2019 00:47

Adaline, the Gov website has pointed out three circumstances, but none of them fit here. Custom and Practice doesn't apply here. There is no collective agreement as it's just Linda doing it, and an 'agreement' between you and your employer has to be in writing.

Symphorien · 03/07/2019 02:38

DawnFawn you need to speak to your company's HR and find out exactly what has been agreed. I honestly don't understand why you wouldn't do that before posting on a public forum.

jameswong · 03/07/2019 02:59

Stamp your authority all over this malingerer, OP!

Coffee is for closers!

Shooturlocalmethdealer · 03/07/2019 03:44

You cant show favoritism so to speak. This has a trickle down effect as already shown in the other employees. Kindly tell her she has to finish her shifts and arrange for transportation. End of!

CurlyWurlyTwirly · 03/07/2019 04:08

Linda has already had put in place the suggestions for the reduced hours / reduced pay.
You talk about her back to work interview / she has had time off sick.
And possibility that she has had time off due to stress because Janet and George have been vocal about being pushed off?

Iliterallycantthinkofanythingq · 03/07/2019 04:13

I don't see the problem to be honest. If she's not being paid for it then I wouldn't be too fussed.

2tired2function · 03/07/2019 04:32

I could be wrong about this but I think if a member of staff has been doing something different to their contract for a certain length of time with the acknowledgement of their manager (ie, working 35 hours/week instead of 40 hours/week for same salary), the new arrangement replaces the old contract. This would mean you couldn't insist on her changing her hours because her contract has legally been changed by the previous manager agreeing to her doing this for 18 months. From memory if someone changes their work conditions for more than 2-3 months, it becomes the new contract.

BlackCatSleeping · 03/07/2019 04:44

Let them grumble. People will complain about anything. It sounds like things aren’t terrible and you are all coping so it makes no sense to get rid of her and hire and train someone else who might be a complete disaster.

CrumpetyTea · 03/07/2019 05:00

I think the resentment is because the work is not evenly spread in that there are certain end of shift tasks that have to be done at that time and she isn't doing them .The others are picking up disproportionate share of the crap -and effectively 5 hrs work that needs doing is either being missed or crammed into the time available. I;ve worked in roles which have end of day processes and it causes massive resentment if someone avoids them unfairly

I think you need to consider whether Janet etc have a real grievance- are they picking up extra crap- is there anyway this can be redistributed?
if someone asked to work/start on those hours what would company policy be?

Verily1 · 03/07/2019 05:19

Be very careful that you don’t land yourself in an employment tribunal.

Mummyoflittledragon · 03/07/2019 05:20

I don’t understand how your wage bill is reduced if the others are picking up more hours. Don’t they stay and get paid for the extra hours worked? Unsalaried staff shouldn’t be working unpaid overtime.

An hours bus ride on two buses once a day is not a reason for Linda to reduce her hours. Many people, who need their job to live and pay their bills travel in this way. London commutes for example are often far longer. It sounds as though Linda doesn’t need her job to live, but you don’t know her financial set up beyond her dh having a well paid job and it’s none of your business. For some reason she doesn’t drive / doesn’t have a car, yet has chosen a job, where she could do with driving. Her reasons and choices are her own.

EmbassyNo1 · 03/07/2019 05:41

How does she manage when her lift is on leave or sick?

CupoTeap · 03/07/2019 05:57

Hi op

Forget the other staff for a minute, you need her to work her hours. That is not unreasonable, it's what she signed up too. If she wanted to permanently reduce her hours would you agree it?

Marmozet · 03/07/2019 05:57

As she is working 7 hours a day, the law states a 30 minute break is required after 6 hours. Why not reduce her lunch to half an hour?

Beautiful3 · 03/07/2019 06:01

So she only gets paid for the hours she works. I don't see the problem with this. If you make her do the full hours she 'll end up leaving. Tell the other staff members that she only gets paid for what she does. You have to talk to hr first, before you do anything.

justilou1 · 03/07/2019 06:14

What happens if her lift is sick, or crashes on the way to work? Doesn't that cause insurance issues? I think that needs investigating.... (Also, is her lift resenting the constant intrusion/expectation? Is Linda being CF and not paying her petrol money?) There are lot of what ifs here?

Nautiloid · 03/07/2019 06:16

How long does she take for lunch OP? Would it be possible to reduce this to make up some of the time your department loses?

In terms of the feelings of your team members, I think it's probably damned if you do, damned if you don't in this situation. You're going to have HR advice on the legislation but perhaps if the rest of the team have an hour lunch and she agrees to switch to half an hour it'd make up some of the work time lost and make things feel a bit more fair.

mysteryfairy · 03/07/2019 06:53

Seems unlikely that this member if staff is being paid reduced wages without any agreement being in place. Do you know for sure that this has not been agreed? You risk doing the very opposite of stamping your authority if you make an issue with this and find there is a proper agreement in place for flexible or key time working.

To me a good manager would be managing the people who have an issue with a key time worker, not seeing the worker as the issue. It’s not up to you to make judgements that only people with children need flexibility and you could fall foul of diversity and inclusion policies with statements like that. Nor should you be interfering to establish whether she is a ‘cf’ for getting a lift as another poster suggests. Most people in real life are capable of sharing lifts without drama and I would expect good workplaces/ managers to encourage green options like liftshares, not try to undermine them.

SnuggyBuggy · 03/07/2019 07:12

It sounds like the real issue is she is being given too much work for the hours she is working if she can't get things finished.

I've seen this situation myself where someone I knew was the only part time worker in a team, was given too much work for her hours and had no choice but to hand some of it over to her colleagues when she left for the day. The colleagues felt like she was swanning off and leaving them in the shit and started bullying her until she left. I don't condone the bullying but the whole situation could have been different if the workload was delegated properly.