To ask why are part time workers disliked?

[CherryCocoa]

I've recently returned to work but part time. It would appear that a lot of people higher than me are not keen on part time workers but I don't understand why? I work hard, I am conscientious, none of my work is passed to anyone else, but yet I'm still looked down on for being part time. Is it seen as lazy maybe? I work 30+ hours a week, I have a baby to look after and a house to run and obviously my pay is pro rata to account for less hours. I'm not a lazy person at all. I just don't get it, can anyone shed the light for me please?

It’s swings and roundabouts. Part time workers won’t have that schedule forever and full timers may well have to work part time due to their circumstances changing at some point.

I'm surprised 30 hours a week is classed as part time .

My full time contract is 35 hours ... although I probably work 50 😂

IME it depends on the role and the person I have someone in my team that does 30 hours we'd call that 0. 8 fte she's amazing she works hard is very good at her job and organises her work around her working pattern without regularly expecting others who have their own workload to cover hers, another is 0.5 and he is exactly the same, they are both qualified professionals dedicated to their line of work.
In the past I had to manage a few administrators alongside my old practitioner team, they were all part time and all watching the clock to the minute (except when they rocked up ten minutes late and still expected to leave bang on 2....). They didn't seem interested in the work it was just suitable hours with decent holiday and sick leave, their husband's work was always prioritised eg of children were unwell, if the boiler needed looking at etc it was always them calling in to say they couldn't come to work. They'd eye roll when there was mandatory training even though we'd make sure there were enough events to cover their usual working days. They'd take a tall and fill their working hours with it, rather than complete things and look to see what needed doing next . It was an absolute pain in the arse.

@Girlyracer

Part-time workers can be good workers fir the hours they are there but it's everything else around them that's a nightmare for a manager. Who is doing what on what day? Who will cover the 2 days when the other person who usually covers is on holiday or leave?

Also there's a trend. I work over 3 offices. 2 offices are all full-time. 3rd office loads of part-time workers. New person starts in the 3rd office as full-time, there a while then a request comes in for part-time working. It's like there's something in the water. I know the details of why they're asking and I'm sometimes baffled.

If a more senior worker asks for part-time, in my opinion that's their chances of progression stuffed. They may not have wanted progression, but if they did, forget it.

And working part-time to top up on state benefits is shitty behaviour. Yeah, let the rest of us pay for you?!

Where I work some of the most senior people in the organisation work a 4 day week. Yep, really stuffed their prospects there . They get paid (not low) 6 figure salaries. Equally there is no way I’d be entitled to tax credits going 4 days a week in a job where I earned £75k full time.... the case for all people at my firm who earn similarly.

Oh and we have a really high pressure job, client facing, teams just work to get it done. And I do overtime, often more than some full timers!

Tax credits are no longer a ‘thing’ unless someone was already on them from previous years. The majority are now on universal credit, which you need to work to receive enough to even make a dent in your household income.

[quote Pinkallium]@kittenpeak I am completely right about the employers NI. It is not paid on the first £8,722 of salary then at 13.8%, so a saving of £1,200 per year when a job is split between two people. A lot more than an extra person at the Christmas party! In my business there are not any significant additional costs - other standard benefits, pensions etc are a % of salary. I completely accept that it may cost more in some roles / businesses of course, but in many including mine it doesn’t.

I know this because I am a director of the business (working part time.) We need a flexible workforce and in my experience it is easier to achieve this when some staff are part time. Some people are difficult to manage and some are lazy, I don’t see any link between this and working hours in general. Although I do feel that most people find it very difficult to work 8 hours solidly each day and employees working a shorter eg 5 hour day are actually the most productive.

One of my part time employees is about to work five days a week for the month of January and will then go back to three days a week for the rest of the year. This works brilliantly for us and IMO is a far better way to run a business than asking the full time employees to work 50 hours a week for the month.[/quote]
I didn’t say you were wrong about NI. I said you were wrong about PT not being more expensive. Which you are. An exception would be if the worker is a contractor, rather than an employee; but a part time employee is absolutely more expensive. Add up your hidden costs. As a director you should already know this. Part timers are more expensive than full timers, which is a reason why they can be given a hard time if they’re not pulling their weight. In terms of how useful they are, of course it depends on the industry, but in the majority of cases it is hard to manage and get right. Yes there are bad managers, but even the best managers struggle. One of the main reasons for this, is the attitude of Part time staff. I’m speaking from my own experience and accept not all PT have had attitudes.

I agree with @whatnow41. I work in a team of ~12 people. Three of them have dropped down to 3 or 4 days a week, but we're not allowed to recruit to cover the days they've dropped. There are loads of well qualified people who would love a part time job in this area, but instead the rest of us have to work harder.

The only problems I've ever seen with PT specifically are where management is weak or unable to see work as anything other than 9-5 + free overtime.

Otherwise some of the minor admnistration points - slightly more annual appraisals, managing effective communication when people are not all in front of you same time every day are heavily outweighed by the motivation of part timers to make it work.

If problems are created for clients or full timers doing free overtime that is an issue with the way work is managed, not the part timer.

If a part timer is performing poorly within their pro rata hours that is a performance issue just as it would be for full timers, not an issue with PT per se.

[quote kittenpeak]@CherryCocoa likely because the PT staff attitude gives them reason to dislike them, and unfortunately you are being tarred with the same brush. I know everywhere is different but this is how it is at my place of work:

I am FT and meant to work 40 hours a week, but some weeks more like 55. I don’t expect any extra pay. The work needs to be done. I make sure work is done, if ive had a busy week I speak up, and I can be trusted to get the work done. A PT who works 20, doesn’t work 30. They are out the door no later than 5:01pm. They take their full hour for lunch and arrive no earlier than 09:00. You could argue that’s what they’re meant to be doing but they provide no flexibility, expect to be paid extra if they work over their hours and this attitude makes life harder for others. Where I am, (and it’s not all PT but it’s a lot of them) they cannot be trusted to take on certain projects just incase the project pushes them over their hours and then they can’t understand why they are not given pay rises or promotions. Another example is they will expect to be allowed the morning off for a dentist appointment, but not work an extra hour if the company is having a busy week.

Not that it makes a difference, but just for context these are not school leaver / entry level roles. They’re demanding roles which pay well and a certain level of flexibility is required and this is reflected in the pay and benefits.

It might be that your company have had problems with part timers, and you are just seen as the same - which isn’t fair. Prove them wrong![/quote]
There's a terrible culture in this country where people feel virtuous and better at their job for working extra hours for no pay. Although I do agree that there is a need for some flexibility both ways.
I work part time in school hours and outside of holidays I have to stick to my hours otherwise I wouldn't be in time for the school run. I get my job done, I'm good at it and if my workload isn't suitable (in either direction) I discuss it with my manager.
Why do you think I don't deserve a promotion based on the hours I work?

It's not a reflection on the individuals. It's simply that the situation it creates can be annoying. In some types of job, no matter how hard someone works, there's no way of avoiding things coming up on their days off which others then have to deal with at the expense of their own work.

I think this thread does highlight that in the UK at least, for many jobs there is an expectation of working unpaid overtime.

If you are working 10+ hours over your contract then there is something wrong. The whole U.K. job market doesn’t recognise this isn’t right.
You shouldn’t be working for free, they should employ more people.
Doing your hours means doing what you are paid to do, there isn’t actually anything wrong with that. Obviously there are situations where people need to pull together and do extra, but on a weekly basis, it’s just wrong.
The culture is wrong, not part time working. It’s why it works in other countries and not here.

I’ve been PT, PT compressed, FT and now FT compressed. I do think it depends on the organisation and direct manager.
When I was PT after my first child I may as well have handed my notice in as that was me written off as a respected and valued worker. I was told in no uncertain terms that I wouldn’t be considered for a promotion ever until I worked FT. This was a large well known organisation too. Even when I upped my hrs to 32hrs pw at 4 hrs a week, it was looked down on because ‘something’ always cropped up on the 5th day when I wasn’t in the office, and it was made into a big deal.
I left there and worked FT for a different firm, I was under no illusions that PT hrs would have never been agreed here as it was made very clear by the hiring manager without me ever asking about it! Again this was a large well known firm with lots of policies on indirect discrimination and respect in the workplace, but they didn’t walk the walk when it came to applying those policies in practice.
I’ve worked FT for 8 years now and can see my days of PT were marred by management attitudes that I was too keen to be at home, had to leave at 5pm so not as committed, only ever given the scraps for work or ‘assisting’ someone else and I was 0.7 at my most PT too!
With the benefit of hindsight I would never go PT again as IMO (wrongly) you won’t be taken seriously in terms of a professional role and this is an issue with disproportionately affects women. When the benefit of hindsight and promotions later through moving firms I still feel a bit bitter again some individuals 8 years on!

If you work in an organisation where getting stuff done is more important than the hours in which you do the stuff then part time can work just fine. I have a specific job, no one picks up my work when I am not there unless it is a dire emergency. Dire emergencies don't happen very often. And if they do, it's an indication that I haven't properly kept on top of things in the hours that I do work, so I have questions to answer. I think I've had one dire emergency in the five or so years that I have worked there. My chief executive doesn't give a damn what hours I work as long as I do the job I was hired to do and nor do my colleagues.

When I've worked places where there is an obsession with putting in extra hours and being seen to stay late, then part time work is sneered at. I was full time in those organisations, so no skin off my nose. But perhaps those organisations could instead have taken a look at the number of full time staff they employed who spent hours every day moaning about their workload instead of doing it, then stayed late and got a pat on the back for it. Instead of criticising the people, full and part time, who did their actual work in the hours they were paid for but then left on time.

I feel like full time working mums get more shit, though maybe not from management. The part tine workers assumed Id drop hours after having a baby and were hugely offended when i didnt. I still get comments from them as well other full time mums i know getying it too. All my other colleagues are part time so im outnumbered.

"When I've worked places where there is an obsession with putting in extra hours and being seen to stay late, then part time work is sneered at."

Yes, but those people probably sneer at people who work their proper hours as well so it's a bigger issue than not liking part timers.

I haven’t read the whole thread yet but in my experience there is a difference between a part-timer who does exactly the same role as the full-timers and a part-timer who does a role that was created as a part time one.

I fall into the latter category and it suits my employer well as there would not be budget for me to do what I do full time. Also, the nature of the job is such that nobody suffers as a result of my unavailability during my non-working days. Everyone’s happy.

However someone who comes back to a previously full time role part time may be seen as not pulling their weight as much as before. Silly though because the employer may well be benefitting from not having to pay that person as much and often such people end up working extra in their non working days.

I work many hours of overtime on the days I'm in, I'm not sure why part-time equals clock watching? Except in that the pt worker often has a childcare pick up to make, and so can't hang back for as long. There must be full time staff in that boat too.
Odd though that me being the last one there some days is never commented on, but needing to adjust meetings for the day I'm not in, is.

I work part time and certainly don't feel disliked.

It varies a lot between employers.
My team have a lot of part time workers, and i think they are well supported. I worked part time when my kids were small and am now almost full time. It hasnt impacted on career progression / promotion for me.
DH also reduced his hours when the kids were small, and his team definitely took him less seriously and invested less in his training opportunities as a result.

I think it completely depends on the industry and the nature of the role. Where I work, we are paid very well and far over the market rate and a certain amount of flexibility is expected and this is reflected in our pay. If we are having a busy week with deadlines to meet, You don’t just log off because it’s 5pm. I agree we shouldn’t praise people who constantly work ridiculous hours when they shouldn’t, but from my perspective (full timer) it’s frustrating when part timers just leave when it’s busy and expect (yes they expect) a full timer to pick up their work. A lot of part timers in various places Ive worked also book doctor / dentist appointments on their working days, expect a morning or afternoon off for them but won’t be flexible to us when we need them to actually complete their work.

Regarding promotion, if there are two people doing the same job (one part time and one full time) and the part timer has not shown flexibility, it is unlikely they will receive the promotion because they won’t be trusted to suddenly take on an extra workload and responsibility because they have already demonstrated they’re unable to.

PT are also much more expensive when toy add all the hidden and admin costs which can frustrate those higher up when they are not putting in the extra effort, which their full time peers do considering how much we are paid.

I’m only talking about the industry I work in, and for the companies I’ve worked for. I’m sure PT can work well in other places but I’ve never seen part time arrangements have a positive effect on profit, results or employee satisfaction

Resentment, jealousy, lack of imagination? It's hard to accurately judge motivations. If you have a thick enough skin, ask.

@kittenpeak I think some of your points about keeping to time are a bit unfair.

There are some days where I have to leave bang on time in order to collect my children from nursery. My husband is a shift worker so cannot do it. I work late when I can, and if something is calendared, I make arrangements, but I would be gutted to think that my colleagues think badly of me on the days where I walk out the door on the dot.

I was able to move to a role where ad hoc emergency late working was far less likely, but it took me about 6 months post Mat leave and not everyone might be in a position to do this without leaving a job/company they love working for.

from my perspective (full timer) it’s frustrating when part timers just leave when it’s busy and expect (yes they expect) a full timer to pick up their work

What do you mean here though @kittenpeak? Do you mean they clock off at 5 on their working days, or that they don’t work on their non-working days?

I think that the two get confused here- I also work in an industry that routinely requires long hours. As a part-timer I work 3 days a week but on those 3 days I work late evenings and early mornings if needed to get the work done. On my non-working days, however, I am simply not available as I am caring for my young son.

The problem is that many part timers have not only one or two full days off work, they also work limited hours in their “on” days. But the two should not automatically go together. The two working arrangements should be agreed separately, just as a full time worker can negotiate a “hard finish” or late start on certain days to accommodate other commitments, via a flexible working request.