to think recruitment crisis is partly due to employer pickiness?

[WhereAreMyAirpods]

DS has just had a rejection for a job - 10 hours a week at the local supermarket.

DS is currently a student and will be going back at the end of September. He told the supermarket at interview that he was happy to work as many hours as they needed until the end of September, and then after that, weekends/evenings and at times when he's not in Uni.

They said no, that wasn't what they were looking for. They were looking for someone who wanted 10 hours a week fully flexible, changing week on week. So one week it might be all day Saturday and a Tuesday morning, the next week three afternoons, the following week Thursday afternoon and Sunday - and so on.

Who can commit to that sort of work pattern? It doesn't work for people who have any other responsibilities whether that's childcare, or kids at school, or another part time job, or study. 10 hours a week isn't enough hours to survive on, but the demand for total flexibility means taking another job is impossible too.

DD in contrast works for another big high street shop which doesn't have issues recruiting because they advertise set shifts - she is contracted for 7 hours on a Sunday and although her start time can be anything from 8am to 11am, it's still 7 hours on a Sunday.

AIBU to think that supermarkets and other large employers can't have it both ways?

My LA is having a care-worker recruitment crisis.

they operate on “rolling shifts”. Nobody wants that.

If you're only offering 10 hours you need to accept people will have things on the rest of the week.

Anyone with full available will likely want full time hours.

Same here. My daughter recently got laid off.
She can only work restricted hours because of childcare- she can't rely on EXH.
She applied for a job in a bakery - flexible hours advertised.
Couldn't get through the online test - sort of a verbal reasoning thing. Very odd.
Same with all the supermarkets.

These places expect you to make their shitty minimum wage job your entire world and then cry when no one applies. It's ridiculous.

Yes my DC’s went through the same thing several years ago and I thought it was totally ridiculous then.
Anyone working in supermarket management know why they do this?

Clearly these hiring practices worked fine when there were more jobseekers than jobs. But we now have a situation that basically meets the definition of full employment so they’re going to have to start actually being attractive places to work.

It's because they've been spun the line of "we have loads of people sitting on benefits who need a few token hours of work a week, and loads of pensioners sitting about doing nothing" and that they can get a totally flexible workforce hearkening back to the days of men waiting at the docks hoping for some kind of ad-hoc day of work.

The truth is that most people have plans of one kind or another beyond "eat, work, sleep", especially now the concept of working your way up from the post room is no longer a thing that really happens.

It's very disappointing for DS too, who could do the job standing on his head and would be a reliable employee who's not going to bugger off for a better opportunity. IF they were able to offer him a set rota of (say) Wednesday afternoon and a Saturday.

I don't think the local store management have much authority to change things though.

Agree. And there is no need for this type of practice. They know when they have deliveries and they know when they are busy and when they aren’t. They know when people have holidays. The only thing unaccounted for is sickness. So you can give fixed rotas for the majority of the hours needed and ask staff if they would be willing to pick up extra shifts to cover holidays and if they would be open to the occasional in the day call for sick cover. (Worked in retail as management). It’s pure laziness.

This is what happens where DD works. They have a site they can log into to and pick up extra shifts if they want, but have core hours. If one major (and successful) retailer can do it, why aren't the others?

They were looking for someone who wanted 10 hours a week fully flexible, changing week on week. So one week it might be all day Saturday and a Tuesday morning, the next week three afternoons, the following week Thursday afternoon and Sunday - and so on.

That is the exact same issue that dd came across when she was job-seeking.

Yup.

most of the places complaining they can't get staff have set batty conditions.

My ds can't find a job either because he wants to work over weekends and after school but they want full flexibility.
Why not employee people who want school hrs to work school hrs and teenagers/students to do the other hrs?

Yanbu. My sister works for a supermarket and has done for ages. Would like to move store, but knows it would mean a decrease in hours that would not suit her and an expectation to drop everything when they want. She is effectively trapped there. To be honest they sound like a pretty shit and arrogant employer and sweat thd small stuff and not the big stuff. She is smart, but won't change jobs because of her age.

I do think a lot of employers who moan about quality of candidates on here usually end up paying them a pittance for high expectations. Seen a fair number of examples of that.

DS is 19 and the rate quoted was good - more than the minimum wage for his age. I think it was £9.60 while on probation and £10 after 3 months. But they can't get staff because they basically want you on call 8am to 10pm, seven days a week.

Agree it’s utterly bonkers. If you want Pt hours you want them for a reason - study, other job, childcare or carer.
Some people want all day Saturday or Sunday or all evenings why not advertise as such.
If you can’t get or keep staff look at how shifts are offered not just pay.
My 16 year old has just tipped toe into world of work. Lots not replied but they are always advertising. One she applied Sun, they rang her Monday, interview Tuesday and got job. Plus they were paying more. Easy to see why they don’t have staffing issues.

It's intentional. It's a variation on zero hours in some ways.

They offer part time hours knowing most people will need more in order to earn enough so they will find it easier to get cover when it suits them and they save on holiday and sick pay.

They won't give fixed hours because then you have a harder time turning down extra hours which are convenient to them. How can you have plans when you didn't know which shifts you would be working anyway?

They look at the cost of every penny spent on wages but I wonder how much such shitty employment practices cost them in terms of endless recruitment, poor staff retention and staff goodwill to match their own.

FOJN "They look at the cost of every penny spent on wages but I wonder how much such shitty employment practices cost them in terms of endless recruitment, poor staff retention and staff goodwill to match their own."

this is what puzzles me.

My daughter is having the same problem , has applied for lots of jobs but is only available certain times due to college .
some of the descriptions are absolutely ridiculous,I’ve seen 10 hours fully flexible too . Why would you bother ?
I started doing 10 hours when I first went back to work , was temping though and I’ve slowly built up my hours now I’m permanent . I did know my expected hours though

Yes I agree. I'm a mum to a 2 year old and two school age children, and I'm really struggling to find work that doesn't mean having to hand over all of a minimum wage pay packet to a nursery and wrap around childcare for the older two on top.

The NHS is particularly inflexible - HCA work local to me is only available in 12 hour shifts either 7am-7pm or 7pm-7am. Total madness.

@WhereAreMyAirpods I think it has come from a culture shift in management.
when I started work, you were trained how to manage both staff and customers. Plus you worked your way through the company, even HR had to do shop floor and back room training, so they knew what conditions were like. It doesn’t seem to be that way now, it feels like everything is centrally managed by accountants or HR. Both seem to think of employees as ‘units’ to be managed and not human beings. HR are marginally worse as they also seem to think you should be grateful to be hired at all. Both factions seem to believe that ‘units’ are infinitely replaceable.
sadly I think this attitude has spread to other employment sectors too.

I used to work in retail HR and we always advised our shop managers they couldn't enforce full flexibility on part time hours.

They could ask for it, encourage it etc but if people had other commitments they couldn't demand it. Obviously if someone was never available outside of key hours we wouldn't take them on but childcare or educational commitments affecting a small percentage of availability we couldn't demand they gave up.

It’s also an issue in terms of logistics eg if there’s no Sunday bus you can’t take 10 hr a week job with expectation of 7 days availability in case they schedule a Sunday shift but would be able to work Monday to Sat no problem. 10 hours split over 4 shifts is also no good if bus/train fare is ££ but one 10 hour shift financially viable.

Happy to state that DD works at Next, which is a retailer whose vacancies clearly state the hours they are wanting to fill. This is a retailer who seems to be doing well and a success story of the pandemic. So if Next can do it...

@fuckgolf and this is partly why no one wants to work in care or nhs. Hours are too long to be able to ‘care’ and over the week too demanding, when they want you to 5+ shifts and swing from one to the other.
They say it’s to cover staff shortage - but really it just exacerbates the shortage, by putting people off or burning them out.