Work situation - is this reasonable?

[Floofydawg]

I'm in a mid senior role in financial services. Work part time (4 days, not condensed) but still get a full time workload done. Am expected to travel around once a month for work which ends up in me doing more than my paid hours that week. I don't get that time back and I still have to get my work done.

Next Monday I've been asked to travel for a department wide 'away day' which will basically just be a talking shop. This would mean me leaving home at 6.30am and not getting back til around 8pm. I've said I'm not going and my manager is trying to pressure me. AIBU to stick to my guns?

In a previous low in pecking order job if we had to go somewhere different to our normal place of work we would get paid or time off in lieu with the difference to normal working day. For example normal start time 9am, 30 minute commute but if had to catch train at 6am, again 30 minute commute for a course which started at 9am would be paid/time back 6 hours for travel.

Or if on relief at another branch would be paid for travelling which took longer than normal travel to work. E.g. Normal travel to work 6 miles a day, to go on relief at 10 miles from base would be paid for 14 miles a day.

I'm TTC and this is exactly why I've said I'll never drop a day if I'm able to have children. I'm in a more lower management role but have the same clause of just doing the job despite the hours contracted for, and dropping a day doesn't make that work magically disappear. I think a lot of women get shafted in this regards to be honest.

Sounds like they want to pay you part time wages and have you work full time and a bit more, OP. If you don't care about promotion/career progression, then dig your heels in. It'll be almost impossible for them to sack you.

I have a friend who was working 4 days technically but doing 5 days' work. She logged all her hours for several months and then asked for a meeting where she presented the data. They increased her salary to the full time equivalent.

Not related to your specific query, but might be worth considering as this sort of situation creates such a sense of resentment, quite rightly.

It's your working day and you're in a senior role so yes, it is reasonable for them to occasionally ask you to travel for work.

Saying no for childcare reasons and simply saying no because you "can't be arsed" are two very different things.

Do you expect to be paid for travelling to the office ? Did that happen pre-Covid when you were in office FT? If so that’s unusual.

Regarding the offsite event, if it’s being held in a different town, then you’d be reasonable to claim expenses but in regard to the actual event, won’t all of your colleagues also be having a long day, why are you different?

A normal commute is a little different to a 3 hour each way journey to be fair. And a lot of my colleagues are London based (we are split about 60/40 north/south but guess what, away days are always in the South).

to be fair, from an employer's pov, cba and childcare are on the same level.

If a childcare issue is a very rare occasion, then fine. If it is a regular thing that you can't do away-days for childcare reasons - unless this is negotiated in advance - and especially if those away-days are then falling to others, then I'd be much more inclined to manage that person out, or into another role that doesn't require away-days.

CBA because cba is one thing. CBA because overloaded is a whole other issue, and OP needs to get on top of it. Her company are going to take as much as she gives and never ever offer to reduce the workload or increase the salary from the goodness of their own hearts.

I think YABU given you are in a senior role, and it sounds occasional. But you need to sort the wider issue of doing a FT rule for PT hours. This is why I'd never go PT, it always remains a FT job. Either go FT and get the salary, or refuse to work more than your paid hours.

This.
Yes, most contracts at senior role include a clause about working outside of hours as needed - but if you are contracted to a 40 hour week and you regularly work 10 hours over a week, you are giving them an extra 25% of your time for free, and that's not reasonable, that's a whole extra weeks work per paycheck!
Especially unreasonable if it's every week month!
I know people do it - but businesses have manipulated us into believing its reasonable. It's not reasonable, its expected because businesses are greedy or underfunded and want to save money and not resource correctly.
I think there should be a law in place that anything above 10% of your contracted hours is 'unreasonable' additional hours and therefore has to be paid. Companies are taking our labour for free. That's it. It doesn't matter why, or what's standard in the industry, or what challenges the company's had this year, or the government funding etc etc etc: you are being expected to give something to them for free. You don't walk into Sainsburys and expect to take 3 cartons of eggs and only pay for 2, so why do we accept this status quo?
What really, really upsets me are the people working additional unpaid hours for less than 40k a year. It's not their fault, you get told its to help you progress, because you are 'senior' (to people on 20k) or whatever excuse companies come up with to try and say 'your work is so vital we can't function without it, but we also won't pay for it'

This is your answer

why are you on 80% if you work 100%? You should deal with that.

tell them you have enough to do without losing a day and then FFS, negotiate proper pay. Why haven't you done that ages ago? Sounds like you're ready to leave tbh.

This would be expected in my role. Possibly some TOIL as a result. But travel to meetings is part of my mid senior job.

I’d sack you if you didn’t go.

you might find that difficult, @fuzzyduck1

but I'll bite: on what grounds?

hmm, ok so you may be expected to go as part of your role and thats absolutely fine. BUT putting extra hours in with no compensation IS NOT FINE. and YABU to all those who say "its just expected". You are paid exactly for the hours you are contracted- anything more you should be getting time in lieu or paid overtime.

I agree with PPs if you are really getting a true full time workload done (commensurate with your role and level of seniority) but only getting 4/5ths of full time pay for it, then that is the real problem and you need to get it sorted pronto.

I wouldn't be picking battles over an occasional away day which seems like the sort of thing that would be expected of a senior bod.

Two different issues here.

What is your sickness policy? I would start by getting signed off with stress for a few weeks and that should focus them on your workloads if you are really being given a full time workload.

However attending a company event on your work day is not unreasonable. You should be attending.

@PlipPlopChoo 6 months full pay, 6 months half. I have honestly thought about it. But I'd only have to face it all when I went back. And I would be dropping them completely in the shit, especially given the colleague who is going to be off for a while.

I think you need to email your boss with a “gentle reminder” that you are compensated for part time position and still manage to fit a full-time workload into your four days. Expecting you to travel there and back means that you are effectively short two days next week, as you require a minimum of ten hours rest time between getting home and leaving for work the next morning to be safe and effective.

Make it matter to him by hitting him in his productivity.

I don't think this is unreasonable. I'd suck it up or find a new job.

It’s absolutely financial services mid level manager range outside of London and the south.

I wonder if she meant a contract role rather than a consulting role... the contract roles I've done have been a piece of piss and very well paid.

OP, employers will give you as much shit as you will tolerate.

@PlipPlopChoo's is a good suggestion as is @Fraaahnces.

This is your life and workload until you change.

Your boss doesn't give two damns about you and will load up as much work as you are foolish enough to accept.

Going out sick and taking a rest to relieve this stress is the right thing to do.

Let your boss do THEIR job and sort out staffing levels.

You ARE too old to be tolerating this.

Stop it.

Push back hard.

The alternative is suck it up and get sick.

Both this and this:
And I would be dropping them completely in the shit, especially given the colleague who is going to be off for a while.
are your manager's/employer's problem and failing, not yours. They have been daft enough to run their business on good will and good health.
Of course they aren't going to bother employing another person and solving the under resourcing problem, when you are willing to take up the slack for free! As it stands at the moment, the work is getting done and they are quids in. You have to be willing to let things fail. As long as you can evidence filling your time productively, what can they do to you?