AIBU to feel discriminated against as a part-time worker (9 day fortnight)

[NoJamSlags]

My employer is offering a 9 day fortnight (compressed hours 9 days a fortnight with the 10th day off). But only to full time staff. Has anyone else experienced this – is it not discriminatory to part time staff not to offer the equivalent? Not sure if I am being unreasonable querying this?

Because they’re still working full time hours.

None of those are issues for me as I’ve said above.

But you haven’t even asked, yet you’re accusing your employers of discrimination. It very much sounds as if you’re getting ready for a fight.

How many people work part time at your workplace?

AIBU to feel discriminated against
Is exceptionally dramatic, so "froth" is fair.

I have explained for you clearly why HR cannot just open up a compressed hours scheme for part-time workers, they need to check first about business issues. I do hope this isn't how you plan to speak to your colleagues, because I suspect you will struggle if it is.

Can I check, you work 2.5 days a week and work 9-5 for the full days and 9-1 on your half day, or do you have different hours?

previously, other staff worked 9-5 5 days a week, but now are going to work 8:30-5:30 with one day a fortnight off to allow for them having done an extra hour a day on their full days.

So I guess you could ask if you could change your work pattern to allow for doing your contracted hours over the longer days and have the half day off once a fortnight as well.

Part time means working fewer days/hours for less money. Eg if someone worked full time (5 days) for a salary of £50k then went part time and worked 3 days, salary would reduce to £30k in proportion to days worked. Part timers aren’t on a better deal - they work less but also earn less!

Compressed hours is different - it’s doing the same amount of work, for the same money, but those hours are squeezed into 9 days rather than 10, in this scenario.

Compressed hours is still full time hours, but longer days. Only paid for the hours they work, but those hours are arranged more conveniently for the full time stoff. They aren't getting way with a day off or anything, they have put in that full day's work across the previous fortnight.

I had the same thing one flexi time back in the early 90s - if you packled your hours in youcould have one day off a fortnight.

Part time workers have that already - they are getting time of in the week through working short days (which they are paid for, just as full timers are paid for theirs).

How is it possible for a part time staff member to work "compressed" hours when the whole point of part time is that they are not there for that many hours? That's just rejigging their shifts a bit.

A 9 day fortnight is only available to FT workers because it means working 74 hours (assuming a 37hr week) over 9 days instead of 10.

You are entitled to request any form of flexible working that you like, and your employer has a duty to consider it and can only refuse for a legitimate business reason (there’s a specific list). So crack on - if that’s what you want to do you can ask.

Surely they will still be full time? Just that they do their hours compressed into 9 days.

Have you got the option to go back to full tome and work compressed hours?

if you now do 5 days a fortnight you'd do 4 and a half

I agree with this.

perhaps read ops post of 15.42

op seems to be asking a question and looking for advice, when its given she explains she will ask after the trails of the scheme - whilst you seem to be patronising

Yes totally reasonable. I don’t know what the law says about part time worker rights, but if they are supposed to be the same as for full time staff then I say you should be entitled to work the equivalent compressed hours

I'd be careful about playing the sex discrimination card. I work in a male dominated profession with very few part-time workers. But it's an equal male and female split for part-time and flexible workers, so that argument wouldn't hold up. If anything the opposite could be true and that is one of the reasons that all FT workers are being offered this option to improve their work/life balance.

OP consider what works for you and request it. If you're already PT then think about why you didn't you ask for whatever pattern you now think you want originally. Did you just assume your employer would say no? Or did it not really suit you?

If this is about money and 'fairness', in that you feel you gave up money for a better work/life balance and now others are being offered an option to claw back some time for themselves without any financial compromise, then check yourself. You can return to FT working for extra money, continue doing what you're doing, or make a new flexible working request.
Don't be jealous of others. You are already better off than many as you can afford to have more time off.

OP does not need to wait for the trial to finish, she has a right to request a flexible working pattern like this one regardless of anything that is or is not arranged for full time employees. I've given her plenty of advice, but her attitude also requires response in appropriate tone.

I've not read the full thread but I got a pay rise as effectively the full timers got an increase in their hourly rate and I got the same treatment but no extra days off as I was already taking them off. I went from 8/10 pt to 8/9 days pt.

It never ceases to amaze me that people think someone working part time should be treated less favourably that a full time worker.
”this is why we can’t have nice things”
who are these “we”, and what “nice things” can’t they have?
Generally speaking, PT employees are treated much less favourably than FT employees. For absolutely no good reason,

But any of those issues you’ve listed should be discussed with the employee not just dismissed out of hand,

Have you asked? I suspect it's that no one's thought about it more than it's not available.

Put a flexible working request in.

They would be, that's the purpose of a flexible working request. OP hasn't actually asked anyone at work.

Less favourably? The employer has granted a request to offer that worker a better work/life balance by allowing them to go part time in the first place.

I’m not sure what you’re counting as being treated less favourably, other than perhaps your own personal feelings of being left out because you’re not there as much.

I’ve mentioned in a later post ways in which envious part colleagues can ruin things for everyone else if they don’t get a piece of the pie.

The OP has every right to request to change her hours. She has had this right for a long time. But instead of asking her managers a simple question, she has decided to cry discrimination and seems to want to go in all guns blazing.

ETA: crying discrimination not because something has been taken away from her, but because others have had something (which she already has) given to them.

I don't understand why you feel the need to tie it up as a pt compressed hours option, which is confusing.

Why not just use the opportunity of the longer working window to put in a new flexible working request and add the extra hour a day in?

But be aware, the working window is likely to be linked to the compressed hours trial, and if that finishes, it could go back to 9 to 5pm. This may be the reason they don't want to include pt ers, as they may end up with them working a window they then withdraw.

Yes. They are allowed to in this case
Ultimately it comes down to needs of the business as well

The extra one hour a day of opening will allow full timers to work full days still.
If part timers want to compress their hours then that might result in them having to work half days - which might not work for the business at all.

If it was related to eg salary, pension contributions, holiday entitlement or similar then that’s completely different and part timers have to be treated the same. Distribution of hours, completely different.

A tribunal would look at the reasons why the company moved to that model and, in my experience, would not necessary expect part timers to be offered the same.

Submit your own flexible working request, detailing how you can do your job in the hours you want. Don’t even try to go down the “discrimination” route

(and before you ask I have 30 years + in HR and employment law)

In 30+ years I have never seen a business (or Tribunal) ever regard part time hours as compressed!
In every case, compressed hours have only ever been hours that are equivalent to the companies full time week (whether that’s 35/40 hours or whatever)
Part time hours are part time hours - how they are worked is an agreement between the company and the employee.
Eg I recently supported a small company with recruitment. Amongst their staff they took on two 20 hour contracts. One is working 4x5 hours and the other is working 2x10 hours. One has a part time contract for 2 days, one for 4 days. Not a mention at all of “compressed” hours!