To think people who work part-time shouldn’t get the same promotion chances as full-timers?

[ThatCandidBear]

If you’re only doing 3 days a week, how is it fair to expect the same career progression as someone putting in 5? AIBU to think promotion opportunities should be tied to hours worked?

The biggest problem for me has been promoting a 3 day a week person into the role that shouldn’t really be a 3 day a week role. The person is absolutely capable of it and deserves the promotion more than some who are working 5 days a week. Our failing is not recognising it’s not a 3 day a week role or having the ability to make it one by day splitting it into two or a job share. We often end up loosing the person anyway as the role is too big.

It seems you have very specific situation in mind.

In some roles it can work absolutely ok, especially if we are talking about specialist/experience based work with more people on the same (higher) level.

Some jobs can be done with limited hours, but with some flexibility/understanding about urgent situations.

I did a PM work part time - I worked over three days, plus was available 2× 30 minutes on the other two days (paid) so if something was needed, I've stepped in and clarified. It worked for everyone, including other part-timers in my team (who had different working days pattern depending on their needs).

Some of us are disabled and can't work full time

I work 3 days and they get far more than 3 days’ worth of work out of me in any given week. I’m amazing value and luckily that has been recognised!

I’ve worked for an organisation where for certain roles you had to have done the ‘junior’ role for two years to ensure you had the requisite breadth of technical experience. Except staff who worked part time had less technical experience due to their reduced hours but they could still apply for progression after two years. In effect full time staff had to work for longer before being able to progress. Not really fair at all.

I get easily double done in my 4 days a week than some of my colleagues manage in 5....

Thus why I got promoted ahead of them

Agree with this. Have always felt since moving to part time if you compared my work achieved against the full timers it exceeds it both in volume and standard. There is a lot of time wasted by the full timers.

Full time workers are much more visible, also part time workers rely heavily on other people to carry on the work whilst they are not in the office so can rarely fully be given the credit for tasks as achievements were jointly carried out, full time workers tend to do more overtime and are more available, full time workers generally do more office socialising than part timers, full timers are there all the time so lees chance of other people taking the credit for their work…..unfortunately I could go on and on

I work part time. Been there 18 months & am already more knowledgeable, efficient & autonomous than a 15 year full time staff member. She can't do anything for herself & knows almost nothing. Can't solve a problem & spends her time chatting on the phone to family & friends.

Why should she get an opportunity that I can't?

Fyi no one carries the load when I'm not there. My work waits until I am there.

Utter bollocks

Absolute codswallop!

I don’t understand the rationale for excluding part-timers in this way. The part-timer could be much better at the job on the next level up than the full-timer.

First off OP said part timers shouldn’t get promoted over full time because “they’ve put less in”……

then OP changed their tune to faux concern about who has to deal with emergencies on the part time workers day off…… (which is the lamest argument ever because this RARELY happens and when it does, genuine emergencies go up the chain of command not down!!)

then it became an issue about “posturing”……

honestly OP, why don’t you just say that a part time colleague got promoted over you and you’re salty about it?

Job shares?

Career progression is dependent on business need. They call the shots. If they want a full time manager that is totally their call.

I agree! I'm present in the office more often than most of my full-time colleagues and no-one picks up the slack on my non-working day - stuff just waits for me to come back. My direct reports like my non-working day because they say it's their chance in the week to catch their breath and clear their feet. I pack a lot into the days I do work, and as I've said already on this thread I deliver more in a week than many of my full-time peers. I agree with @WimbyAce that there is a lot of time wasted by full-time workers, and part-time workers are often more efficient and driven.

When I went back to work part-time after mat leave I found myself in that hole of still having my full time workload.

I don't think 'hours worked' is a reliable metric for determining suitability for promotion.

😂😂
You know it isn’t

They aren't just slacking off on Thursday and Friday. They are not being paid for that time. If the company is not employing anyone else and that's leaving excess work to be done on Thursday and Friday, that's poor management. Nothing to do with the part time staff member.

Meh, I'm four days a week and have specifically gone down a specialist path for promotion because that's the type of role that can be done part time and in flexible hours.

If I was going the management route in my line of work it would have to be full time again (or possibly a job share) because there are too many decisions required in very short turn arounds to do reduced hours even though I'd be more than capable of doing the work.

what if the part timer has worked there for 10 years and the full timer only 2? overall the part timer has "delivered" more for the company overall, so how does that work in your lack of logic?

Also how does it work when vacancies are external? The best person could be a candidate from outside the organisation who hasn't delivered anything at all for the company at that stage, compared to internal candidates for whom it would be a promotion.

Promotions aren't direct rewards for doing well - that's what pay is for. People get promoted because there's a job that needs filling and they're the best candidate. The aim of an interview (internal candidate or not) should be to find the best candidate for the NEW role, not the person who works hardest/achieves most at their current one.

A few times I have encountered situations where a part-time worker was promoted as it was cheaper than promoting a full-time worker. These tended to be roles where the extra responsibility was planning and/or technical rather than direct supervision. In one case the assistant manager was part-time but worked full time when the manager was on holiday.

www.gov.uk/part-time-worker-rights

Wouldn’t it be easier to just explain the story that’s actually happened rather than this weird general nonsense that you’re apparently worried about.

Yep.

You can't treat part time workers less favourably, thank god.

www.acas.org.uk/part-time-workers