To think that the overtime should be paid?

[SorcererGaheris]

In the bookshop in which I volunteer, there are two paid employees - the FT manager and PT deputy manager. (It's a charity shop.)

I've been aware for a while that the charity does not pay the shop's employees for any overtime they do (which is probably the main reason that the deputy manager generally refuses to work more than her contracted hours.) But I assumed that since this was the case, they could therefore not expect employees to do overtime, since it's not paid.

However, the manager is under pressure to keep the shop open for longer during the week and to also keep the shop open on Sundays when the volunteer team for that day are unable to come in. Sunday is the one day when there is no paid member of staff in the shop and it's entirely volunteer led, but but occasionally there are times when the volunteers can't come in to do their shift and when that happens the shop is closed on that Sunday.

From a recent conversation I had with the manager, it seems that the charity does indeed expect her to do unpaid overtime, and there is so much pressure that it seems she is more or less almost forced into doing it.

Discussing this with other volunteers, I learned that the charity offers time off in lieu for unpaid overtime, and that it would be in the employment contract. Time off in lieu would be reasonable IF taking additional time off was usually a practical possibility, but given the nature of charity shops relying on a staff of majority volunteers, taking additional time off is often NOT a practical possibility.

So what seems to happen in practice is that the manager ends up doing overtime that is completely unrenumerated in any way.

This set-up seems unfair to me. In typical retail, I imagine time-off in lieu of payment for overtime would be more reasonable, because all the staff contractually have to be there, so there're more flexibility and consistent cover. This is not the case with charity shops.

Given the nature of charity shops, I think that the charity should either commit to paying any overtime they demand - or at the very least, they should not put pressure on their employees to do the overtime when they're aware that it can't really be compensated.

This is none of your business. If it affects you personally, then it's your problem. It doesn't so it is up to the paid employees to decide whether it bothers them.

It's a charity, people may be happy to give up some of their time for free. If they're not, they can either personally challenge it or leave. Is there any difference between you working on a voluntary basis and a paid employee working hours on a voluntary basis? They may be asked to but it's up to them whether they do.

I agree but this is easily resolved by the staff member saying they are unavailable for additional hours.

I don't doubt that. But either she sticks up for herself and others in her position or she'll be taken advantage of forever. Or she should get a new job.

You can see it as being unfair, so what do you think would help to get the charity as a whole to change their policy? They're so massive I doubt they'd just do it for one manager. Do other managers feel the same way? Does she communicate with them?

@HoskinsChoice

It does bother the paid manager. That was clear from our discussion.

Is there any difference between you working on a voluntary basis and a paid employee working hours on a voluntary basis

The difference is that I freely choose and am happy to work there for free on a voluntary basis.

The manager is a paid employee and is not happy to work additional hours unpaid on a voluntary basis, but feels pressured/pushed into doing so.

Yanbu but charity shops in general are not doing themselves any favours by making themselves so difficult to volunteer for. I know of 3 young people, 2 who are in the 16-18 age bracket and one over 18, who are all finding it incredibly difficult to find a volunteering opportunity at any of the hundreds of charity shops in our city. I assumed this was because they are swamped with far more volunteers than they could possibly need, so if this isn't so, why isn't it easier to get an opportunity to volunteer?

Time Off In Lieu is perfectly fine, businesses can't be expected to find an extra 10% for the wages bill, and the manager should recruit and train more volunteers until there are enough to cover the workload so she can take the TOIL.

« Wet lettuce tax » indeed.

How can she be a good manager if she is not able to stand her ground, that’s the question.

Why can’t she just tell whoever is scolding her « Please do let me know when I can take TOIL for the overtime that brings my salary below min wage - until you do so I won’t be able to do it ». And leave it at that.

@CactusSwoonedEnding

Maybe that's the case in quite a few charity shops, but I do get the impression (from mine) that we're in the situation of having fewer people apply to volunteer than we did in the past. I've also got the impression that that's the same across the board for charity shops generally, although some individual charity shops may still get a healthy amount of applicants.

the manager should recruit and train more volunteers until there are enough to cover the workload so she can take the TOIL.

I think more could potentially done to try to recruit additional staff, but ultimately it does come down to whether people among the public wish to volunteer, and volunteer numbers have been down for a while.

Also bear in mind that many (if not most) of the volunteers are unwilling to take on the additional responsibilities of effectively running the shop in the manager's stead. In our shop, if the paid manager or paid deputy manager isn't present then there needs to be what they call a 'Lead Volunteer' in the shop, someone who is happy to oversee things. But a lot of the volunteers are just happy with their own basic roles and don't want to take on extra responsibilities - and since they're volunteers, they're under no obligation to take those jobs on if they don't want them.

Pressuring someone to work for free is entirely unreasonable.

@Harrietsaunt

It seems like they expect her to make herself available.

If her not working additional hours results in the shop either being closed (or not open for as long as they want) then she gets told off. So I think she's in a difficult situation. She can (and does) refuse at times, but then she gets hassle for it. So there are times when she (unwillingly) does unpaid overtime to avoid the telling off.

She’s making a choice…

Assuming that they are not paid a very high rate then they need to be very careful as they could be breaching minimum wage laws

@BillieWiper

I do agree with you, but I just find it hard to see the manager sticking up for herself in that way. She's not what I would describe as an unconfident person, but I think she'd prefer to avoid the hassle and conflict that taking a firmer stand might entail.

A different job might be better for her, but considering her age (she'll be 67 this year) and her health (I think she's a diabetic) I wonder if she doubts her chances of being accepted for another position?

You can see it as being unfair, so what do you think would help to get the charity as a whole to change their policy? They're so massive I doubt they'd just do it for one manager. Do other managers feel the same way? Does she communicate with them?

I have no idea to any of that. No idea what would get the charity to change. It wouldn't surprise me if other managers did indeed feel the same way, but I've no idea if our manager talks with them about it.

She's definitely a member of the Oxfam Union, because when Oxfam employees went on strike over low pay a couple of years ago, our manager and deputy manager were among those striking (and the shop was closed on the strike days.)

Volunteer numbers are down for various reasons.

Less people are retiring early or if they are they are doing childcare for grandchildren. There is also a bit more of a me culture these days.

@Harrietsaunt

Yes, of course she is. It's her choice, but I still think the situation she's in is innately unfair (as well as the level of pressure and hassle she gets if she doesn't do extra hours.)

@Comefromaway

Charity shop managers don't get high wages. A bit above minimum wage, but not much more, as I understand.

Most charity staff are women (and middle class with a better-paying spouse or the wages would make life impossible)

You can report them for paying under minimum wage https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage/worker-disputes-over-minimum-wage

As for rest it’s her decision what hours she works. She needs to push back and say no.
But if the custom and practice is employees working extra hours each week and dropping below min wage the employer will potentially be in difficulty.

It's not innately unfair when the manager is actively choosing to ignore the terms of their employment contract and work for free. It's just stupid.

@WallaceinAnderland

I'm not sure that she is ignoring the terms of her employment contract?

I've been informed by other Oxfam volunteers that Oxfam offers time off in lieu for unpaid overtime. So the manager must be aware of that, but taking extra time off is often not practically possible for her to do.

There are times when (despite expectations) she won't do the unpaid overtime. While you may see it as stupid for her to agree to do any unpaid overtime at all, the consequences of not doing it are that she gets told off. It seems harsh to say someone is being stupid for - understandably - wanting to avoid the unpleasant experience of being told off.

You said she did not take the TOIL, that is what I was referring to.

Thanks very much. That does give it more context.

I think unfortunately you'll have to just firmly, kindly remind her that she should speak to union, higher up and or the other managers to get it rectified. And in your opinion she shouldn't work for free. Offer to back her if she needs some kind of statement etc. Which is unlikely if she won't act.

But then once your position is crystal clear I'd probably try and just distance yourself from it.

You sound like a very empathetic and kind person to be thinking about her but ultimately she's choosing to work there and you would probably have a happier working day just not thinking about it.

This. If people are on low wages to start with, it doesn't take much to take them effectively below NMW

@BillieWiper

I think she's probably aware of that already, but I suspect she doesn't think there's much chance of anything changing. Perhaps she engages with the union - but the person directly above her would be the area manager and that's usually the person who ends up telling her off - because the area manager is in turn getting told off by her superiors, etc.

It comes across like a chain of scolding.

The problem is that the demands/expectations coming from the shop are often not feasible when it comes to the realities of many charity shops' circumstances at the moment. I've thought for a long time that those making these kinds of decisions must have never worked in a charity shop themselves, otherwise they'd know that some of their suggestions are completely impractical.

But she's not a child. A grown woman shouldn't accept being 'told off' for refusing to work for free or less than NMW.

Why should she break the law?

Maybe she works for a charity but she isn't one herself. It sounds like a shit place to work, no doubt. If I was her I'd just leave tbh. If I hadn't the strength to refuse to be 'scolded'.