SO angry on dh's behalf - can his employer do this?

[CountessDracula]

DH is a lawyer. In his dept there are 3 partners, he is the most senior assistant and there are a few other assistants not as qualified as him.

The partners have agreed to provide a 24 hour on-call service for a helpline for one of their clients. They have decided that each of them and dh will take it in turns to be on call a week at a time. SO - every 4th week he will be on 24h call for 7 days This will presumably mean that we can't go to the cinema/theatre etc, can't go out and have a few drinks as he will have to be right on the ball, I run the risk of being woken up in the night when I am always bloody exhausted as it is etc etc

It's ok for the partners all of whom earn £250k+ but dh has (a) not been consulted about this, (b) not been offered any extra money and (c) is expected to just roll over and do it.

I think this constitues a change to the terms and conditions of his employment and that he should query this with them. It's not that he wants more money, but why should we have our lives effectively put on hold one week in 4? I think it is very unfair

Can they do this?

Thinking about this again, aren't you on call 24hrs a day 7 days a week as a lawyer anyway? In a way? I've taken plenty of calls at 11pm on a sunday. But I guess there is a difference between a client feeling embarrassed but just having to phone you at an antisocial hour, and a client given your number as an available helpline at an antisocial hour.

How many calls do they expect to get out of it?

And can't you go to the cinema just put your phone on vibrate?

The more I think about it the more I think he shoudl say "if you are going to give me the crap of a partner I want partnership" and use this to force the issue....

I was in the same boat before I finished work, but unfortunately there was a very sticky section in my contract which really meant they could do as they pleased.

No pph he is not a corporate lawyer, yes he gets the odd call in the evening but they are rare.

It is just the principle really, why should they impose this on him? None of the other assistants are being asked. I agree they give him partner responsibilites without the rewards (but then there are loads of nice things about not being a partner too!!!)

Don't get too excited about the extra holiday thing - I'd be very surprised if they have the ability to offer extra holiday - I know I don't. I ALWAYS ensure that my team have time off when they have been working long hours but that is in an ad hoc manner: there is a difference between that and saying "take 5 extra days off whenever you like". Latter tends to cause massive ructions with other staff, IMO. But it is worth a try.

I honestly think if he goes and says very unemotionally - "look you are partners and that goes with the territory. I'm not [insert "yet" if that is the way that he wants the conversation to go] and that doesn't seem fair to me. I'm not prepared to do [1 week in 4] but I am prepared to [do 1 week in 8/do it if I get extra time off/do it for a period of 3 months while you are setting it up]" then he will be viewed as being helpful.

But I think he probably needs to decide whether he is going for partnership or not, because it is only when he is clear that he is not that the balance swings in his favour. (I'm always slightly nervous of competent senior assistants without partnership aspirations, personally, as I know I have no "hold" over them!).

In my opinion, my work life balance is better because I am a partner and have a greater ability to influence my own working environment, but feel free to remind me of that when I'm posting at 3am.

Yes Anchovy, as you say that makes partners nervous which is why he doesn't want to fess up lol!

Cd, I hope your dh gets this sorted, no advice but I wouldn't want my dp to be available on this basis either. I think who ever said the partners MUST be prepared for him to object is right, surely they'll be surprised if he doesn't? Or doesn't at least use it to force the partnership issue.