OK DH and I need to sit down and have a chat about his job situation this weekend. He is very unhappy and minded to quit. I'd like him to stick it out for 2 more months as he will get a cash lump sum repaid to him but am quite concerned that he might turn around and punch his boss before then [half kidding smiley] I am also irritated with DH that he is not documenting in any way his now very adversarial relationship with his boss and the many ways in which she has not followed through on agreements made with him or seems to show preferential treatment to certain members of her team which is causing tensions between us.
So a couple of questions to help us consider whether some of the main issues can be dealt with and a request for some general advice as to what may be done to try and improve things.
Contracted hours: DH is contracted to work 37 hours per week being from 9-5.30 with an hour for lunch. His contract states however that he has to be flexible and work to fit with his customers needs. This frequently means DH working until 9/10 pm, working from 6 am, working on weekends almost NEVER having a lunch break (with consequential health impact - he has almost constant heartburn). There is no give and take for this - ie the fact that he worked 8 hours on the weekend does not mean that he can (for example) take Monday afternoon off. I think this is totally unreasonable but is it illegal? What are the implications of the working time directive in such circumstances? Any other points worth thinking about? Can HR be asked to clarify what this should mean in practise as his boss is absolutely certain that it is all about fitting in with the client wilst always working during your contracted hours. Being perfectly honest it is simply not possible to do DH's job in just 37 hours per week.
OTE: DH has an OTE made up of basic plus commission. At a recent roll out of the new sales campaign he was told that salespeople would receive 325 accounts per annum and based on this a number of targets were set (sales increase and closes per day) in order to achieve OTE. DH's boss has told him that he will be receiving just 200 accounts but targets are as set at the original sales meeting. This basically means that OTE is unachievable (not just challenging but simply unachievable with just 200 accounts). Can anything be done about this - is there any obligation to provide him with the means of achieving OTE? What about any means of preventing him from being discliplined for failing to meet now unachievable targets?
Unfair allocation of accounts: In the last quarter DH was on holiday for 4 weeks and accordingly was allocated a lower number of accounts than the rest of his team. This quarter he has no holiday so was expecting a slightly higher number of accounts compared to some of his colleagues who are (for example) taking 2 weeks off over Easter. This quarter however his boss has advised that holidays will not impact upon accounts allocation.
DH is aware that some team members are allocated more accounts than others and based on current league tables of sales performance this is not performance related. Is this reasonable/acceptable behaviour by his manager. If not how can this best be challenged?
DH has been meeting all of his targets this qaurter (top of the sales list on some targets) and accordingly agreed with his manager that he would be allocated some additional accounts. Despite three meetings agreeing this (one per week for three weeks) no additional accounts have been allocated and now he has been advised that he will not recieve any this quarter. Again - how is such inconsistent behaviour on the part of his boss and lack of follow through on her comittments to be challenged?
Thank you for any thoughts - I am at a loss as to suggest how to deal with such unreasonableness because I work for grown ups!