Sharing out overtime

[BrightBlueCast]

Kids’ leisure activity.
Person A works 5 sessions a week, fixed.

Person B works 1-2 sessions a week depending on their availability and the employer’s need.

Person B thinks all overtime opportunities should be divided equally, including quite large extras like trips and residentials which pay well.

Contracts not clear on the matter - it just says overtime will be offered from time to time.

Those in charge of staffing would rather have Person A for extras as they are much better at the job, much more of a team player, get on very well with everyone, great relationship with parents, kids respect her etc. Person B is less in all respects.

What’s fair? Any suggestions?

Also, in a side note, I'd be starting a Performance improvement plan with person B and having very defined, SMART, targets for her role moving forward to monitor her development and support her to improve.

@puddleduck234 - we're certainly intending to say that this needs to be done by email, not phones or costly meetings (we don't mind the idea of meetings sometimes but not for this). I will concede that Person B isn't on email during the day so I wouldn't expect a quick reply (would give at least a few days to reply) and I would call if it were urgent (and Person B can also call me during working hours).

It's completely the tail wagging the dog. Unfortunately she wasn't really cut out for the job, was given it, has done it ok, but nobody has ever felt comfortable with her. But she's been there several years. And she's so very cross.

Thank you @ChoiceMummy - that's helpful to know!

@gogohm

Offering b at least 29% of opportunities seems fair because they are allowing the business to run

We can certainly do this as a compromise (rather than offering Person A first refusal on everything which I think is what's ). Depending on availability, could we offer Person B the overtime hours where WE think she can do best (or, least harm). ie we give her the easy overtime and save the more challenging (but also more 'fun') overtime for Person A who, simply, is just better all round. This means low-key afternoons at our home base = Person B. Trips = Person A.

@BrightBlueCast

Kids’ leisure activity. Person A works 5 sessions a week, fixed. Person B works 1-2 sessions a week depending on their availability and the employer’s need.

Person B thinks all overtime opportunities should be divided equally, including quite large extras like trips and residentials which pay well.

Contracts not clear on the matter - it just says overtime will be offered from time to time.

Those in charge of staffing would rather have Person A for extras as they are much better at the job, much more of a team player, get on very well with everyone, great relationship with parents, kids respect her etc. Person B is less in all respects.

What’s fair? Any suggestions?

I can understand being equal distribution and fairness, but if person A is overall better for business and is better with the "customers" then with all due respect why does B want equal distribution ? Seems they just want the £ even though their abilities ect, could potentially adversely affect the business model.

@Hawkins001 - Person A is so much better (to the point where we thank our lucky stars every time we see her as she's just so good) but it's hard to say that to Person B. We can say that Person A is better suited to some of the overtime (trips, for example) because she has a better understanding of the kids (we have a few challenging ones, and so familiarity is very, very important there) but I guess apart from that it's in large part personality.

I can definitely argue in future about the general flakiness of her admin skills though and I'm keeping a record of failures to respond to emails (including ones about safeguarding training and DBS checking). It's not an admin job but my view is that personal admin is important when it comes to organising your work life.

My argument about trips out etc is that, if it were a school class trip, it would usually be in everyone's best interests that the class teacher goes rather than the occasional supply teacher, because children benefit from familiarity when outside their normal setting. And Person A knows instinctively what kind of pitfalls to look out for that are specific to some of those children. Some of those things are very subtle and only come through building a relationship.

[quote BrightBlueCast]@Hawkins001 - Person A is so much better (to the point where we thank our lucky stars every time we see her as she's just so good) but it's hard to say that to Person B. We can say that Person A is better suited to some of the overtime (trips, for example) because she has a better understanding of the kids (we have a few challenging ones, and so familiarity is very, very important there) but I guess apart from that it's in large part personality.

I can definitely argue in future about the general flakiness of her admin skills though and I'm keeping a record of failures to respond to emails (including ones about safeguarding training and DBS checking). It's not an admin job but my view is that personal admin is important when it comes to organising your work life.

My argument about trips out etc is that, if it were a school class trip, it would usually be in everyone's best interests that the class teacher goes rather than the occasional supply teacher, because children benefit from familiarity when outside their normal setting. And Person A knows instinctively what kind of pitfalls to look out for that are specific to some of those children. Some of those things are very subtle and only come through building a relationship.[/quote]
That's understandable, that's the thing, when you have a commander leading the troops, you need the leaders that know the troops to achieve successful goals, but then the issues are how to convey that to other commanders, that want to be in charge but are not the best equipped for the troops they want to lead, so to speak.

If person A is so good, could you not increase her contracted hours? Eliminate the need for overtime?

@StrictlyAFemaleFemale I would like to do that, and have thought about it often! It's tricky though because the overtime varies greatly and I'm not sure it would necessarily be in Person A's interests, nor in the interests of the paymasters. I have wondered whether a more permanent contract (with sick pay etc) would be more appealing to her, though, even in the money over the course of the year were the same. It's something to look into. That would then set her above Person B in rank too, I think, which better befits the situation.

How long has person B been employed by the company?

Send an email to A and B advising a review of overtime has been undertaken and from next term the following will apply.

• overtime offered based on sessions worked, 7 sessions a week A does 5 = 70% B does 2 = 30%.
• planned overtime requirements emailed to A and B with a response required within x days or by COP on x date (what ever suits).
• ad hoc overtime requirements emailed to A and B with a response required by ? ( much shorted deadline) or on first come first served basis.
• A record of overtime will be kept and monitored to ensure fair % split over a term.
• A text message will be sent to both A and B advising an overtime email has been sent with deadline for response of ? Much quicker than phoning.

Make sure A and B have clear objectives and provide regular feedback. Use something along the lines of “ what have you done well”, “what do you need to improve/require development”.

As you have picked up B needs prompt constructive feedback. I would address any “I’m good at my job comments” with you do x well but you need to improve y and give specific examples. If there isn’t an improvement then follow your poor performance policy to either get the improvements or exit B.

I think B has a point that the overtime should be offered equally tbh - I can't see how you can justify emplying B for 'several years' yet be so unhappy with her performance you don't want her to do any extra work.

While I agree that performance measures should be followed if necessary, you are also going to find it hard to justify starting them only after she complained about not getting a share of the overtime. It's been very badly handled from the start and it's hard to see how it could be improved at this stage - it does sound more personal (employee B is not liked) than performance-related to me. If you know about the overtime a term in advance, the fact that she's not able to access her email during the day isn't really relevant because the overtime could be sorted out months in advance!

@SeasonFinale both have been
employed 3 years. Recruiter at same time. Person B was furloughed for a while while Person A did work online.

@GinPalace2 that’s so helpful - thank you. That is what I will do!

@ChicCroissant - yes it’s definitely a mess.

There have been 2 changes of line manager since her start, missing / lost contracts, furlough, pandemic (ongoing obvs), no precedent, distant and slightly chaotic top-management, no official HR, poor communication style from Person B herself, nobody wanting to rock the boat by addressing issues. It’s come to a head now.

The past 2 terms haven’t had overtime clearly worked out in advance because things have had to be fluid because of Covid restrictions. That’s been incredibly difficult for everyone. Next term (which begins in a month) should now be more or less fixed (although more OT is bound to arise as we go along) so I’m keen to get the advance overtime sorted and want to do this proportionally rather than 50:50. I wanted to take a few days to consider whether this is fair before suggesting it. Hence coming here and asking opinions.

Is the overtime outside normal working hours? And is it paid at a different rate? Most workplaces don’t give overtime until 37.5h have been worked at normal rate. Although time & half for unsocial hours like weekends.

If there isn't anything specific in the contract that states the overtime has to be divided equally then it doesn't have to be. It makes sense that if the full time person is more experienced and better at their job then they should get first pick, but having said that, it's not a great way to treat part time staff if they feel they are left out and excluded from opportunities, they may eventually get fed up and leave. Perhaps if it was brought up in an appraisal about their performance in their job and see if it could motivate them to work harder and they would be more useful? Obviously needs to be put to them tactfully though. But I think being honest as to why the full time member gets more opportunities is down to their performance and what they put into the business

Thanks for the update.

Think about whether it would be helpful to use the new term as a wider reset and refresh. Acknowledge all the difficulties and the inability to plan. Thank them for flexibility etc. and that we are going to reset so everyone is clear on what is expected (both parties) and that you hope to be able to plan ahead. For example monthly 1:2:1s have dropped by the wayside so reinstated, refresh of standards/objectives etc.
This would be a lot of initial work for you but would help in the long term.

I would also do 2 face to face team meetings with A and B (can be zoom). At the first, present the outline of what you are proposing to do and then invite comments, be clear you will make the final decision. This way you can float ideas and let them (B ) have time to absorb the changes. If you structure this right at the second meeting you present finalised plans but give credit e.g. B you made a valid comment about not viewing emails during the day so I will text you when I send an overtime email.

If B isn't good at the job time to manage them out.

@Shelby2010 - all hours (standard and overtime) are late pm / early evening and Sundays so not really any difference there.

@Scooby5kids
It’s hard to say work harder as that’s not so much the issue. She does the job and is of the opinion that shes good at it. She just isn’t great with people: kids, colleagues, parents. She focuses on the small things and misses the bigger picture. She’s argumentative (passive - agressively) and easily offended when pulled up on things. She gets on well with Person A which is lucky but then everyone gets on with Person A because she is a genuinely very nice woman.

@SeasonFinale that’s how I feel but we probably don’t have a tight enough case, she would threaten legal action and nobody senior to me has big enough balls to do it.

I will be keeping close tabs on performance / attitude etc but I think if I tried to instigate any official reprimands she would kick up a massive stink.

@GinPalace2
Good idea about the reset. Many things have changed and both staff probably hark back to the days when they sat around with my predecessors with their diaries. That’s not quite how I want to go about organising the rota but I will suggest a meeting at the beginning of term and regularly after that where we catch up properly. I think I have the right to move things along and do things differently and they need to respect that

You definitely do have a right to do it your way.

Good luck

[quote BrightBlueCast]@SeasonFinale that’s how I feel but we probably don’t have a tight enough case, she would threaten legal action and nobody senior to me has big enough balls to do it.

I will be keeping close tabs on performance / attitude etc but I think if I tried to instigate any official reprimands she would kick up a massive stink.[/quote]
Document everything. If they deserve a poor appraisal give poor appraisals. If she kicks up a stink there is probably more to show those higher up that she needs to go!

[quote BrightBlueCast]@Shelby2010 - all hours (standard and overtime) are late pm / early evening and Sundays so not really any difference there.

@Scooby5kids
It’s hard to say work harder as that’s not so much the issue. She does the job and is of the opinion that shes good at it. She just isn’t great with people: kids, colleagues, parents. She focuses on the small things and misses the bigger picture. She’s argumentative (passive - agressively) and easily offended when pulled up on things. She gets on well with Person A which is lucky but then everyone gets on with Person A because she is a genuinely very nice woman.[/quote]
If she thinks she does the job well but is rude, passive aggressive, not good with kids and people etc, then she is underperforming at her job and it needs to be addressed so that she doesn't have a higher opinion of herself. Maybe some more training is needed. If I was her line manager, I really wouldn't tolerate a member of staff being rude to customers on a regular basis, it would warrant a disciplinary. It sounds like she's just been allowed to carry on the way she has for too long and she needs to be knocked down a few notches and remember who is in charge and that she can't just dictate to everyone what is happening. Ugh she makes me pissed off just reading it. My husband had a member of staff like this at his work and he thought he was untouchable because nobody addressed his behaviour. He started taking the piss and not doing any work, calling in sick for rubbish reasons, refusing to do things out of spite. Eventually they sacked him because he broke a piece of machinery on purpose while he was having a tantrum.