=======================================================================================

Post Number : 10001

Item : 37 Hour 2024

Date Post Made : 06/03/2024

Posted By/Alias : 35-37 cancellation

Your View :

I have worked for the organisation for over 30 year's. I feel this is the worst decision made, all staff on 37 hours should have been included and reduced to 35 hours accordingly. This shows bias in my opinion. I will only work my statutory hours from now on regardless weather they are 37 or 35 hours.

=======================================================================================

Post Number : 10002

Item : 37 Hour 2024

Date Post Made : 06/03/2024

Posted By/Alias : Winston Smith

Your View : 

I have spoken amongst my colleagues and there is a strong appetite for strike action. We believe that for the strike to be most effective we would like to do it on a polling day. Whilst the general election is unknown, we have, a district election on May 2nd. Councillors always show a particular interest and like to meddle in the highway works we are carrying out on polling day. I feel this date would make them particular nervous if they lost the highway reactive response on that date, particular if adverse weather was a possibility. Whilst this is a district election, many of the councillors are 'double hatters' and I am also sure their political colleagues in the district council won’t be too happy with this when they go back to their local political branches. Whilst this is a short time frame, can we get moving on this possibility?

=======================================================================================

Post Number : 10003

Item : 37 Hour 2024

Date Post Made : 06/03/2024

Posted By/Alias : Alias_C

Your View :

We have had no personal explanation for why requests for posts to be considered as exempt were turned down aside from a brief response at the session on Monday. We are now told to resubmit our business case but there is no clarity on the criteria against which the business case will be judged against. In addition, the whole premise of preparing a business case is prejudicial against lower paid staff who do not have any experience of putting together business cases.

=======================================================================================

Post Number : 10004

Item : 37 Hour 2024

Date Post Made : 07/03/2024

Posted By/Alias : 10004

Your View :

Need to ensure Simon Geraghty fully aware of all the issues. Need to put more detail on the costs i.e. staff leaving, reducing hours, reducing good will flexibility e.g. ooh, difficulty recruiting, need for agency / consultants, need for additional overtime reduced productivity, reduced FTEs. Need to reiterate reputations damage inc fire & rehire, services which will be cut. Need to ask again for clarity on the benefit i.e. revenue and cost saving. Need to reiterate we’re not in 35hr posts. Need to rebut ‘fairness’ claim. Industrial action?

=======================================================================================

Post Number : 10005

Item : 37 Hour 2024

Date Post Made : 07/03/2024

Posted By/Alias : Andy

Your View :

Fundamentally object to the proposal. The supposed savings are overstated e.g. includes staff who are paid for from capital. Notion that we are in 35-hour posts is incorrect. There has been no cost-benefit analysis i.e. if we deliver same service, we will need to employ more staff including agency. The "fairness" argument is spurious. The process has been dire - short notice of meetings, refusal to correct notes of meetings, misleading information re Exemptions, misleading Leader which led to him misleading Councillors, untruthful comments re ADs supporting proposals. Need to bypass Head of HR as he is not acting in good faith Item For Discussion?

========================================================================================