To what degree can an employer change working hours

[Baffled womble]

Having worked for the same company for many years, ive been told that my attendance days are being changed. Not hours worked. The actual days that I work. For at least 10 years, at the suggestion of the company, I have been doing specific days on a 3 days a week basis. Im being told that this will be moving to 5 days a week. No consultation, no reasons, just that I will be receiving a letter telling me my attendance will be changing. Surely this cannot be right? If I had only been doing the job for a couple of weeks I would fully expect flexibility as it would presumably be part of my contract but considering ive been basically doing the same job with specific attendance days for all these years have the company set an attendance pattern which would now be regarded as unreasonable to change? I have a second job which would be greatly impacted (lost) by this change.

 

[fisicx]

What does it say in your contract?

 

[The Byre]

@Newchodge is the one to give you the right answer, but an employer cannot change the terms of an employment contract unilaterally unless such changes are possible according to the terms of an existing employment contract.

 

[Baffled womble]

Thanks for the responses so far. I probably didn’t word my question particularly well. I guess I’m trying to establish if, by my employer giving me a job with an attendance pattern suggested by THEM and said working terms and patterns remaining unchanged for so many years doesn’t this now constitute an established working pattern and form and additional part of the original contract? The hours are in the contract, the 3 day attendance was a verbal agreement which can easily be proved by years of records showing the same working days . I appreciate this would not be relevant if I had taken a job in a hotel last week but this is the first change in many years which is the key point here. With property, the term acquiescence would apply ie in very basic terms, if you erect a wall without planning permission and no one complained for 10 years, there would no longer be a case for taking down said wall on the basis that if the wall had caused a problem the problem would have come to light immediately.

 

[fisicx]

If the hours are in the contract you can be expected to work those hours.

A verbal agreement is difficult to enforce. Is the person you made the agreement with still in post?

 

[kulture]

You really need an employment law expert to comment. It is all down to what it says in your contract and whether your current working practice can be considered an agreed amendment to the contract. It does not matter that it was verbal although it would have been better to have been in writing.

does your employer know about your second job, and if not does your contract let you have a second job? Be careful how you complain about this proposed change to your working practices.

 

[Baffled womble]

If the hours are in the contract you can be expected to work those hours.

A verbal agreement is difficult to enforce. Is the person you made the agreement with still in post?

They’re still with the company but in a different role. They’re the sort of person that will deny everything as a matter of policy.

 

[Baffled womble]

You really need an employment law expert to comment. It is all down to what it says in your contract and whether your current working practice can be considered an agreed amendment to the contract. It does not matter that it was verbal although it would have been better to have been in writing.

does your employer know about your second job, and if not does your contract let you have a second job? Be careful how you complain about this proposed change to your working practices.

I don’t say too much about my job as it has no connection with the job in question but to my knowledge there’s nothing in the contract to say I cannot have another job. There’s no competition issues if that’s what you’re referring to with regard to being careful. Any pointers with regard to complaining about these changes would be appreciated. Thanks for responding

 

[kulture]

Most employment contracts have a paragraph that says something like no second job without permission. This would have nothing to do with competition but more about ensuring that you do not overwork, ensuring that you can be flexible and ensuring that your first loyalty is to them. Go read your contract and don’t just assume that it does not have such a clause.

whilst you are reading it look up the hours of work section and see if it too has a paragraph saying that the hours are flexible and may change.

Details matter. A well worded up to date contract could reduce your chances of appealing this.

it really does not depend on who said what when with regards to your verbal agreement. The demonstrable facts of your working pattern for the last few years should be all you need to say that an effective contract is in place.

 

[The Byre]

@Newchodge is the one to give you the right answer, but - as @kulture states - it would appear that ten years performing one set of hours would constitute a contract.

BUT - be warned, we are heading into an economic maelstrom and at least another 200,000 will lose their jobs in retail alone in the UK this year. Share prices are in a giant bubble as QE money has been used to speculate and the market is littered with zombie companies writing losses. The dollar is marching closer and closer to losing its' reserve status.

I would be very keen to remember the adage about the bird-in-the-hand! Perhaps an employer that wants you to work more hours is that bird.

 

[Baffled womble]

@Newchodge is the one to give you the right answer, but - as @kulture states - it would appear that ten years performing one set of hours would constitute a contract.

BUT - be warned, we are heading into an economic maelstrom and at least another 200,000 will lose their jobs in retail alone in the UK this year. Share prices are in a giant bubble as QE money has been used to speculate and the market is littered with zombie companies writing losses. The dollar is marching closer and closer to losing its' reserve status.

I would be very keen to remember the adage about the bird-in-the-hand! Perhaps an employer that wants you to work more hours is that bird.

I think you’re right about that employer wanting me to work more hours. The problem is, I don’t want more hours which is possibly why pushing me towards 5 days would prompt me to think “well I might as well work a few more hours while I’m here”. I think you’re also spot on about the economy tanking. Tough times ahead.

 

[Newchodge]

An employment contract is made up of many things, starting, but not ending with the written contract. If you have been working a particular pattern for 10 years you have a contractual right to work that pattern. Contractual rights are all very well, but what you lack, almost certainly, is power.

I assume you haven't bothered to join a trade union? If you have, get them involved now. If not, I am afraid you are pretty much on your own.

Only you can know what is likely to be behind your employers decision. Do they really need you to work the new pattern? Do they need to lose staff and are looking for ways to do this without paying redundancy? Are they wantng to be rid of you personally?

Your best bet is, probably, to seek a meeting with your manager and explain that the proposed change will cause you hardship and that you cannot do it. If they insist you will have to make a choice. It sounds as if you work for a fairly large organisation. You need to try to establish if this is a 'local' decision, made by your immediate manager, or a decision made at a much higher level If it is local a formal refusal in writing, copied to HR my help.

 

[Baffled womble]

An employment contract is made up of many things, starting, but not ending with the written contract. If you have been working a particular pattern for 10 years you have a contractual right to work that pattern. Contractual rights are all very well, but what you lack, almost certainly, is power.

I assume you haven't bothered to join a trade union? If you have, get them involved now. If not, I am afraid you are pretty much on your own.

Only you can know what is likely to be behind your employers decision. Do they really need you to work the new pattern? Do they need to lose staff and are looking for ways to do this without paying redundancy? Are they wantng to be rid of you personally?

Your best bet is, probably, to seek a meeting with your manager and explain that the proposed change will cause you hardship and that you cannot do it. If they insist you will have to make a choice. It sounds as if you work for a fairly large organisation. You need to try to establish if this is a 'local' decision, made by your immediate manager, or a decision made at a much higher level If it is local a formal refusal in writing, copied to HR my help.

Thanks for your comments. I did join the union and they are monitoring it. The changes are at a local level and the notice of change hasnt been sent out yet but I was looking for advice in anticipation of this letter arriving any day now. My work pattern is actually over 10 years but there are a couple of others in the same boat who have been doing it for a lesser period. Would you know what period would qualify as a contractual right to work the pattern? Ive heard as little as 1 year. The union will certainly help but it would also be nice to get an opinion from someone outside who isnt wrapped up in the politics of a large organisation. The union are very knowledgeable about specific business practices but dont seem quite as clued up on general employment law. Thanks once again. Its been a great help.

 

[Newchodge]

Thanks for your comments. I did join the union and they are monitoring it. The changes are at a local level and the notice of change hasnt been sent out yet but I was looking for advice in anticipation of this letter arriving any day now. My work pattern is actually over 10 years but there are a couple of others in the same boat who have been doing it for a lesser period. Would you know what period would qualify as a contractual right to work the pattern? Ive heard as little as 1 year. The union will certainly help but it would also be nice to get an opinion from someone outside who isnt wrapped up in the politics of a large organisation. The union are very knowledgeable about specific business practices but dont seem quite as clued up on general employment law. Thanks once again. Its been a great help.

It is never a good idea to get multiple opinions on a matter that is being dealt with by an official body.

 

[The Byre]

The union are very knowledgeable about specific business practices but dont seem quite as clued up on general employment law.

That is usually not the case. The problems arise because we have in the UK a mixture of common law based on that which has gone before and the law of statute based on the principles of Roman Law. That means that the word first uttered by someone who does understand the legal situation will be the word 'Depends!'

Even in a statutory law jurisdiction like France or Germany, cases of precedent and previous benchmark rulings have to be taken into account, bearing in mind all the circumstances of any one specific case.

It is never a good idea to get multiple opinions on a matter that is being dealt with by an official body.

This!

 

[Lady H]

An employment contract is made up of many things, starting, but not ending with the written contract. If you have been working a particular pattern for 10 years you have a contractual right to work that pattern. Contractual rights are all very well, but what you lack, almost certainly, is power.

I assume you haven't bothered to join a trade union? If you have, get them involved now. If not, I am afraid you are pretty much on your own.

Only you can know what is likely to be behind your employers decision. Do they really need you to work the new pattern? Do they need to lose staff and are looking for ways to do this without paying redundancy? Are they wantng to be rid of you personally?

Your best bet is, probably, to seek a meeting with your manager and explain that the proposed change will cause you hardship and that you cannot do it. If they insist you will have to make a choice. It sounds as if you work for a fairly large organisation. You need to try to establish if this is a 'local' decision, made by your immediate manager, or a decision made at a much higher level If it is local a formal refusal in writing, copied to HR my help.

Hi, sorry to jump onto this reply.

First, hope you are well.
If the contract states they can ask you to work anytime Monday to Friday 24/7 yet for 3 years you have worked a particular pattern would there then be a contractual right to work that pattern?

Please kindly let me know your thoughts.

Kind regards.
Lady H

 

[Newchodge]

Hi, sorry to jump onto this reply.

First, hope you are well.
If the contract states they can ask you to work anytime Monday to Friday 24/7 yet for 3 years you have worked a particular pattern would there then be a contractual right to work that pattern?

Please kindly let me know your thoughts.

Kind regards.
Lady H

Probably.

 

[SillyBill]

Playing the other side, I've changed hours/days before now, several times over the years in fact. And certainly not because I thought it'd be a fun thing to do to upset some staff that week but hours or days that may have worked for even 10 years do not always continue to suit a business. In reality your employer can move unilaterally if they see the lesser of two evils as potentially being sued by yourself if they don't get agreement and it goes south. Perhaps they've made that calculation and whatever you do it will be a "this is it, like it or lump it". I know I've been there and generally when hours/days need to change, we've done our best to explain why, offered plenty of notice but beyond that, it is what it is, we've worked out how we need to operate and it is basically accept the new terms which the business can offer or leave....or leave and claim constructive dismissal. The alternative is chucking £'s at a shift that no longer works every week, good way to kill the business. Naturally never wanted the latter and fortunately always been avoided.

 

[Felixkoch2312]

Probably.

Can you share some more details about it?
I am talking about the procedure here.

 

[Newchodge]

Can you share some more details about it?
I am talking about the procedure here.

Not really. It will depend entirely on the facts of each case.

 

[Felixkoch2312]

Not really. It will depend entirely on the facts of each case.

If you don't mind and if you have some cases previously then can you share them?

 

[Talay]

That is usually not the case. The problems arise because we have in the UK a mixture of common law based on that which has gone before and the law of statute based on the principles of Roman Law. That means that the word first uttered by someone who does understand the legal situation will be the word 'Depends!'

Even in a statutory law jurisdiction like France or Germany, cases of precedent and previous benchmark rulings have to be taken into account, bearing in mind all the circumstances of any one specific case.
This!

I fired one employee. She brought in "the union" who wanted to talk at me and not to engage. Luckily, I had done my homework and followed ACAS procedures and the union bloke got ripped a new one.

Union clown didn't even know the law, didn't have any case evidence, was spouting crap and was told so.

We never saw either of them again.

 

[The Byre]

Union clown didn't even know the law, didn't have any case evidence, was spouting crap and was told so.

There is a world of a difference between unions. The BMA and the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers are both unions.

 

[Talay]

There is a world of a difference between unions. The BMA and the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers are both unions.

No idea. Bearded left wing labour voter type. Never risked a penny in his life, probably idolises Citizen Smith and Arthur Scargill. Getting fat on the contributions of the bretheren.