Tweet
Hi folks.
Firstly, a bit of a general background to my issue...
I work in a small short-term respite unit for disabled children, run by my area county council. The unit has a staff team comprising Care staff (those who care directly for the children), a small admin team (including the Manager and Deputy), two Handypersons, two Cooks and two Domestics (of which I am one). Whilst there is nothing clearly written down in policy or contracts, it has always been 'understood' that the Care staff are regarded as 'substantive' staff (i.e. because they are core to the business of the unit, and without them it would need to shut), and Handypersons, Cooks and Domestics are 'ancillary' staff: there to support the functioning of the unit. The understanding of these different designations is reflected in things like A) a unit policy which stipulates that 'substantive' staff are restricted on the number of weekends they are allowed to take as annual leave in a single year (4 weekends); and B) the use of separate office folders for the minutes of 'Care Staff Meetings' and 'Ancillary Staff Meetings' - the latter of which specifically lists 'Domestics, Handypersons, and Cooks' on the cover. These again, though, are just 'understandings'. There is nothing officially confirming the staff designations of 'substantive' and 'ancillary'. The only contractual element that could have a bearing on things is a generic statement in all staff contracts which says "Any changes to your working hours or work pattern required to meet business needs will be discussed with you and where necessary contractual notice will be given for any changes."
The unit has been operating for 16 years, during which time Domestic staff, Cooks and Handypersons have never been routinely covered in their absence during annual leave periods, and there have never been any restrictions imposed on their annual leave (all annual leave requests go to the unit's Deputy Manager as she compiles and manages the rota). Recently, though, one of the Handymen (who is also, at 15 years, the longest-serving staff member) had an annual leave request rejected because, the Deputy Manager told him, he had used up his 4-weekend limit - a limit, as mentioned above, that applies to 'substantive' staff only. As this had never been an issue for him before, he naturally challenged it, only to be told that 'all staff at the unit are substantive staff'. This had never been said before to any of us on the 'ancillary' team. Indeed, the other Handyman had already taken 5 weekends off during the year without restriction, and one of the Cooks (with 10 years' service) had often taken more that 4 weekends' annual leave over that time. This, then, clearly pointed to a recent change in the arrangements by the Deputy Manager, most likely prompted by some of the Care staff saying that they often found it difficult if there were times when there were no Cooks, Domestics or Handypersons on duty at all - something that very rarely happens, never leads to any real problems at the unit if it does, and shouldn't really happen anyway if the rota is compiled with proper forward planning by the Deputy Manager (something that she is clearly not good at because Care staff are always complaining to her about their shift allocations, inadequate cover, etc).
My colleague then decided to take the matter up with HR (run by an outsourced company), who referred him directly to our Regional Manager. She then wrote back to him to confirm, firstly, that all decisions on approving annual leave requests will take into account service needs. Furthermore, quote: "Substantive staff is anyone that is employed on a permanent contract and this does include Cooks, Domestics, Handy people etc. The term auxiliary (sic) staff is used to group staff who undertake the same role in the same way shift leaders and children’s residential workers are grouped together." Notwithstanding the error of substituting 'auxiliary' for 'ancillary', this doesn't make a lot of sense! We infer from it that she is talking about either temporary staff or agency staff - neither of which we use at the unit, or have ever used.
Unfortunately, no one at the unit is in a union (first time, ironically, that I've not been in the union in a job). My colleague has approached ACAS and has been informed that any variations to contract or policy obviously need to be discussed and agreed - basically, things we already knew, and it doesn't technically apply in this case anyway. My colleague has now decided to raise a formal grievance on the issue, and we 'ancillary' staff have a meeting next week with both the Regional Manager and our Deputy Manager to discuss it. Their line is obviously going to be, as they have both stated to us, that we are all 'substantive' staff - even though, again, there is no specific policy or contract statement to confirm it. They also, from what we understand, didn't feel they needed to inform us of the 'change' because, as they see it, there isn't any change.
I think that's enough for you to understand the quandary we are in over this issue. 'Nothing in writing' could, on the face of it, be taken both ways. They could argue that there is no official designation of 'substantive' and 'ancillary', even though it's always been 'understood' through past practice and other things I've mentioned above. Equally, we have nothing to point to in defence of our position.
Can anyone suggest the best course of action that we could take if, as we suspect, the meeting will result in an impasse - and we will be pressured into accepting the management position?
Many thanks for reading this, and for any help you can offer.
Firstly, a bit of a general background to my issue...
I work in a small short-term respite unit for disabled children, run by my area county council. The unit has a staff team comprising Care staff (those who care directly for the children), a small admin team (including the Manager and Deputy), two Handypersons, two Cooks and two Domestics (of which I am one). Whilst there is nothing clearly written down in policy or contracts, it has always been 'understood' that the Care staff are regarded as 'substantive' staff (i.e. because they are core to the business of the unit, and without them it would need to shut), and Handypersons, Cooks and Domestics are 'ancillary' staff: there to support the functioning of the unit. The understanding of these different designations is reflected in things like A) a unit policy which stipulates that 'substantive' staff are restricted on the number of weekends they are allowed to take as annual leave in a single year (4 weekends); and B) the use of separate office folders for the minutes of 'Care Staff Meetings' and 'Ancillary Staff Meetings' - the latter of which specifically lists 'Domestics, Handypersons, and Cooks' on the cover. These again, though, are just 'understandings'. There is nothing officially confirming the staff designations of 'substantive' and 'ancillary'. The only contractual element that could have a bearing on things is a generic statement in all staff contracts which says "Any changes to your working hours or work pattern required to meet business needs will be discussed with you and where necessary contractual notice will be given for any changes."
The unit has been operating for 16 years, during which time Domestic staff, Cooks and Handypersons have never been routinely covered in their absence during annual leave periods, and there have never been any restrictions imposed on their annual leave (all annual leave requests go to the unit's Deputy Manager as she compiles and manages the rota). Recently, though, one of the Handymen (who is also, at 15 years, the longest-serving staff member) had an annual leave request rejected because, the Deputy Manager told him, he had used up his 4-weekend limit - a limit, as mentioned above, that applies to 'substantive' staff only. As this had never been an issue for him before, he naturally challenged it, only to be told that 'all staff at the unit are substantive staff'. This had never been said before to any of us on the 'ancillary' team. Indeed, the other Handyman had already taken 5 weekends off during the year without restriction, and one of the Cooks (with 10 years' service) had often taken more that 4 weekends' annual leave over that time. This, then, clearly pointed to a recent change in the arrangements by the Deputy Manager, most likely prompted by some of the Care staff saying that they often found it difficult if there were times when there were no Cooks, Domestics or Handypersons on duty at all - something that very rarely happens, never leads to any real problems at the unit if it does, and shouldn't really happen anyway if the rota is compiled with proper forward planning by the Deputy Manager (something that she is clearly not good at because Care staff are always complaining to her about their shift allocations, inadequate cover, etc).
My colleague then decided to take the matter up with HR (run by an outsourced company), who referred him directly to our Regional Manager. She then wrote back to him to confirm, firstly, that all decisions on approving annual leave requests will take into account service needs. Furthermore, quote: "Substantive staff is anyone that is employed on a permanent contract and this does include Cooks, Domestics, Handy people etc. The term auxiliary (sic) staff is used to group staff who undertake the same role in the same way shift leaders and children’s residential workers are grouped together." Notwithstanding the error of substituting 'auxiliary' for 'ancillary', this doesn't make a lot of sense! We infer from it that she is talking about either temporary staff or agency staff - neither of which we use at the unit, or have ever used.
Unfortunately, no one at the unit is in a union (first time, ironically, that I've not been in the union in a job). My colleague has approached ACAS and has been informed that any variations to contract or policy obviously need to be discussed and agreed - basically, things we already knew, and it doesn't technically apply in this case anyway. My colleague has now decided to raise a formal grievance on the issue, and we 'ancillary' staff have a meeting next week with both the Regional Manager and our Deputy Manager to discuss it. Their line is obviously going to be, as they have both stated to us, that we are all 'substantive' staff - even though, again, there is no specific policy or contract statement to confirm it. They also, from what we understand, didn't feel they needed to inform us of the 'change' because, as they see it, there isn't any change.
I think that's enough for you to understand the quandary we are in over this issue. 'Nothing in writing' could, on the face of it, be taken both ways. They could argue that there is no official designation of 'substantive' and 'ancillary', even though it's always been 'understood' through past practice and other things I've mentioned above. Equally, we have nothing to point to in defence of our position.
Can anyone suggest the best course of action that we could take if, as we suspect, the meeting will result in an impasse - and we will be pressured into accepting the management position?
Many thanks for reading this, and for any help you can offer.
Comment