Do employers have to advertise new positions?

PaintingMedium

hi! Would love if someone could point me in the direction of the rules or regulations concerning employers who hire new people without advertising internally or externally. I was looking for more hours in my job, and i knew people were leaving my workplace so i thought i would get an opportunity to try and get some of theirs, i was in hospital for a week, and when i got back, i found they had hired new people without advertising or giving myself or other workers the chance. Is this legal, where is the legislation for this?

The citizens information site and department of trade site are both useless and cant find any info whatsoever, help!!

mikemac

Maybe in the civil service, but not in the private sector afaik.

Using an example of a barman/waitress for instance, then a lot of these jobs are never advertised and you get one by approaching the manager and asking for a job.

What kind of job is it OP?

Thrill

As far as I know, all civil service payed jobs have to be advertised. I don't know about the private sector though.

Mr. Presentable

PaintingMedium wrote:

Is this legal,

Of course it is. There's no obligation on me to advertise a position. If, as your post implies, you knew there was a vacancy to be filled, you should have thrown your hat in the ring.

I'm quite surprised you think it should have been offered in-house first - how did you get in in the first place?

PaintingMedium

nipplenuts wrote:

Of course it is. There's no obligation on me to advertise a position. If, as your post implies, you knew there was a vacancy to be filled, you should have thrown your hat in the ring.

I'm quite surprised you think it should have been offered in-house first - how did you get in in the first place?

Well, i did, i told the management, but then i had to go into hospital for a week, and the new people were hired so i never had a chance!

I got the job in my store by handing in my cv after the job had been advertised.

seamus

Yeah, basically they have no obligation to tell you that a position is available or otherwise that they are hiring.

People often get confused because the civil service are obliged to advertise, and union rules often state that all position must be advertised and filled internally, where possible.

If you work in a private non-union place, then it's really up to the employer whether they want to advertise.

Darragh29

nipplenuts wrote:

Of course it is. There's no obligation on me to advertise a position. If, as your post implies, you knew there was a vacancy to be filled, you should have thrown your hat in the ring.

I'm quite surprised you think it should have been offered in-house first - how did you get in in the first place?

I worked in a company once where no jobs were advertised, it was a case of management picking their favourites for promotions, the first you knew there was a vacancy was when you came into work and saw that the guy who was working beside you was now your direct manager. I found this extremely frustrating and actually difficult to deal with where I worked. Unfortunately, while there is one rule for the public sector, there is no obligation on private sector employers to allow fair play for access to promotions. I have to say that this is why I think there is such a diabolical standard of people management in Ireland, because the people who end up in management positions usually get there by arse licking their manager and don't have to compete with better qualified candidates on a level playing field. This has been my experience working in Ireland. I know many will disagree with me which is fine, but I seriously have an issue with the standard of management in Ireland, which I have found to have an issue with fair opportunities in the workplace. It's like the concept of fair play and transparency in Irish workplaces is just above Irish managers.

Darragh29

nipplenuts wrote:

Of course it is. There's no obligation on me to advertise a position. If, as your post implies, you knew there was a vacancy to be filled, you should have thrown your hat in the ring.

I'm quite surprised you think it should have been offered in-house first - how did you get in in the first place?

If you don't advertise a position, how do you know that the person who ultimately gets the job, is the best person for the job??? By refusing to advertise a position, you are putting a glass ceiling over every employee in your workplace, except the one employee that you have singled out for the position.

seamus

Darragh29 wrote:

If you don't advertise a position, how do you know that the person who ultimately gets the job, is the best person for the job??? By refusing to advertise a position, you are putting a glass ceiling over every employee in your workplace, except the one employee that you have singled out for the position.

If you don't advertise *all* positions, then yes that's true. But for for one or two particular positions, it's not so much. There are plenty of cases where someone leaves, and another member of staff is the most obvious replacement, given their skillset and experience in the company.

anthony4335

AFAIK ,all positions have to be advertised, both internally and externally within a company. But the best thing you can do is talk with the citizens advise ,and also with a union, I think that most unions with advise people regardless if you are a member or not.

Darragh29

seamus wrote:

If you don't advertise *all* positions, then yes that's true. But for for one or two particular positions, it's not so much. There are plenty of cases where someone leaves, and another member of staff is the most obvious replacement, given their skillset and experience in the company.

Don't agree with this at all. I spent years in a job where I was substantially better qualified for management positions where I worked, than people who were hand picked for promotion and I never got the chance to apply because the first I knew about it was when my manager decided like yourself that he knew best and just promoted who he thought would be better at the job. On every occasion, he promoted someone and that someone just went and repeated the same process, promoting people with no real consideration for who was the better qualified or experienced person out there.

Where I used to work, this caused a really devastating morale problem (which my manager was oblivious to and never even knew that he had caused).

You're on a road to nowhere with your staff if you are not advertising positions in your workplace. I've seen first hand how this affects team morale, it actually turns staff against the company because it is perceived as corruption and favouritism, even if it is not intended to do so.

Personally I'd love to see legislation being introduced that compells both transparency and fair process in the workplace when it comes to promotional opportunities, because it might weed out some of the ineptitude that unqualified and incompetent people bring into management positions.

Darragh29

anthony4335 wrote:

AFAIK ,all positions have to be advertised, both internally and externally within a company. But the best thing you can do is talk with the citizens advise ,and also with a union, I think that most unions with advise people regardless if you are a member or not.

Union membership doesn't mean anything unless you are in a protected industry like Irish Rail or An Post or unless you are in a public sector position.

Try working in Microsoft and telling them you are in a union and your union rep has told you that Microsoft has to advertise positions from now on. You'd be laughed out of your job!

leeroybrown

As was pointed out above only the civil service has a blanket rule that all jobs need to be fully advertised (typically with an internal advertisement period). Some unionised workplaces have collective agreements to the same effect. Some larger multi-nationals have their own internal rules regarding the advertisement of all positions.

In my opinion the best is the case is the last where a private industry chose to have internal regulation but ultimately have relatively free will in decision making. Well managed companies will still approach recruitment properly and badly managed companies will still make a mess of it regardless. At the low to mid level most areas of the civil service are ultimately a bureaucratic mediocracy so their system suits them. While the idealised external view of the civil service system sounds great it can make it awkward to get the best person when there are several internal people who could do the job.

If management feel that someone is the best candidate for a job then they'll give it to them. What's the point of them running what would look like staged internal recruitments when they know who they will hire. The annoyed staff will just accuse them of running a show recruitment on top of favouritism.

Mr. Presentable

Darragh29 wrote:

Don't agree with this at all. I spent years in a job where I was substantially better qualified for management positions where I worked, than people who were hand picked for promotion and I never got the chance to apply because the first I knew about it was when my manager decided like yourself that he knew best and just promoted who he thought would be better at the job.

Perhaps humility came into the selection process

Seriously, though, I will decide whom I employ. I am paying their wages. Think of the junior positions as trialists, you let them learn the ropes and promote the best.

I know you think you were the best, but truth be told, you don't get to decide that until you actually are.

the_syco

Darragh29 wrote:

I spent years in a job where I was substantially better qualified for management positions where I worked

No offense, but people smell this "better than you" attitude a mile off. There's a lad at work who thinks he's the bee's knee's, but won't get any job. Of course, everyone gets interviewed, etc, but he still doesn't stand a chance in hell.

And there lies the problem. Interviews for external staff is one thing, but internal staff... are either promotable, or going to be in their same job for life.

Dudess

I'm not an employer, but my opinion on this is: if you're already employed by a company, say on a part-time or temporary basis, and a full-time position in the same department comes up and someone from outside gets it, then that just seems terribly unfair.
If you're already working there, surely you're more qualified than someone on the outside? One can say that's life, blah blah, but obviously if you're already there and you haven't been fired, haven't received a warning, then you're clearly doing something right, so you must be an asset to the company. But you're still not good enough for a full-time position in the very same area? It's downright illogical.
This "foot in the door" theory - I don't know. I think a lot of the time, if you get your foot in the door, it gets stuck there. From my experience, companies seem to prefer new blood (i.e. strangers).

Darragh29

nipplenuts wrote:

Perhaps humility came into the selection process

Seriously, though, I will decide whom I employ. I am paying their wages. Think of the junior positions as trialists, you let them learn the ropes and promote the best.

I know you think you were the best, but truth be told, you don't get to decide that until you actually are.

It might appear that I was going around with my head up my arse thinking I was better than everyone around me but this wasn't the case at all. I know for a fact that where I used to work, there were individuals I worked with who had no qualification in management, they had no relevant experience that could have been offered as a substitute for a qualification. These individuals had absolutely nothing to offer that would suggest that they should be given preferential treatment for a managerial/supervisory position, but they were singled out for a promotion where I worked because they were licking the arses off their boss. I on the other hand had studied hard full-time for 3 years for a diploma in management and I also had supervisory experience in my previous job.

I don't think its too much to ask that when you go to the bother and expense of getting a hard earned qualification in a specific field, that you are at least allowed the opportunity to do an interview for a job in this specific field where you work. Promotion by way of shoulder tapping deprives employees of this opportunity. It creates a breading ground for corruption in the workplace, it destroys team morale and creates a two tier mentality in the workplace, with those that are "in" with management given preferential treatment for opportunities and promotions and those who are not, who then look for ways to do as little as they possibly can, such is their level of dissatisfaction.

If you are in a people management and you are not allowing employees equal and transparent access to opportunities/positions/promotions, whatever you want to call them, you have no business managing people in my opinion.

Darragh29

the_syco wrote:

No offense, but people smell this "better than you" attitude a mile off. There's a lad at work who thinks he's the bee's knee's, but won't get any job. Of course, everyone gets interviewed, etc, but he still doesn't stand a chance in hell.

And there lies the problem. Interviews for external staff is one thing, but internal staff... are either promotable, or going to be in their same job for life.

What your describing is a workplace where positions are advertised and people are interviewed. There is at least a veneer of fairness apparent there. What the OP is describing and what I can certainly relate to, is a workplace situation where nothing was advertised and people were singled out for promotion in back rooms and offices. What I recall is coming into work on a Monday and being told that the guy you were working beside last week, is your manager this week. You look at your manager and see an inept sh*te who has had his head hidden up your bosses arse for the last 12 months.

Unfortunately due to Irish managers being utterly clueless when it comes to their job, this is commonplace, in my opinion...

seamus

Darragh29 wrote:

Personally I'd love to see legislation being introduced that compells both transparency and fair process in the workplace when it comes to promotional opportunities, because it might weed out some of the ineptitude that unqualified and incompetent people bring into management positions.

I'd hate to see the government interfering in the internal affairs of private companies who are not doing anything wrong, legally or ethically.

Irish people have a problem in that they'll tend to just take it, and grumble about it. If Irish employees voted with their feet, then companies with inept management would find it impossible to keep good employees and would be forced to shape up. We don't need legislation to protect us because we feel hard done by.

RainyDay

Darragh29 wrote:

Try working in Microsoft and telling them you are in a union and your union rep has told you that Microsoft has to advertise positions from now on. You'd be laughed out of your job!

MS do advertise all positions (except the most senior ones) internally.

Wishbone Ash

Regarding the civil/public service - I think it's important to differentiate between external and internal advertising. In some cases, public service positions are advertised internally.

One of the disadvantages in some civil/public service recruitment for promotion, is that the candidates are assessed on their performance at interview only. Their track record, further education or the fact that they have been 'acting' in the position cannot be taken into account. That would never happen in the private sector.

Darragh29

seamus wrote:

I'd hate to see the government interfering in the internal affairs of private companies who are not doing anything wrong, legally or ethically.

Irish people have a problem in that they'll tend to just take it, and grumble about it. If Irish employees voted with their feet, then companies with inept management would find it impossible to keep good employees and would be forced to shape up. We don't need legislation to protect us because we feel hard done by.

I think that the problem is that the approach you are suggesting, (employees voting with their feet), is a non-runner, because of the sheer number of inept people in managerial positions in this country. Think about it, you wouldn't have your car fixed by someone who wasn't qualified mechanic, you wouldn't have electrical work done in your house by someone who wasn't a qualified electrician, so why is it that we tolerate a situation whereby the most complex of tasks, developing humans in a specific role and understanding what is motivating the person, both positively and negatively in the workplace, is undertaken in Ireland largely by people who have no relevant qualification in that particular field???

Newaglish

Darragh29 wrote:

why is it that we tolerate a situation whereby the most complex of tasks, developing humans in a specific role and understanding what is motivating the person, both positively and negatively in the workplace, is undertaken in Ireland largely by people who have no relevant qualification in that particular field???

Slightly off topic, but I don't really think a "qualification" in management is really that helpful. Managing people is all about personality, leadership ability and experience.

Management literature is by and large, common sense and/or fairly worthless.

Wishbone Ash

Newaglish wrote:

Managing people is all about personality, leadership ability and experience.

It also may require a knowledge of employment law and industrial relations.

Newaglish

Wishbone Ash wrote:

It also may require a knowledge of employment law and industrial relations.

Well, yes. I take that point.

But that's not really what I was getting at.

Also, it actually doesn't take very long to get a good grounding in employment law, it's relatively straightforward.

fret_wimp

Darragh29 wrote:

I have to say that this is why I think there is such a diabolical standard of people management in Ireland, because the people who end up in management positions usually get there by arse licking their manager and don't have to compete with better qualified candidates on a level playing field. This has been my experience working in Ireland. I know many will disagree with me which is fine, but I seriously have an issue with the standard of management in Ireland, which I have found to have an issue with fair opportunities in the workplace. It's like the concept of fair play and transparency in Irish workplaces is just above Irish managers.

not true at all. Im at the bottom of the ladder, but all of my immediate managers ( except 1) are fantastic at their jobs and totally deserve to be where they are. Regardless of how they got where they are, they are more than fit for their roles and the company would be at a loss without them. Your post sounds more like sour grapes rather than anything factual.

Regarding the issue in hand, if your not satisfied in you role and feel unappriciated, vote with your feet. You staying in the role, venting to us about it wont help. sure we all need to vent but it wont help your suituation. Make a plan. Talk to your manager and let him know your feelings, in a diplomatic and non offensive way. if that doesnt work, just stay there and take their money until you get something better elsewhere. if your so brilliant, you will be sorely missed and thats one up for you. the main point here is be proactive ,get off your behind and do something about your suituation.

Darragh29

fret_wimp wrote:

not true at all. Im at the bottom of the ladder, but all of my immediate managers ( except 1) are fantastic at their jobs and totally deserve to be where they are. Regardless of how they got where they are, they are more than fit for their roles and the company would be at a loss without them. Your post sounds more like sour grapes rather than anything factual.

Regarding the issue in hand, if your not satisfied in you role and feel unappriciated, vote with your feet. You staying in the role, venting to us about it wont help. sure we all need to vent but it wont help your suituation. Make a plan. Talk to your manager and let him know your feelings, in a diplomatic and non offensive way. if that doesnt work, just stay there and take their money until you get something better elsewhere. if your so brilliant, you will be sorely missed and thats one up for you. the main point here is be proactive ,get off your behind and do something about your suituation.

Sounds like you need to seriously get with the script my friend and read some of my previous posts! If your immediate managers have no managerial qualification, they should not be in a managerial position because if they have no qualification in management, then they are untrained unprofessionals.

I voted with my feet a long time ago, I threw in my dead end position with a major US multinational in Ireland, after spending too much time working too hard and seeing the lazy and inept around me getting tipped on the shoulder for promotion. I now work for myself running a very successful business and have proven to myself that my abilities were utterly wasted in a corrupt dead beat, morale zapping, brain numbing workplace that didn't advertise positions, promotions, vacanies, whatever you want to call them.

Trust me, I'm not moaning or cribbing about my situation here, as my situation at the present could not be better, I answer to nobody but myself and my workplace is extremely fair, open and also honest and ethical. Nobody would get a management position within my business unless they were professionally trained in people management and could demonstrate a clear understanding of industrial psychology and how it operates within the workplace both positively and negatively. I've seen first hand the huge damage that untrained people in people management positions can do.

For your information, what I'm relaying here are my memories of working in an environment where there was no transparancy, fair process or opportunity in relation to vacancies and promotional opportunities. The more useless you were, the faster you were promoted, due to the existance of an, "old boys club" mentality within the organisation. The sole reason that this situation was allowed to develop was because the figures who were in management positions had no idea how to do their jobs, they knew absolutely nothing about how to manage people, how to motivate people and how to develop people in the workplace, etc. This is what the OP was asking for opinions on.

Darragh29

Newaglish wrote:

Slightly off topic, but I don't really think a "qualification" in management is really that helpful. Managing people is all about personality, leadership ability and experience.

Management literature is by and large, common sense and/or fairly worthless.

I couldn't disagree more with you. If you have no been proerly trained in any job, you have being set up for failure. As I said, you wouldn't let an unqualified surgeon operate on you, so why would you let someone with no qualification manage you and possibly have you out of work with work related stress because they don't have a clue how to do their job???

Newaglish

Darragh29 wrote:

I couldn't disagree more with you. If you have no been proerly trained in any job, you have being set up for failure. As I said, you wouldn't let an unqualified surgeon operate on you, so why would you let someone with no qualification manage you and possibly have you out of work with work related stress because they don't have a clue how to do their job???

Oh, I didn't say managers shouldn't be trained, I just meant that a college degree is not the best training a manager can get nor does it mean someone is necessarily a good manager.

When I was in college, I saw a number of people graduating from the BBS/Management stream who would make hilariously poor managers. I also saw people graduating from straight accounting/economics/science/sports/whatever who would do a much better job - and vice-versa.

Your example isn't exactly comparing like with like either. I mean, you cannot draw a comparison between operating on a human being, and getting Mary in the office to be more productive.

If your immediate managers have no managerial qualification, they should not be in a managerial position because if they have no qualification in management, then they are untrained unprofessionals.

What body of managers have you qualified with? There is no independently recognised qualification for "managers". A manager is not a professional. You may be an entrepreneur, a shrewd businessman or a strong leader, but you are not a professional.

Darragh29

Newaglish wrote:

Oh, I didn't say managers shouldn't be trained, I just meant that a college degree is not the best training a manager can get nor does it mean someone is necessarily a good manager.

When I was in college, I saw a number of people graduating from the BBS/Management stream who would make hilariously poor managers. I also saw people graduating from straight accounting/economics/science/sports/whatever who would do a much better job - and vice-versa.

Your example isn't exactly comparing like with like either. I mean, you cannot draw a comparison between operating on a human being, and getting Mary in the office to be more productive.



What body of managers have you qualified with? There is no independently recognised qualification for "managers". A manager is not a professional. You may be an entrepreneur, a shrewd businessman or a strong leader, but you are not a professional.

I've seen several people I used to work with, having to take sick sick leave due to work related stress, caused completely by their managers failing to do their own job properly. I think you completely underestimate the nature and extent of problems that an unqualified manager can create, not so much for themselves but more for those that have the utter misfortune to have to report to them.

I can only speak for myself but I did a 3 year diploma in management at DIT. While studying for this qualification, I gained a HUGE insight and developed an understanding as to what motivating factors are at work when people excel at their jobs and more importantly what factors are at work when an employee fails to perform at their job. Often factors in an organisation can be altered to bring about an immediate and measurable improvement in the performance of a group/team of employees. More importantly, and I've seen this first hand, where there is a serious morale problem in the workplace, changes can be made that will turn this problem on its head and re-instate a positive atmosphere in the workplace.

Unfortunately, in order to be able to make positive changes in a workplace, you have to be able to recognise exactly what factors are at play and why people are behaving a certain way, often negatively. It's easy to say, "Joe there in the back office is an arsehole and is a lazy c*nt who won't help anyone and he is also very rude and completely uncooperative".

I can only speak for myself but until I did a module in industrial psychology, I would not have understood so confidently that Joe was demotivated in his job because of the lack of opportunity where he worked. He viewed management with complete cynicism and contempt because management where he worked held him back from exploring his full potential and treated him like a mule.

It was only when I actually became Joe, a number of years after having completed my diploma in management, that I really understood the need for people who are in management to have received training in how to manage people.

That's my two cents, for what it's worth...

Wishbone Ash

Darragh29 wrote:

If your immediate managers have no managerial qualification, they should not be in a managerial position because if they have no qualification in management, then they are untrained unprofessionals

Many of my previous line managers did not have any specific formal managerial qualifications. Many others had all the degrees relating to management but were absolutely cráp at working with people.

Darragh29 - you seem to be assuming that all managers work in large corporations with many employees and a HR section. Most employees in Ireland work in small private enterprises. Several friends of mine are managers in a very successful small businesses. None of them have any formal managerial qualifications - some of them haven't completed the leaving certificate. I doubt that their employers would continue to employ them if they were incompetent.

Darragh29

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Many of my previous line managers did not have any specific formal managerial qualifications. Many others had all the degrees relating to management but were absolutely cráp at working with people.

Darragh29 - you seem to be assuming that all managers work in large corporations with many employees and a HR section. Most employees in Ireland work in small private enterprises. Several friends of mine are managers in a very successful small businesses. None of them have any formal managerial qualifications - some of them haven't completed the leaving certificate. I doubt that their employers would continue to employ them if they were incompetent.

Well I'm only speaking from my own experience. I've never had a manager who had a professional management qualification. I've had managers who had degrees in engineering, science, arts, etc, and how on earth this made them more suitable for a people management position is something I will go to the grave without understanding. I should clarify something here, I'm not saying that there are not people out there who have a natural leadership ability that makes them ideal for a career people management.

What I'm trying to say is that there are a lot of people out there in people management positions who not alone are not naturally suitable for the people management job that they are doing, but despite this natural inability to bring out the very best in people at work, they haven't even bothered to learn the basics when it comes to the theory of people management/industrial physcology, they just want to be managers so that they are at a level above their peers, they want to be recognised for their job status, they want more money, but they are absolutely sh*te managers.

rebel.ranter

Hi Darragh29,

I'm just curious how many companies have you worked in that brought you to the colclusion that all Irish managers are inept & poorly trained?
I've noticed from previous posts on this particluar forum that you have a hatred for management. I also notice that you have started your own business. I presume you manage people in your business, do you? How do you think they rate your management skills? How much training have you done in relation to your management skills?

In my career I have seen companies do things badly but equally I have seen them do the right thing in relation to people management. Sometimes people with all the right training & skills on paper turn out to be poor in reality. I would tend to agree with one of the previous posters who suggests that attitude & manner, etc. are far more important than qualifications. You can always train someone with the right attitude. You can't change someone's personality.

Back on Topic:
I do believe that jobs should be advertised even if there is an obvious candidate in mind. As well as being fair it gives others who may not necessarily be in the frame a chance to sell themselves.

Darragh29

rebel.ranter wrote:

Hi Darragh29,

I'm just curious how many companies have you worked in that brought you to the colclusion that all Irish managers are inept & poorly trained?
I've noticed from previous posts on this particluar forum that you have a hatred for management. I also notice that you have started your own business. I presume you manage people in your business, do you? How do you think they rate your management skills? How much training have you done in relation to your management skills?

In my career I have seen companies do things badly but equally I have seen them do the right thing in relation to people management. Sometimes people with all the right training & skills on paper turn out to be poor in reality. I would tend to agree with one of the previous posters who suggests that attitude & manner, etc. are far more important than qualifications. You can always train someone with the right attitude. You can't change someone's personality.

Back on Topic:
I do believe that jobs should be advertised even if there is an obvious candidate in mind. As well as being fair it gives others who may not necessarily be in the frame a chance to sell themselves.

Hi Rebel,

I wouldn't describe my clear opinion of Irish managers as a "hatred for management". However I call it as I see it, and as I've said before, based exclusively on my own personal experience of people in management/supervisory positions in Ireland, the standard of management is nothing short of a filthy disgrace. I've seen this first hand, no more so than with regard to the current topic, which is in relation to the advertisement within the workplace of vacancies/positions/promotional opportunities.

This is where I've personally seen extremely inept, hapless individuals who worked their way into management/supervisor positions cause the most harm in the workplace.

As I've said in previous posts on this very thread, I worked hard for 3 years full-time to obtain a diploma in management. I considered it unacceptable when I found myself in a workplace where I was not even informed of vacancies that were relevant to the qualifications that I had worked hard to secure, but people I worked with who had no qualification in management or experience, were elevated behind the scenes into management/supervisor positions from the same job that I was doing at the time, and the first that I would know about a vacancy was when a guy I was working beside on a Friday evening became my manager the following Monday morning.

As I've said above in response to another post, I wasn't walking around the job with a notion of myself, I just knew how hard I had worked to get a particular qualification, I could recall the sacrifices that I and others had made on the way and that the least I deserved after doing that was to be given the opportunity of applying for a position that was relevant and being allowed to put my best foot forward in relation to career opportunities where I worked at the time.

Unfortunately this particular workplace was completely corrupt, you had an "old boys club" that made up the rules as they went along and ignored company policy. If you went to HR, they would tell HR to Fu*k off because they had come up with a better way of doing things than was set down in company policy so HR had to change the company policy to suit these muppets and if you told HR to put it up to them, they were afraid to stand up for you and would just come back to you and say, "sorry, the rules have changed"!!! If you tried to go outside the company you were threated with legal action and also dismissal and you can forget about even mentioning the word union in this particular workplace.

In relation to what my staff might think of me and my management abilities, I know for certain that no employee would ever leave my business because they were not listened to, because they were demoralised or downtrodden at work, or to stay on topic, because they felt like there were no opportunities at work or if there were workplace opportunities, that they were reserved or ring fenced for certain privileged employees...

PaintingMedium

right, so despite most people saying employers dont have to give employees a chance to apply for other positions in the company. Most have said that only in public sector does this apply. Even the citizens information said this to me. If this is true, how come i have found in the Protection of Employees Act 2001, a section that cites clasue 5.3 of the Framework Agreement, that states

As far as possible,employers shall give consideration to

Requests by workers to transfer from full time to part time work and vice versa

Provide information on the availability of full time and part time positions to facilitiate transfers from full time to part time and vice versa


is this not law then??