Mobiles in the workplace.

Absolute bull**** move.
What a great way to ruin morale.

You say a few have ruined it for everyone. What employer punishes their whole workforce due to the actions of a few.

Manager couldn’t deal with the problem of a few, so now will have to deal with the whole workforce being pissed off.

I think management need to go.

Princess Calla

greenspurs wrote: »

And those that dont have children?

What would be your excuse/reason for them to be trawling facebook while they should be working?

People that have children shouldn't get any more preferential treatment than those that don't. No more than they should be discriminated against.

However parents especially of creche age will need to be contacted, so a company will need to ensure that parents are contactable within a very short time frame. Taking a message on a post-it to follow up on a tea break is not going to cut it.

No one should be on facebook, but before facebook/mobile phones I used to see the lads (I've never seen women do it) heading into the toilet with a newspaper......when I started working first one man probably 50, used to head in with a copy of playboy....like seriously!!!

So if it's not the phone it will be something else.

hots

Set targets, employees meet them or don't, deal with that. Everything else is noise and bad management from eras long left behind.

greenspurs

Princess Calla wrote: »

It's only simple if it suits the organization.

We've one receptionist, there's about 500 of us in the building, if they had to field personal calls the company would need to hire an extra 2 or 3 receptionists.

You're also relying on all information of who reports to who is kept 100% up to date.

Its not that big , about 100 people.

greenspurs

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolute bull**** move.
What a great way to ruin morale.

You say a few have ruined it for everyone. What employer punishes their whole workforce due to the actions of a few.

Manager couldn’t deal with the problem of a few, so now will have to deal with the whole workforce being pissed off.

I think management need to go.

Thats the Talksport/Sky Sports attitude.....

HA haaaaaaaaaa :rolleyes:

Princess Calla

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think management need to go.

I think the OP is management and is trying to justify the stance.

greenspurs

Princess Calla wrote: »

People that have children shouldn't get any more preferential treatment than those that don't. No more than they should be discriminated against.

However parents especially of creche age will need to be contacted, so a company will need to ensure that parents are contactable within a very short time frame. Taking a message on a post-it to follow up on a tea break is not going to cut it.

No one should be on facebook, but before facebook/mobile phones I used to see the lads (I've never seen women do it) heading into the toilet with a newspaper......when I started working first one man probably 50, used to head in with a copy of playboy....like seriously!!!

So if it's not the phone it will be something else.

You use your phone at work , dont you ? :rolleyes:

As ive said ..The procedure is they ring the reception.
If its an 'emergency' the receptionist comes out - "you need to ring your wife/husband"...
They get their phone and ring...
3-4mins id say.....

I suppose thats too long of a delay also ? :rolleyes:

Wow...
Phone addicts cant bear to be away from them ....

greenspurs

greenspurs wrote: »

Wow...
Phone addicts cant bear to be away from them ....

No, hard working employees don’t like draconian measures, as “a few” employees could not be managed

a_squirrelman

greenspurs wrote: »

You use your phone at work , dont you ? :rolleyes:

As ive said ..The procedure is they ring the reception.
If its an 'emergency' the receptionist comes out - "you need to ring your wife/husband"...
They get their phone and ring...
3-4mins id say.....

I suppose thats too long of a delay also ? :rolleyes:

Wow...
Phone addicts cant bear to be away from them ....

It seemed to me like that poster wrote a decent post seeing both sides. You're a tad defensive on this aren't you? Maybe management isn't for you.

greenspurs

a_squirrelman wrote: »

It seemed to me like that poster wrote a decent post seeing both sides. You're a tad defensive on this aren't you? Maybe management isn't for you.

You must have long arms to reach that far ......

AnRothar

I have to admit that I love this thread and some of the responses.

The following is just an observation as I sit having a cup of coffee with 2 young adults present an both on their phones. Just to give myself an aura of smug superiority I am using a tablet:)

Mobile phones are endemic in modern society.

For most they have become an addiction.

There was one poster earlier who encapsulates it perfectly. They even go to the extreme of using their own children as a justification that they cannot be apart from their "precious".

Finally, relying on "professionalism" or any similar rallying cry to get people to part from their " baby" for any length of time does not work.

Princess Calla

greenspurs wrote: »

You use your phone at work , dont you ? :rolleyes:

As ive said ..The procedure is they ring the reception.
If its an 'emergency' the receptionist comes out - "you need to ring your wife/husband"...
They get their phone and ring...
3-4mins id say.....

I suppose thats too long of a delay also ? :rolleyes:

Wow...
Phone addicts cant bear to be away from them ....

No I actually don't.

Before I had children my phone stayed in my handbag I'd check it at lunch but generally there would never be a missed call etc.

Now, yes my phone is on my desk, the creche does ring (precovid) to say there's a temperature or they've had a fall etc. Generally the phone call lasts a minute or two , I get on with my day no one else needs to be involved.

One time the creche did ring to say the child was having an allergic reaction (unknown allergy at the time) by them contacting me directly I was able to contact the dad who was closer to the creche and they did a u-turn and was there within 10 mins which at that point straight to hospital. The episode took maybe 4 minutes out of my working day. If I'd been relying on receptionists etc by the time the message got to me it's likely I'd have had to leave work, missing the day , so my productivity would be zero, I'd be putting through force majeure to cover the day so more paperwork for my manager so a total headache all round for the sake of a phonecall.

JayRoc

Princess Calla wrote: »

It's only simple if it suits the organization.

We've one receptionist, there's about 500 of us in the building, if they had to field personal calls the company would need to hire an extra 2 or 3 receptionists.

You're also relying on all information of who reports to who is kept 100% up to date.

We're not talking about fielding "personal calls". We're talking about the sort of emergency that might occur once or twice a decade.


Mobiles and smartphones have only been common for a few years. How did people manage beforehand?

People simply cannot imagine being without their phones for a few hours nowadays. I think it's daft myself.

Mimon

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

If you're a surgeon or a theatre nurse or a teacher, guard (in some roles), pilot, train driver, air-traffic controller, prison guard, even a motorway toll-booth operator, then you CANNOT just leave the job because you get a phone call about a family emergency. No matter what is important to you. Because if you do, quite likely other people will suffer severe consequences or perhaps even die.

If properly run, these companies have protocols for how family emergency calls should be placed, and part of induction is getting you to tell relevant people about these.

This is ridiculous. If there was an emergency where someone had to leave one of the above jobs there would be someone to cover. If not it is a fault of management for not having cover/contingency plan in place.

bucketybuck

Princess Calla wrote: »

I think the OP is management and is trying to justify the stance.

As somebody already said, this was a failure of management.

They are removing personal property from good staff because they cannot adequately address the known problem.

Its not even a complicated problem, just discipline the people caught using their phones when they shouldn't be. But I suspect the supervisors/management don't like direct conflict and so would rather implement a general policy than actually following disciplinary procedures with specific individuals.

bucketybuck

JayRoc wrote: »

People simply cannot imagine being without their phones for a few hours nowadays. I think it's daft myself.

This whole train of thought is irrelevant to be honest, maybe you get one call a decade, maybe you have 20 kids and have to be contactable at all times, it doesn't really matter.

They are confiscating personal property from their staff.

My personal phone is pretty much a desk ornament for all the use it gets and I'm still telling whomever to **** off if they ever tried to confiscate it.

myNewName

greenspurs wrote: »

Slight bit of an over exaggeration there, with a slice of mega drama.

People are addicted to their phones, but cant admit it.

Were you up in arms when smoking was banned in workplaces, pubs etc ?

Not at all, I don’t even have kids! Trying and obviously failing to put myself in the shoes of someone with kids in this hypothetical situation 🀣

JayRoc

bucketybuck wrote: »

They are removing personal property from good staff .

I don't see that. They are telling staff they can't bring phones onto the work floor and are providing them somewhere secure to leave them during a shift.

I really am surprised so many people see having their mobile on them at work as a Human Right.

ELM327

Are you taking employees from prison?

I'd never work for you/your company even if you doubled my salary! Awful.

Manage the problems, don't punish everyone for the perceived sins of a few.

Very handy to have the mobile - in case of 'emergencies' sayeth some o' the female employees - in a room full of phones...

Funny tho' ; when up in the canteen; where there's a dearth of phones, for a 40 minute 15 minute tea-break, am guessing it must be a time when one o' them 'emergencies' could never happen, as the phone does oft, pretty much always be left on desk :rolleyes:

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

If you're a surgeon or a theatre nurse or a teacher, guard (in some roles), pilot, train driver, air-traffic controller, prison guard, even a motorway toll-booth operator, then you CANNOT just leave the job because you get a phone call about a family emergency. No matter what is important to you. Because if you do, quite likely other people will suffer severe consequences or perhaps even die.

If properly run, these companies have protocols for how family emergency calls should be placed, and part of induction is getting you to tell relevant people about these.

No, you would need to land the plane and finish the surgery but you are utilizing extremes that don't apply to your office based comments earlier.

You would still be running out the door asap as well and **** whatever is supposed to come next. Surgeons won't be performing any surgeries of their child has been hospitalized

greenspurs

Princess Calla wrote: »

The episode took maybe 4 minutes out of my working day. If I'd been relying on receptionists etc by the time the message got to me it's likely I'd have had to leave work, missing the day , so my productivity would be zero, I'd be putting through force majeure to cover the day so more paperwork for my manager so a total headache all round for the sake of a phonecall.

Wow... the exaggeration to justify .. what ? i dont know .


As i said it would be 3-4 for the receptionist to contact the person, and for them to get their mobile..
So whats the difference ?

Mobiles are not an item of PPE in this job. They are not required. Simple.

Dav010

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

You would still be running out the door asap as well and **** whatever is supposed to come next. Surgeons won't be performing any surgeries of their child has been hospitalized

Rubbish.

greenspurs

bucketybuck wrote: »

As somebody already said, this was a failure of management.

They are removing personal property from good staff because they cannot adequately address the known problem.

Its not even a complicated problem, just discipline the people caught using their phones when they shouldn't be. But I suspect the supervisors/management don't like direct conflict and so would rather implement a general policy than actually following disciplinary procedures with specific individuals.

There is a hint of truth in that. Cant disagree.

greenspurs

bucketybuck wrote: »

My personal phone is pretty much a desk ornament for all the use it gets and I'm still telling whomever to **** off if they ever tried to confiscate it.

Even if theres a risk that the phone can slip into produce going to customers?

You still think thats ok?


If its on a desk in an office, theres no risk of it 'contaminating' a product, but if its someone on a production/packing line using their phone, the risk is considerably higher.
You think thats ok ?

greenspurs

Princess Calla wrote: »

I think the OP is management and is trying to justify the stance.

Incorrect

witchgirl26

JayRoc wrote: »

I don't see that. They are telling staff they can't bring phones onto the work floor and are providing them somewhere secure to leave them during a shift.

I really am surprised so many people see having their mobile on them at work as a Human Right.

It'd be one thing if they were providing lockers for people to store their phone in, no issue with that at all. Even having a rule of no phones on the floor & disciplinary processes in place if you are caught with one. However I think the big issue here is management being in charge of locking those phones & the locks only releasing at certain times. That part seems a bit draconian. Also does that mean that management are happy to take responsibility if something is to happen to someone's phone while in those lockers? I know that they can can use the "stored at owners risk" in locker rooms where the individuals are in charge of locking the locker themselves but if management are in control of that & there is any kind of issue with the locking system & something gets damaged or stolen, it opens them up for claims.

JayRoc wrote: »

We're not talking about fielding "personal calls". We're talking about the sort of emergency that might occur once or twice a decade.


Mobiles and smartphones have only been common for a few years. How did people manage beforehand?

People simply cannot imagine being without their phones for a few hours nowadays. I think it's daft myself.

I have a young child in creche. He's only 2 and started creche when he was 8 months old. Add in a break for Covid-19 shutdown & he hasn't been physically in the creche for more than about 9 months. The creche have rang me about 20 times in that period. They are obliged to let you know if your child has bumped their head. If they need to administer paracetamol, they have to get your permission on the phone first. I don't want my child waiting a couple of hours to get medicine that's needed because I have to wait till a tea-break to ring them back. There's also times, especially at the moment, that if they start displaying a Covid-19 symptom, you need to go collect them as soon as possible.
Mobiles have been around and in common use for over 20 years. And prior to that, creches weren't in as common usage as there was often a parent at home or grandparents doing the minding. Therefore there wasn't the same necessity to be contacted. Times move on & change.
I love being without my phone for times and ignoring it completely. However while my child is in creche, I don't leave it too far away from me as for his sake, I need to be contactable.

L'prof

Reading this thread from the jacks. You’ll never get my phone off me!

Mrs OBumble

witchgirl26 wrote: »

I have a young child in creche. He's only 2 and started creche when he was 8 months old. Add in a break for Covid-19 shutdown & he hasn't been physically in the creche for more than about 9 months. The creche have rang me about 20 times in that period. They are obliged to let you know if your child has bumped their head. If they need to administer paracetamol, they have to get your permission on the phone first. I don't want my child waiting a couple of hours to get medicine that's needed because I have to wait till a tea-break to ring them back.

So what would happen if you were a theatre nurse or a prison guard etc?

bucketybuck

JayRoc wrote: »

I really am surprised so many people see having their mobile on them at work as a Human Right.

Another person trying to make this something it is not.

Tell me this, if they said you had to leave your wallet in some box in reception would you have a problem with it?

Please note that according to the OP this is not a personal locker for each employee, it is a box that is locked and that they cannot access outside of strict times.

Making people leave their phones in their own locker would be fine because at least it is still under the employees control, but that would require management to discipline those who don't follow that instruction.