Extra Workload = Remuneration ?

[gee4]

At the moment we are going through the final stages of our company re-org.  Staff are being phased in to newly refurbed areas leaving my boss and his department the only ones in this building.

As a result one director has thrown his toys out of the pram and while reluctant to move, now wants his secretary to take back control of travel for his business development team who are currently co-located with their business areas.

This would mean work being taken away from me and 2 other secretaries.  My boss spoke to me briefly about it yesterday and said it would not happen, being in a different building it does not make sense for another secretary to support the guys who sit near me.

During the conversation he threw in that it was mentioned that I would support an additional group of people who currently fall under Operations and are currently not part of my boss's remit.  This threw me altogether because it was random and totally out of the blue.  Am I to believe that because other secretaries and departments are vacating this building that I just take on the workload of those who are left?

Questions arising from this are -

- Which Director are this team going to report to?
- How many are in the department?
- Which secretary currently supports them?
- Why can't that secretary continue supporting them?
- How much impact will this have on my existing work?
- Is it too much to ask for remuneration given no pay rises this year?

Have any of you had to deal with this?  How have you managed your current workload on top of an additional department?  Do management have any idea of what admin staff actually do or do they just expect the work to get done?

Whilst it may seem that I am able to do a good job and am reliable and efficient, it would be professional if these things were discussed rather than assumed.  I don't think my boss realises the impact this could have on him.

[Rocket]

Gee,


I have just started a new post and knew when I was recruited that I would be taking on extra duties in the coming months that will entail longer hours.  I will be paid for those hours and eventually my current post will be "refurbished" and reassessed.  My colleagues have had pay cuts for the past two years and are facing no pay increases in 2011 as well as having to take on new tasks because our company is being reorganised.  These are very difficult times and many companies are seeking to cut costs or to manage work without recruiting too many new personnel.  One feels fortunate to have a job, but at the same time it shouldn't mean that one is just used as a doormat.   The effect of a workload that is too heavy combined with no increase in pay is a decrease in morale and motivation and an increase in sick leave. 

Being a newby I am not sure precisely what you do or what level you are at in your team.  On the face of it this looks like a completely new job.  You are asking some very pertinent questions and probably need to explore them with your manager and personnel department.

Asking for a pay rise may not win you any favours at this stage.  I would wait and see what the reorganisation brings and negotiate from there for a reassessment. 

I really feel for you and hope all these changes are not the prelude to redundancy.

Regards,

Celeste

[gee4]

LOL no nothing to do with redundancy, more to do with a director throwing the head up, trying to get back work that his secretary couldn't cope with in the past and now because I do such a good job and it's being noticed, I am being given the additional work while others either claim they are too busy or it's "just not my job".

I don't think there is any harm in asking.  I mean do you think my boss would take on additional duties without being paid for it...??

[Katie G]

Gee,

You have a good list of important, reasonable questions that deserve straightforward answers from your higher-ups.  It may well be that they're not entirely sure how it's all going to shake out and don't want to pass on bad information.  (A common problem where I work!  One day you're told ABC and next week you're told XYZ.  You really can't tell what's going on until it's actually happening!) 

Regarding a pay increase, however, over the past few years, I've seen plenty of people at all levels - from mail room clerks to vice-presidents - being assigned more duties with no increase in pay.  In one case there was actually a pay CUT, but the choice was that, or lose the job entirely.  Of course, I don't know how UK laws with employement contracts would factor into this, since I'm in the US in an "at will" state.

Not much help, I know. 

But thanks for my morning laugh!  The image of a manager "throwing his toys out of the pram" - priceless! 

[gee4]

Oh Katie that's probably a very "norn iron" saying...we use it all the time or alternatively, he/she has thrown their teddy bear out of the pram...

You are spot on though - we do go bounce from ABC to XYZ in the blink of an eye.  The thing is once you've said something you can't retract it, so bossie has now sown the seed if you get my drift.

We shall see what materialises but my guess is, the secretarial function in general is being looked at, not just one particular role.

[gee4]

Well it's official but unoffficial and rather disgusting in my book.

I was asked this morning about "a list" indicating revised secretarial support within the company.  It seems the changes are now official, but I am the only one not to have had this discussion with my boss.

In light of the fact my boss has now gone on holiday for 2 weeks, I think it would have been appropriate for him to have AT LEAST called me on Friday to update me (he called other members of his team about other issues) or have HR speak to me on his behalf.

Once again, in yet another company, I am in limbo with little or no communication between individuals or departments.

It may even have been more appropriate for HR to gather the secretaries in one room, update us all together, make us feel like a team, instead of finding these things out from others.  Apparently one secretary was informed 2 weeks ago and let the cat out of the bag when speaking to another colleague.  That is just so unprofessional and creates a very bad atmosphere for everyone involved.

[gee4]

I took the bull by the horns yesterday and contacted our HR Director.  She was able to clarify my new duties are now official but apologised that my boss didn't get to update me before he went on holiday.

That aside a few of the secretaries have kicked off discussions with their union rep about ways of working and grading.  Unfortunately as is the case, union business cannot be discussed with non-members so myself and one or two others have not attended their meeting this morning.

To be honest as long as I have had my new duties confirmed and I have informed the team in question that I will be supporting them, I am happy with things.  Having only been here a few weeks short of 2 years I don't feel I have any reason to question ways or working or grading.  The other secretaries have obviously had to put up with the situation for longer than I have so perhaps have more of a case.

Anyway my weekend starts at lunchtime today and so far the sun is shining.

[gee4]

Well the saga continues...the union did not get much in the way of a response (favourable or otherwise) from HR as regards the questions raised  by the secretaries last week and obviously this didn't go down well.

However, this morning we have received an invite to a brief next week with our Deputy MD.  That should be interesting to say the least, as there doesn't seem to be any formal agenda.

A meeting on this subject without an HR representative, doesn't seem favourable.

[gee4]

I have to ask myself sometimes how companies operate.

Our secretarial brief was very revealing...Deputy MD spoke first, outlining why the meeting was called and apologised for the bad communication.

The "list" of secretaries and associated depts is an interim solution and not permanent.  This is Phase 1.  Phase 2 will look at roles within the organisation and address gaps that need filled.

It was clear HR have stepped out of the loop to allow senior management to steer this exercise.

Let's face it in 20 years I think people need their knuckles rapped if things have gone on this long.  Any wonder some individuals are disgruntled.

The worst thing is with no timeframe it could drag on for ages but it was agreed no one wants that.  So for now we carry on with our interim duties until the next phase is implemented.

[JessW]

 

And then at interviews HR/Management have the nerve to ask us where we want to be in, say, 5 years?

Answer: "well, hmm, up the proverbial creek working for bosses who couldn't organise a ..." (please insert preferred comical situation to suit!).

Jess

[gee4]

Exactly!

If management have no timeframe on this exercise and cannot ascertain (as yet) what their admin needs are for the next X years, how on earth can we as individuals plan career progression or aspire to greater things?

[gee4]

Ok I realise some things are out of my control, but when there is an action upon you from a meeting you attended, you action it, right?

Today we had our second meeting with management, the union and a representative from HR.  The action upon all of the secretaries from last month's meeting was to draft a list of tasks and daily duties as a starting point to re-writing job descriptions and ascertaining what the company needs as regards future secretarial support.

I was shocked that management started off the meeting by repeating a lot of what they had discussed previously.  It was only when they began asking us for assistance by outlining our duties, did I point out an action had been bestowed upon us to do just that.  It was clear looking round the table I was the only one who had done what was asked of me.

At first I was a little embarrassed and several individuals jibed about not having time, trying to make out I must have had too much time on my hands.  I got angry and couldn't believe everyone was making a joke.  Here I was, only in the company 2 years, with other secretaries who have been here 20 years, moaning about their workload, having engaged the union to act on their behalf, yet they had done nothing to help themselves.  Not only that, but they were all still griping about the "list" and still seemed unclear as to what "secretarial support" actually meant.  Some seemed to think it only referred to booking travel.

I seriously couldn't believe what I was hearing and made a point of saying that I clearly understood my duties and was carrying them out.  I highlighted that not only do I provide secretarial support for my boss, but also for other programme managers.  It seems whilst I am carrying on with my job, others are still griping about certain aspects.

In the end an action was taken by management to draft a "template" for the secretaries to complete based on headings they would provide.  I had no problem with that but felt that since I complied the first time round, I was now having to reproduce work I had already done.  The timeframe for this was set at 3 weeks which I found bizarre.  Why would it take anyone 3 weeks to complete a template/questionnaire based on what they do on a daily basis.  Not only that, but it is going to take management a further 2 weeks to collate the findings.

All in all this has resulted in a total of 5 weeks work which, in my opinion, could have been avoided if the other secretaries had carried out the task they were actioned with in the first place.

My question to those of you reading this is, why did only 1 person out of 13 complete the task asked of them, and why did 12 other secretaries not bother to find the time to help themselves in this situation when they are the ones who have engaged the union to sort this out?

Had I chaired this meeting myself I would have abandoned it and demanded the secretaries completed the action bestowed upon them within 48 hours.

I felt it was a complete waste of time and we are now 5 weeks behind instead of ahead.  Given our next meeting is 5 weeks away, it's clear there will be nothing done on this subject before Christmas or the new year.

[JessW]

Gee

It sounds like bone idleness to me, or perhaps (and I may be being quite cruel) ignorance at what an action point is and that it requires, well, actionning on the relevant attendees' part (ie theirs).

I too would be quite miffed if I did my job to the best of my ability, kept to timeframes etc, and then had it thrown in my face like I had done something wrong.

As to the practicalities, I cannot suggest a tactic to cope (as each place is totally different from any other and each situation is different etc!), but rest assured, so long as you did it during your work time and not in your home time, then they can pay for as much repeated tasks as they chose!  It is their dime, their loss and their lack of management skills that has allowed the repeated work to be necessary in the first place.

My thoughts are with you during this trying time!

Jess

[gee4]

Oh Jess thank you for some sanity!

It seems "many of the girls are sceptical about what will happen....largely because of the way they have been treated in the past."  Whilst I understand that, there was still an action on all of us from the last meeting if this exercise is to progress and an end result achieved.

Can you believe I have had to suggest the meeting is minuted and actions circulated?  Surely the Deputy CEO who chairs the meetings should engage his secretary to minute the meetings??

Someone pinch me because I don't believe this is actually happening!

[msmarieh]

I think it is a common problem when too many people get involved in a process and it ultimately indicates a lack of organization on the part of the manager of the meeting.

Were minutes sent out from the meeting?

As organizer, they should have sent out a note a week in advance to remind people of what they were expected to bring to the meeting.

It is one of my great frustrations when I get involved in a committee that works that way. Such a waste of time and effort.