Our employer’s rules and regulations should be haggled in the contract of 2012. Specifically rule 1 which is about the manner to preserve the employee work practices starting from the date of original appointment rather than the date on the new title.
Employees tend to move, relocate, transfer, promoted, cross over or even prefer certain working hours however this rule has been frustrating many. Although many may not like this rule it is still a rule that all have to abide with. However the employer may claim that they have to abide with the Civil Service Laws and the Public Authorities Law of the State of New York and the Rules and Regulations of the City Personnel Director but we still say nothing is impossible and if we are not going to haggle we may never gain. Thus it should be on the table.
To prove the point the recent rehired members who were laid off were restored to their original work practices based on their initial appointment date. Therefore it should be set as precedent and must be memorialized for the future in the contract of 2012. The other side of the equation is that the employees who have either transferred or crossed over from one department to the other whether intentionally or not should have their work practices based on the original date of appointment and they too should benefit. It should not be a one time thing and it should be available to all employees all the time.
Work practices should not be based on the date on the new title rather it should be based on the date of the original appointment that would be equitable to the employees. That would be wise to pursue and have it memorialized in the contract of 2012. Employees work practices did not suffer due to a lay off (as in the case of the current rehired members and were restored to their work practices), however the employees who have cross over, promotion or otherwise their work practices are affected. Employers need to control the manpower however that should not outweigh the employee work practices.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete