Work

[Mr_Danger]

14 minutes ago, westlondonmist said:

I'm not sure if he's a bell end who likes to intididate using faux threats or just an idiot thinking that he wouldn't have to pay for the county court costs. Even if he won there's a very good chance he'd pay all his fees himself.

 

I've heard a few places like that, is it even legal? I bet it isn't. I think even pay minimum wage for the shift even if the wage if you get it is more. I've worked at one place that did a trial day (which was because the previous person dissapeared on their 3rd day during their lunch break and was partly to see if the new person was happy to stay) and the person was paid but not LLW which they'd get for subsequent days. 

Not sure of legalities but in this case the woman wasn’t informed of the unpaid bit (although plenty of people reckon she should have checked that) and they had her doing full duties so at the very least you’d think it was a murky area from an insurance standpoint. If the cunts don’t value your time on day one they don’t deserve your time on day two. Easy for me to say being steadily employed for a long time and apparently unsackable.

[BomberPat]

He didn't get the job, thank fuck.

I copied Payroll in to his email to clarify the process, Payroll said what what was required, he said he "wasn't about to engage in more bureaucracy to make up for <the university>'s failures". I'd almost want to be in a courtroom as he tries to take the high ground explaining how he's been screwed over by people who have repeatedly told him that if he just did the bare minimum he would get his money, and told him exactly what the process he needs to follow is.

He kicked off about the lunch part being £10 for a "meagre" lunch, as if we're somehow responsible for what he chose to eat as well, and then insisting that he didn't get an itemised receipt because "cafes don't give itemised receipts". Which is both bollocks, and fails to explain why the amount he is claiming for doesn't match the amount on the receipt 

[SuperBacon]

@BomberPat it really is times like this when you wish you could just email him back "oh fuck off you cunt" isnt it?

Reminds me of my favourite ever moment in work in my first proper office job. I worked in the call centre for a housing association and the guy training me was called Alan and was PROPER OLD SCHOOL, an absolutely delightful gruff older lad who warned me that all calls were recorded (which to my embarrassment later on didn't realise that they were still recorded when on hold)

Anyway he told me of the good old days when one such arsehole had called up and given him a right unnecessary mouthful and he was polite as back, then Alan said "sorry sir, did I give you my name when I answered the phone?" and the chap replied he hadn't, so he said "well why don't you fuck off then" and hung up. Of course when he called back, everyone denied knowledge of the initial call as there was no record. Could've been a tall tale to pop the new office junior but I like to believe him.

Great job that, this was the one where I came in early one morning and found a housing officer pissed up at 7am trying to set fire to a confidential bin, and a high flying finance bod losing his shit over someone eating his cheese (or yoghurt I really can't remember) out of the fridge and flipping out in front of the entire floor. 

Had to put up with a nuisance caller who would call up and offer me "really rough sex" but swings and roundabouts really.

[davertfnewman]

On the unpaid trial front, I did one at a bar years ago. They interviewed me, had me try it out for an hour or two because I hadn't done it before, then offered me the job. I was applying for it because my current job only offered about sixteen hours. Went back to my current job to let them know I had gone for a job that offered me double that and that I'd be leaving - they offered me forty hours, so stuck with them and thanked the bar for the offer but my situation had improved so wouldn't be joining them. I think not paying me in that situation is perfectly fair.

[Monkee]

If a trial is genuinely a trial - e.g. a couple of hours to see if you have the necessary skills - then it’s OK that it’s unpaid. I would class that as being part of the normal hiring process so I wouldn’t expect any compensation. But anything outside of maybe 2hrs or where you incur unexpected (unusual) expenses then I think it’s fair to ask for some sort of payment or expenses to be covered.

Years ago, I had an interview for Broadcast (the TV analysis company). I was then invited to do a 2-day trial with them which was basically sold to me as me having got the job and this was just to meet the team I’d be working with. At the time I didn’t really think too much about it, took 2 days of annual leave and agreed.

I was basically sat at a desk on my own the entire time doing data entry. And then I didn’t get the job. It was annoying but I never said anything because I was quite angry but I didn’t really lose any money as I’d taken it as annual leave. It really wasn’t fair what they did and I felt very used.

[davertfnewman]

I'd say that they did cost you because of you having to use the holiday and not getting it back.

[DaGangstanator]

19 hours ago, westlondonmist said:

I don't really understand getting lunch paid for if at an interview. I did a recruitment day once at a call centre where there was like a 100 people so they put sandwiches out etc but that's it. Are people who apply to jobs at colleges and universities just have a high opinions of themselves and expect all this?

I had lunch and expenses for an interview paid for my first ever interview when I was about 19. Haven't ever been offered either again in the subsequent 20+years !😆

[DazzM]

I can't remember if I've posted about this before, but any public sector workers, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Competency Based Interviews - How bollocks are these? Basically just rewarding people who can talk the talk, and quite often be the best bullshitter. I know of people who have gotten roles who just made up their examples and rehersed them.  

Public sector role hiring annoys me so much because it's rarely built on merit, but purely on those that who can hit the absolutely tosh STAR method.

Oh, and don't get me started on the need to advertise roles, that people are actually seconded to then interviewing for them knowing fine well who's going to get it...

[BomberPat]

cunt's actually done it. Yesterday evening, we got a county court claim from him. It's absolutely riddled with spelling mistakes, so at least I can rule out ChatGPT. 

He is claiming that the "failed to contractually honour their own regulations". Which we didn't - literally my last email to him is quoting the specific regulations he hasn't followed. He then complains that we asked for itemised receipts, "which is not appropriate and disproportionate for the amount claimed". Aside from the fact that nowhere I have ever worked would allow you to claim expenses for any amount without an itemised receipt, the card receipt he did submit (which, again, is expressly against the regulations he's claiming we haven't followed, which I quoted to him) is for a totally different amount to what he's claimed for, with no indication of even where it's from, and he's done nothing to respond to that question at all.

He then says "their final response after 4 months of non payment was to request me got complete more paperwork for lost receipts". Typos aside, the only reason that was our "final response" is because he told us not to bother replying, and refused to fill out the paperwork. The paperwork he only had to fill out because he was refusing to provide an itemised receipt.

I gave him three options - he provide an itemised receipt (which he insists is impossible because "cafés don't provide itemised receipts", which must come as news to the hundreds of other people successfully managing to claim expenses), he complete a form justifying why he was unable to provide an itemised receipt, or I ask that Payroll process the remainder of his claim for travel expenses, but not the £10 being disputed. He has completely refused to engage with any of it.

He's trying to claim his expenses, plus a penny interest for every day since he "submitted" the claim - by which I assume he means when he posted it to an address he took a best guess at, and then didn't tell anyone - and the cost of his court expenses.

It's funny, because it's so ridiculous, but it's wasted so much of my time dealing with this cunt.

[Ronnie]

10 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

It's funny, because it's so ridiculous, but it's wasted so much of my time dealing with this cunt.

All the more reason to celebrate when his case is thrown out. I imagine that your employer won't have a problem with your not coming in the following day.

[deathrey]

I would kind of want this to go to court so it can be thrown out and you can provide your counter argument to his actual face. He will have a hissy fit when he doesn't win and I would want to actually see it.

[BomberPat]

yeah, being able to see it in court would honestly be the dream at this point. I doubt it ever remotely goes that far, his claim form is amateurish bullshit, and he's said he's going to submit all the emails he's received as evidence - all they will prove is that he's consistently refused to engage with anything we've asked him to do, and usually in a really shitty and unprofessional way. That he's trying to claim we've failed to honour policy, when I've repeatedly quoted the policy at him to explain how he hasn't followed it, yet still thinks he's in the right is mental. 

The only part I have any sympathy for is that there's a month between him submitting the claim and us starting to process it. But that's because he sent it by post, despite no indication being given that he should do that. I can't blame him for not knowing that we're a team who largely work remotely and don't receive post, but when you've had an Excel file emailed to you, it's just common sense that it should be submitted by email, and that if you do send it by post instead, it wouldn't hurt to say "I've sent it by post, could you confirm receipt?", or even to ask that you have the right address! But even then, I lost any sympathy based on how he's behaved since then, and even if the delay were his only complaint, there's no legal recourse to that.

I've sent all the paperwork and a timeline of events to Payroll and our Legal department for them to deal with, so it's likely completely out of my hands now. Explained it all to my team in our Teams chat so everyone could have a good laugh about it. I imagine he will continue to email us, as it's clear ours is the only email address he has and he's not smart enough to find someone else's, so I expect I'll hear from him again.

 

[deathrey]

Please do keep us updated, I feel quite invested in this now.

[SuperBacon]

1 hour ago, DazzM said:

Competency Based Interviews - How bollocks are these? Basically just rewarding people who can talk the talk, and quite often be the best bullshitter. I know of people who have gotten roles who just made up their examples and rehersed them.  

They are absolutely shit, and I hate the way interviewing is these days (I say these days, it's been that way for years) I had one recently where I was asked if I could give an example of a time when I felt really passionate about service delivery. Erm, not really?

1 hour ago, DazzM said:

Public sector role hiring annoys me so much because it's rarely built on merit, but purely on those that who can hit the absolutely tosh STAR method.

There are some people that clearly deserve to be there, but it's amazing how many people fail upwards in the public sector, it can be very easy. You do look at people and think how did they get in that position, but it's not always that way.

At my last place people used to ask how one of our chief officers got into their position and it was just pure jealousy. We saw him very briefly and were never privy to any of his actual dealings or meetings, and he was a fantastic people person and that's the most important quality.

1 hour ago, DazzM said:

Oh, and don't get me started on the need to advertise roles, that people are actually seconded to then interviewing for them knowing fine well who's going to get it...

I went for a grade above role recently and interviewed so well, genuinely one of the best interviews I've ever done and I had an incredible real life scenario and answer for a diversity and equality based question which I guarantee no one else would've had. I knew someone from that immediate team were interviewing for it (a really nice guy who I really like and respect), but I backed myself for the role anyway, not arrogantly but just being confident for once.

He did get the role, and in hindsight, he always was (again, not a negative thing towards him)

Was told it was incredibly close and maybe 1 mark between us, and I don't begrudge him the role, but I was so so gutted about it, and haven't felt that bad about something interview related in ages. The hiring manager met me for a coffee to discuss it, which NEVER happens, and she suggested it, and all the feedback made me feel so much better, but christ, just appoint them in the first place, don't bother with an interview process.

[SaitoRyo]

15 hours ago, SuperBacon said:

Great job that, this was the one where I came in early one morning and found a housing officer pissed up at 7am trying to set fire to a confidential bin, and a high flying finance bod losing his shit over someone eating his cheese (or yoghurt I really can't remember) out of the fridge and flipping out in front of the entire floor.