3 ms·

That is the biggest problem these days even here in Canada. A few years ago at my old job I finally got a big raise from $14 to $24/hour. Then almost immediat

That is the biggest problem these days even here in Canada. A few years ago at my old job I finally got a big raise from $14 to $24/hour. Then almost immediately reduced to part-time from full-time but the same duties. I toughed it out hoping for a reversal but one day I was abruptly laid off without notice. Then three people were hired to do my job. It seems business have no realistic view of employees. You're merely an "FT" or "PT" in manager parlance. Working minimum wage is more difficult than it was years ago due to it being stuck at a specific rate for decades. But hours worked is just as important and the trend to cut everyone to part-time was an even bigger disaster. Even the Fight for Fifteen group has been fighting for $15 for many years. They should be adjusting the rate for inflation, by now it should probably be $17.

aries1980 7y ago
> Then almost immediately reduced to part-time from full-time but the same duties. This means the same job could have been performed in less amount of time? If so, why not employers are incentivised to increase the efficiency and raise the pay at the same time?
- dghughes 7y ago
  No it meant management didn't have a clue. Just a few of my tasks took hours. Compliance duties where compliance officers picked away at options while I had to sit there. Escort vendors into the server room often for an entire shift if not longer. Preventive maintenance on equipment that could take a month. Those three tasks plus a couple of dozen other duties. Add to that other departments asking for help. This place was notorious for reducing employee benefits to nothing. Employee reviews but the employee is at max pay rate so no bonus but still reviewed. No holiday parties. Overtime change from over 8 hours to only over 40. And on and on. It was just a terribly run organization and I'm glad I'm out of it. There was a big exodus of long term staff in a short period of time just after I was laid off.

aries1980 7y ago

> Then almost immediately reduced to part-time from full-time but the same duties. This means the same job could have been performed in less amount of time? If so, why not employers are incentivised to increase the efficiency and raise the pay at the same time?

dghughes 7y ago
No it meant management didn't have a clue. Just a few of my tasks took hours. Compliance duties where compliance officers picked away at options while I had to sit there. Escort vendors into the server room often for an entire shift if not longer. Preventive maintenance on equipment that could take a month. Those three tasks plus a couple of dozen other duties. Add to that other departments asking for help. This place was notorious for reducing employee benefits to nothing. Employee reviews but the employee is at max pay rate so no bonus but still reviewed. No holiday parties. Overtime change from over 8 hours to only over 40. And on and on. It was just a terribly run organization and I'm glad I'm out of it. There was a big exodus of long term staff in a short period of time just after I was laid off.