Work advice question

[RangerWickett]

At the start of this year, my schedule at the university library where I work was kicked up to 30 hours a week, from a previous baseline of 20 hours. Now, last year I actually ended up working an average of 35 hours a week (covering other shifts, doing special projects, traveling to other libraries in the university), but still, getting an official bump to 30 hours was nice. I thought.

It used to be that if a coworker was sick or on vacation, I would gladly cover his shift because of the extra pay I'd get. Now, though, they want me (and my coworker who also got bumped up to 30) to cover those shifts, but reduce our hours during the rest of the week so that we stick as close to 30 hours as possible. This will cause us to go from double-coverage during busy hours to single-coverage.

This sorta annoys me. I used to be eager to help out, because sure, maybe I was giving up my Saturday evening, but I'd be getting paid for 7 hours of work. But now I am obligated to cover other folks' shifts because otherwise the library might not have anyone at the main desk, and I'm basically not getting any benefit for covering these extra shifts. Sure, I guess I get a free afternoon in the middle of the week, but it's not like that's something I can plan around. And it's not even actually a step up for me, because I'll end up working fewer hours on average than I did last year.

I know things could be worse, but I feel like this set-up kinda sucks. Heck, back when I worked at a grocery store, if someone got sick and they asked you to cover at the last minute, you still had the chance to work your normal hours too and get the extra pay. They didn't punish you for your flexibility.

What should I do? I mean, I know that everyone is cash strapped, and indeed, the library laid some people off back in August. Should I mention my displeasure to my supervisor, or to her boss; or should I just grin and be thankful I've got work, even if I think the policy is a bad idea?

 

[megamania]

This is common with many places. During the winter months we have no triple coverage and sometimes no double coverage for an otherwise busy convience store. This includes delivery days and most holidays.


You have to either grin and bare it or find a way to enjoy it anyway.


I treat work like a game.... a serious game but a game anyway. You have to find something within it to compete on a some level or the such. Make a game of it. You still get it done but have some fun or something to look forward to that way.

 

[Umbran]

That may depend somewhat on your relationship with your employers. If you have the right sort of relationship, you can tell them, "I'll do it, but do recognize what your asking is having me work fewer hours in an inconvenient, unpredictable pattern. I'm taking a hit for the good of the overall budget, and I expect that to be taken into account...," and have that mean something - either when you need some leeway yourself, or when it comes time to get references, and the like.

 

[RangerWickett]

Many thanks. I sent an email to express my concerns, and I took your advice Umbran, focusing on my willingness to help out the library's budgetary needs, while asking for any indication they can give me regarding what I can expect for the year overall.

If it doesn't work . . . eh, I was in the mood for a new job anyway.

 

[Janx]

Ultimately, the library is skimping. if a guy misses his shift, and you cover it, baring overtime concerns, it is the same cost to the business (you are getting his pay).

If you cover his shift, and work less on your shift, the library is saving money, but at the expense of the sick guy dictating what work doesn't get done. (because he calls in sick, you are forced to cover, thus YOUR work isn't getting done).

If they are OK with this, this means that your job must not be that important to them, because they don't care if your doing your job, or somebody elses.