Carryfast:
[Seemingly also anyone proposing doing that as a job share on a 3 day week basis is a lazy git ?.
Can you point out where I said people who want 3/4 days a week are ‘lazy gits’ please, as it’s confusing me. Not least because I’ve never called anyone a git in my life
You do know the meaning of by implication.IE job advert mentioning ‘lazy gits’.Quite possibly on the basis of them turning down an early start after a late finish,or wanting to finish eating their lunch before getting moving,or not wanting to work a potentially 72 hour and/or 6 day week.Which you then seemed to defend unless I’ve missed something.
Not to mention saying that you’d turn down anyone saying that they’ll take on the job as a 3 day week job share.
albion:
Really CF you do talk some balderdash, old fruit.
Mostly telling me I dont know about my own business whereas you do.
You may have a point in the wider picture, but what works for most firms doesn’t apply to all. All that happened in my little firm was terms and conditions going up. I didnt finish work because of rates, I got the rates I wanted.
Likely 6 day 72 hour week? You see our weeks could range from 10 hours (getting paid 40 to 60-70. We once paid 123 hours for one week (perfectly legal running). I can imagine how that would work as we never got any hint of workflow hence often having drivers on standby, ie rules were have your day off but keep your phone by you, or let us know if you were in the pool for an hour in case you were called in. 90% of the time you weren’t. So Switchlogic gets ‘lucky’ and gets the busy weeks and carry fast is unlucky and gets the quiet weeks. Now that might suit you personally, getting paid to work 10 getting paid 40, but if you are someone that wants to do more and you were working on average earnings as mentioned at the interview, you’d not be happy.
If you want to Witter on about your new pet idea that nasty bosses are working drivers to death in order to suppress wages, crack on. But that’s all the energy I wish to expend now.
^ That bit was all I meant.Who knows what the OP’s example is all about but talk of lazy gits cutting ‘breaks’ short and compulsory working on Saturdays is red rag to a bull to any union man worth his salt.
albion:
Really CF you do talk some balderdash, old fruit.
Mostly telling me I dont know about my own business whereas you do.
You may have a point in the wider picture, but what works for most firms doesn’t apply to all. All that happened in my little firm was terms and conditions going up. I didnt finish work because of rates, I got the rates I wanted.
Likely 6 day 72 hour week? You see our weeks could range from 10 hours (getting paid 40 to 60-70. We once paid 123 hours for one week (perfectly legal running). I can imagine how that would work as we never got any hint of workflow hence often having drivers on standby, ie rules were have your day off but keep your phone by you, or let us know if you were in the pool for an hour in case you were called in. 90% of the time you weren’t. So Switchlogic gets ‘lucky’ and gets the busy weeks and carry fast is unlucky and gets the quiet weeks. Now that might suit you personally, getting paid to work 10 getting paid 40, but if you are someone that wants to do more and you were working on average earnings as mentioned at the interview, you’d not be happy.
If you want to Witter on about your new pet idea that nasty bosses are working drivers to death in order to suppress wages, crack on. But that’s all the energy I wish to expend now.
^ That bit was all I meant.Who knows what the OP’s example is all about but talk of lazy gits cutting ‘breaks’ short and compulsory working on Saturdays is red rag to a bull to any union man worth his salt.
No you said it could work at all levels, to use your words.
I think Carry, that when you’ve run a successful haulage business for a few years, then you can come back and tell people who have done so, how they should or can operate. Until then, it’s all hot air.
Carryfast:
Not to mention saying that you’d turn down anyone saying that they’ll take on the job as a 3 day week job share.
Did I? Where exactly? If I was ever a TM again, heaven forfend, I’d take drivers on on the shift pattern my boss asked me to, be that 6, 5,4 or even 3 day weeks. I merely made the point that one good reason for wanting drivers to do a normal working week is that good ones are ■■■■ hard to find, which is a fact, and you as usual twisted it in your usual way. Better luck next time old fruit
albion:
Really CF you do talk some balderdash, old fruit.
Mostly telling me I dont know about my own business whereas you do.
You may have a point in the wider picture, but what works for most firms doesn’t apply to all. All that happened in my little firm was terms and conditions going up. I didnt finish work because of rates, I got the rates I wanted.
Likely 6 day 72 hour week? You see our weeks could range from 10 hours (getting paid 40 to 60-70. We once paid 123 hours for one week (perfectly legal running). I can imagine how that would work as we never got any hint of workflow hence often having drivers on standby, ie rules were have your day off but keep your phone by you, or let us know if you were in the pool for an hour in case you were called in. 90% of the time you weren’t. So Switchlogic gets ‘lucky’ and gets the busy weeks and carry fast is unlucky and gets the quiet weeks. Now that might suit you personally, getting paid to work 10 getting paid 40, but if you are someone that wants to do more and you were working on average earnings as mentioned at the interview, you’d not be happy.
If you want to Witter on about your new pet idea that nasty bosses are working drivers to death in order to suppress wages, crack on. But that’s all the energy I wish to expend now.
^ That bit was all I meant.Who knows what the OP’s example is all about but talk of lazy gits cutting ‘breaks’ short and compulsory working on Saturdays is red rag to a bull to any union man worth his salt.
No you said it could work at all levels, to use your words.
I think Carry, that when you’ve run a successful haulage business for a few years, then you can come back and tell people who have done so, how they should or can operate. Until then, it’s all hot air.
Yes a wider picture which by definition means all levels.If not at least most to be pedantic.
We’ve got a let’s say 72 hours 6 days a week operation being shared by two drivers doing 3 days each.
A 7 days a week job being shared by two drivers doing 4 on 4 off.
A 16 hours a day job being shared by two drivers doing 8 hours each.
A 24 hours a day job being shared by 3 drivers doing 8 hours each.
An international trunking job being shared by two drivers doing let’s say 1.5 weeks on 1.5 weeks off possibly even 2 weeks on 2 weeks off.
An international tramping job being shared by two drivers doing 1 + months on 1 + months off.
Feel free to list all the other types of operations which can’t be done on that type of basis.
While it seems clear that many/most/a lot of employers,in the wide picture,are minimising the amount of labour they employ to maintain an over supplied labour market.Nothing else logically explains it.
But yes I’m sure that plenty of employers will have no problem in finding plenty of turkeys willing to vote for a 72 hour 6 day week for example.
Carryfast:
Not to mention saying that you’d turn down anyone saying that they’ll take on the job as a 3 day week job share.
Did I? Where exactly? If I was ever a TM again, heaven forfend, I’d take drivers on on the shift pattern my boss asked me to, be that 6, 5,4 or even 3 day weeks. I merely made the point that one good reason for wanting drivers to do a normal working week is that good ones are ■■■■ hard to find, which is a fact, and you as usual twisted it in your usual way. Better luck next time old fruit
While I merely made the point that ‘if’ it was me,which it won’t be,I’d tell the employer in the OP example that I’d be interested in trying it as a 3 day week job share.In answer to which you said if it was you you’d show me the door for trying it.
So good drivers are hard to find.Great tell em that they will need to reduce daily rest/cut breaks short as instructed and work a compulsory 6 day week any back chat will get em slung out the office called a lazy git.That’ll fix it.
Hilarious. I bet you’ve a spreadsheet working it all out, and a giant wallchart you call Carrys Battle Plan in your home office where you spend your days pretending to run a huge transatlantic intercontinental transport operation Do you also have a huge board with toy trucks you move around?
switchlogic:
Hilarious. I bet you’ve a spreadsheet working it all out, and a giant wallchart you call Carrys Battle Plan in your home office where you spend your days pretending to run a huge transatlantic intercontinental transport operation Do you also have a huge board with toy trucks you move around?
Way above my pay grade.Management is obviously your forte well it was while you were doing it and before you walked away from the office by all accounts ?.
But a strong union ethic did obviously leave me with the idea why employ fewer people doing more work when you could employ more doing less.Which by definition reduces labour supply and increases wage rates.Yes the management side wouldn’t like it nor anyone for who half the rate being advertised for half the workload just isn’t enough but it has nothing to do with lazy gits as to why.
^ That bit was all I meant.Who knows what the OP’s example is all about but talk of lazy gits cutting ‘breaks’ short and compulsory working on Saturdays is red rag to a bull to any union man worth his salt.
Now that’s where you are completely wrong.
Good unionised jobs, i work in one such and have worked in them for many years now (as a union member not one of those hangers on who milk the good terms but won’t join the union), are based on good terms/conditions but also recognise that giving quality reliable work (they have tended to be specialised sectors) and value for money, and perish the thought actually looking after the customer, help keep the company in profit and growing, and if the company doesn’t keep in profit and ahead of the also rans in the long term then those good jobs vanish for everyone.
Good union members these days are not still living in the 70’s, where profit for the company was seen as a dirty word and militant fools were happiest when out on strike or taking some other action for the most futile of reasons, during which time the company could not operate, became disrespected and eventually closed down.
Not even bright enough to put some quality in their work when they were at work, to offer you know a bit of value for money to the company to prove they were worth what they were after.
Juddian is spot on. I’m no fan of unions, and our one was worse than useless, but things have changed in the past 40+ years. Still trying to get my brain around Carryfasts working schedule, I’m pretty certain that none of my gaffers would have entertained it as for starters it was very much ‘one truck, one driver’ and driving a rigid tipper for four days isn’t going to make a driver much money either! Nothing wrong with saturday work either as long as you finished early enough to get time off for starting on monday again, strikes me that Carryfast expects maximum money for minimum work and, unless you are driving for a huge company where transport is just providing a service to deliver their own products so doesn’t actually need to make a profit as such, that isn’t going to happen piloting a rigid tipper around.
Juddian:
Good unionised jobs, i work in one such and have worked in them for many years now (as a union member not one of those hangers on who milk the good terms but won’t join the union), are based on good terms/conditions but also recognise that giving quality reliable work (they have tended to be specialised sectors) and value for money, and perish the thought actually looking after the customer, help keep the company in profit and growing, and if the company doesn’t keep in profit and ahead of the also rans in the long term then those good jobs vanish for everyone.
There is a fine line between accepting that you must actually do some work, and taking pride in that work, and adopting (what we now call…) the neoliberal language of “value for money”, “looking after the customer”, and so on.
The vast majority of haulage “customers” are not customers at all, but associated employers, or head employers in a contracting chain.
Talk of “keeping the company in profit and growing and ahead of the also rans” in practice often simply means competing against other firms and undercutting other workers - and it means accepting the inevitability of competition with workers - and over time that will usually mean you end up with either the lowest pay or the hardest jobs that the market will bear, and you’ll likely keep supporting an ideological agenda that undermines the position of workers as a whole.
Working for a firm that contains a right-wing union will often be the worst work/wage bargain you’ll receive in your life.
albion:
It works the same from the other side of the fence. A business is easier and pleasanter to run if both sides get rid of the adversarial approach to employing and employment.
In my business the interests of myself and my drivers were aligned. Sadly the firm that they have TUPEd over to are itching for the end of the year to change terms and conditions. Sounds as if I’m romanticisng somewhat, but I didnt have any reason not to trust my drivers and they thought the same of me.
Job share would not have worked CF, some jobs it just doesn’t.
Sadly in the real world it just doesn’t work like that.Wages and terms and conditions always one way or another,sooner or later,get dragged into the competitive tendering process as a way of either under cutting rivals and/or adding to the bottom line on the balance sheet.That’s why we had to have unions and the more militant the better to throw a spanner in the works of that unholy exploitative rolling process.First and foremost with the aim of removing wages and terms and conditions from that competitive market process.Everything else being fair game.
Hmm. Well said
As for job share it can work at all levels of operation local to distance.Either in the form of in this case sharing a likely 6 day 72 hour week between two workers on a 3 day week basis.To sharing an international trunk between two drivers on the basis of one or two weeks on one or two weeks off.Or even domestic or international distance tramping on a 4 on 4 off or one month or more on one month or more off basis.It would of course be a game changer regarding the labour supply side of the equation resulting in a self propagating wage increase environment making the idea even more lucrative from the employees’ point of view but obviously more distasteful from the point of view of the employer.Which I think probably answers my own question.
I think it does answer your own question. Employers will never needlessly distribute work to more people than they have to.
Juddian:
Good union members these days are not still living in the 70’s, where profit for the company was seen as a dirty word and militant fools were happiest when out on strike or taking some other action for the most futile of reasons,
And here we are with prospective employers calling anyone who refuses to bow down to possibly enforced 9 hour rest periods/cutting breaks short and 72 hour 6 day weeks lazy gits.As I said turkeys voting for Christmas.
So there’s no place in your view that it is possible to be both militant and still offer the guvnor value for money IE can you shorten your break that load is urgent.Yes no problem I haven’t started eating my lunch yet.As opposed to no chance I’m in the middle of eating it.Or can you do a late finish yes no problem and can you do an early start as well tomorrow.Sorry no chance I have to travel to from work and have a life.To which the answer is do it or else it’s an order not a request you lazy git.
On that note why isn’t two drivers,working a 3 day 36 hour week,considered ‘value for money’ when it costs the employer no more than employing one ?.
windrush:
Juddian is spot on. I’m no fan of unions, and our one was worse than useless, but things have changed in the past 40+ years. Still trying to get my brain around Carryfasts working schedule, I’m pretty certain that none of my gaffers would have entertained it as for starters it was very much ‘one truck, one driver’ and driving a rigid tipper for four days isn’t going to make a driver much money either! Nothing wrong with saturday work either as long as you finished early enough to get time off for starting on monday again, strikes me that Carryfast expects maximum money for minimum work and, unless you are driving for a huge company where transport is just providing a service to deliver their own products so doesn’t actually need to make a profit as such, that isn’t going to happen piloting a rigid tipper around.
Pete.
The job is actually advertising up to around £50 grand pa and I’m actually talking about accepting half the wage for half the work and there are plenty of full time jobs paying a lot less than half that.So how does that fit the bs claim of maximum wage for minimum work.
Nothing wrong with an enforced 6 day or even 5 1/2 day week and enforced overtime the rest of the week until it’s no longer considered overtime says it all.Going back to the 1930’s.
Carryfast:
.In answer to which you said if it was you you’d show me the door for trying it.
Did I? Where exactly?
Great.So you see no problem with the question of why not offer the job in question on a 3 day week job share basis and you’d withdraw the comment ‘I’ll be unemployed for the rest of my days’ for even suggesting it ( which may or may not be correct but who cares ).
Carryfast: The job is actually advertising up to around £50 grand pa and I’m actually talking about accepting half the wage for half the work and there are plenty of full time jobs paying a lot less than half that.So how does that fit the bs claim of maximum wage for minimum work.
Nothing wrong with an enforced 6 day or even 5 1/2 day week and enforced overtime the rest of the week until it’s no longer considered overtime says it all.Going back to the 1930’s.
So why would anyone want to work like that? “Up to around 50 grand” means nothing really, it could be almost half that if the work wasn’t there all the time which is very common on tipper work as I know from experience. Long days sat in a weighbridge or at home/in the yard. At my last firm I didn’t get ‘overtime’ at all, the haulier didn’t get extra from the quarries for me being out late/early so could hardly be expected to pay the driver extra. Being paid on earnings (in my opinion the best way to get results from a driver on tippers) it was only night time and sunday work that was paid at rate and a half. Job and knock, and get off home. Those companies who did pay drivers on hours with overtime (and I worked like that as well for two previous companies) often had trucks parked in laybyes hanging their time out! Not me though, that isn’t helping the boss much either, it’s a two way street and you work together.
Anyway you always know best, even us who have done the job (any job ! ) apparently know nowt about it. You could single handedly change the world of road haulage, there must be drivers queuing up to work half a week for half the wage and have more time at home to spend the money they haven’t got?
Carryfast:
.In answer to which you said if it was you you’d show me the door for trying it.
Did I? Where exactly?
Great.So you see no problem with the question of why not offer the job in question on a 3 day week job share basis and you’d withdraw the comment ‘I’ll be unemployed for the rest of my days’ for even suggesting it ( which may or may not be correct but who cares ).
Nice try but that’s not the comment you kept referring to is it? The one where you said I’d show you the door for asking for a 3 day week? The one that doesn’t exist because you made it up? As for the comment you do quote no, I don’t take it back. Wanting to work 3 day weeks is the very least of your problems!
Do you also have a huge board with toy trucks you move around?
