The only reason I happened to know was that some of us were going to go over 27.5 hours one time. Then I realized I had not worked Monday. I called my sup and said it would be fine for me to do extra hours. Then he explained the aforementioned reasoning to me.
So was the problem two sided in Cali? Was one problem that Pters had no ambition to work more? And the other that Fters just ran them for almost seven hours for four days?
Yes - It was two sided. The FT sups knew the PT sups would not come up on the over 27.5 report. The PT sups felt they were working for free. I had to reprimand the FT sups for this. But I also looked at the attitude of the PT sups as well.
PT sups have changed over the years since the 1980's. Back in the 80s-90s, they worked hard and were hoping to go FT. Now, I feel PT sups (in general) are more like glorified hourly workers. This has nothing to do with degrading the non-management employee. On the contrary, I normally do not use the word hourly, I rather define the difference as mgmt and non-mgmt. I make no bones about it... this is focused on those PT supervisors who in my opinion are degrading the PT sup position.
I want to make the distinction, because in my experience, most PT sups are only concerned with how much money they are making. Other than some additional responsibility, a PT sup in not much different than a non-management employee.
I don't want to get a bunch of flack over this. I did not pre-judge each PT sup. I judged them as I saw where their priorities, and values were at. There are a number of sups who just do what they can to get by. This is just another job. I did not want mgmt people like this working for me.
If I get the opportunity to pick the folks who work for me ( and I did) .... than this is not the kind of sup I want working for me. It does not mean that I expect the sup to work without proper pay.... It is about attitude.