|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
#25735 - 04/10/07 01:59 PM
Re: Transitional points problem!!
[Re: Dicky]
|
Geoff Hannis
Hero
Registered: 12/02/04
Posts: 3044
Loc: the path less trodden
|
Goodness Gracious, Dicky ... do you you think that I take offence? I don't take offence at anything that's stated in open forum! 
However, after due deliberation, having heard all pleas, and weighing the issues from all aspects as based upon the prima facie evidence adequately presented here, I hereby declare that the guy has no case! Next plaintiff please ...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#25739 - 04/10/07 02:28 PM
Re: Transitional points problem!!
[Re: Geoff Hannis]
|
Scottish
Technologist
Registered: 09/04/05
Posts: 46
Loc: Manchester
|
And who appointed you Judge, Jury and Executioner Geoff? 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#25742 - 04/10/07 02:40 PM
Re: Transitional points problem!!
[Re: Scottish]
|
Geoff Hannis
Hero
Registered: 12/02/04
Posts: 3044
Loc: the path less trodden
|
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." - I forget now where I saw that. But it sounds like a fair one to me!
Just trying to keep it all light-hearted, Scottish, especially as execution is no longer an option these days.
Edited by Geoff Hannis (04/10/07 02:41 PM)
Edit Reason: Typo!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#25743 - 04/10/07 02:44 PM
Re: Transitional points problem!!
[Re: Geoff Hannis]
|
Ivor D.
Savant
Registered: 21/12/04
Posts: 115
Loc: The Brecon Beacons
|
Matthew 7:1
or was it Skippy.....?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#25744 - 04/10/07 02:48 PM
Re: Transitional points problem!!
[Re: Geoff Hannis]
|
Scottish
Technologist
Registered: 09/04/05
Posts: 46
Loc: Manchester
|
After a quick Google search:- Its from Mathew 7 if your interested Geoff. 
Anyway, lets get back to the real issue. Some of us did well out of AfC, some of ok and some got dropped upon from a great height (Mr 3 Year Guy et al).
The whole issue of transitional points was unfair. Those that ended up there must have been previously underpaid if their job description matched a higher band during AfC. How were they rewarded for years of underpayment? Put onto transitional points that meant if would be up to three years before they ended up at the bottom of the pay scale they should have been at previously! Thankfully they have now been dropped but there must be a number of unfortunate people that were affected this way.
Has anyone else out there found themselves in the same position and managed to improve their standing by some means (except moving job)?
If so share your experiences with the forum in order that it may help those that have been less lucky.
Edited by Scottish (04/10/07 03:26 PM)
Edit Reason: added text
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#25749 - 04/10/07 03:25 PM
Re: Transitional points problem!!
[Re: John Stewart]
|
Paul Allum
Technologist
Registered: 30/11/05
Posts: 40
Loc: Kent
|
There is, unfortunately, no method within the afc system for advancing up the scale other than by yearly increments. This is because AFC is half a system, the other half, KSF, that was supposed to "reward" expansion of job roles and responsibility was IMO Bodged Up Beyond Belief. I was unfortunate enough to see the initial draft of the KSF (Imho)a four letter word piece of nonsense with no room at all for anything other than nursing skills. At the last moment it had to be rewritten to fit other types of staff and the "reward" part was totally ignored in favour of bigger sticks to beat the dead horses.
PS it could be worse think of all the people who had worked for 10 years or more to be assimilated at the bottom of a band and get the guy that started the week before on the same point.
Edited by Paul Allum (04/10/07 03:30 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
