A puzzle
I started my new job on Tuesday, and now, after a mere four days' work, I've received a new contract in the post for a permanent position. Out of the blue.
Now admittedly my deputy manager did ask me on Thursday if I'd be interested in staying on for the full six months (which I was) but was careful to say that she was seeing what she could do. I took this to mean that she'd have to justify the expense of keeping me on for longer to the financial department.
Even so, there's a world's difference between a temporary contract, be it for six weeks or six months, and a permanent one. While it's possible they wanted to give me a pleasant surprise, it still strikes me as odd by way of business practices. Not to mention that I've not even been there so much as a week and we've yet to start selling tickets. I shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, but can any employer tell much about new staff in the space of four days?
Now I will admit that two events at work speak very much in my favour: I've been asked to go accompany the deputy manager to go through the Festival programme at a nearly-housebound patron's house on Thursday (being stronger on the musical side than anyone else), and I'd also taken it upon myself to contact the various classical CD shops in the city centre to double-check how many copies of the brochure they'll be needing. Knowing I was only taken on for six weeks initially, there was no way I was going to let the chance to make a good impression slip me by - a question of making damn sure they'd miss me come the end of my contract.
For all that, I've still niggling suspicions. For instance, it's odd that, according to my temporary contract, I'm required to give two weeks' notice before leaving, whereas in this permanent one, it's a mere week - surely it should be the other way round? I'd like to hope an organisation of this calibre is not capable of mistakes like this, so if you can think of another explanation, let's have it.
UPDATE (18:15, 20/03/2006) As my mother suggested, a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand was up to. Turns out we'd all been sent a second contract, and Muggins here, with his ethics, just had to be the one to bring it up.
Now admittedly my deputy manager did ask me on Thursday if I'd be interested in staying on for the full six months (which I was) but was careful to say that she was seeing what she could do. I took this to mean that she'd have to justify the expense of keeping me on for longer to the financial department.
Even so, there's a world's difference between a temporary contract, be it for six weeks or six months, and a permanent one. While it's possible they wanted to give me a pleasant surprise, it still strikes me as odd by way of business practices. Not to mention that I've not even been there so much as a week and we've yet to start selling tickets. I shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, but can any employer tell much about new staff in the space of four days?
Now I will admit that two events at work speak very much in my favour: I've been asked to go accompany the deputy manager to go through the Festival programme at a nearly-housebound patron's house on Thursday (being stronger on the musical side than anyone else), and I'd also taken it upon myself to contact the various classical CD shops in the city centre to double-check how many copies of the brochure they'll be needing. Knowing I was only taken on for six weeks initially, there was no way I was going to let the chance to make a good impression slip me by - a question of making damn sure they'd miss me come the end of my contract.
For all that, I've still niggling suspicions. For instance, it's odd that, according to my temporary contract, I'm required to give two weeks' notice before leaving, whereas in this permanent one, it's a mere week - surely it should be the other way round? I'd like to hope an organisation of this calibre is not capable of mistakes like this, so if you can think of another explanation, let's have it.
UPDATE (18:15, 20/03/2006) As my mother suggested, a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand was up to. Turns out we'd all been sent a second contract, and Muggins here, with his ethics, just had to be the one to bring it up.
posted by Anthony at
01:12
4 Comments:
i corrected the blog, "British", and credited you. :)
By
Aethlos, at 19/3/06 01:46
Thanks! While you're at it, there's a comment of mine here awaiting your attention too, not to mention this strange contract matter.
By
Anthony, at 19/3/06 08:26
Congratulations on landing a permanent role. And good luck with ticket sales, now that the advanced booking is open. I hear that the end-of-festival party (to which all staff members are invited) is a rather boozy affair. You can look forward to that, because between now and then, there's bound to be a lot of work ahead.
By
Anonymous, at 22/3/06 16:28
Blast it, I've just re-read what I wrote and realised I never said it was the permanent contract which was wrong. We were never supposed to get them.
By
Anthony, at 23/3/06 07:36
Post a Comment
<< Home