And now I come to talk a little the subject. The first say that, actually, I do not think that my conditions are bad, nor do I lose if the agreement goes ahead eventually. But that does not mean that we conform to what they're putting on the table. We can not think that the agreement puts our peak hours are 1800 hours, this is going to comply, and will let you have unpaid overtime as usual. I am the first who does not believe, and I do not believe that absolutely nobody. Moreover, as in many cases the hours "official" decrease the number of hours "face", may rise. While that is a thing of each. I have a rule I refuse to do something you do not get paid. One thing that I like what I do, and quite another to do it for free.
Besides, I think the goal they have set for this agreement is very low. Purport to regulate a sector which until now was a real joke, and so far, it still is. I know people very close to doing a job similar to mine, to do it on a bench, enjoying stunning conditions. Vale, the banking agreement is one of the good and not going to get in 10 minutes, but why not try to pull a bit over there? If you work 100 hours less per year than proposed by our Convention! Not to mention the housing loans are also by convention, and myriad other benefits.
I took this agreement as an example to be banking I know best, but really, what I've seen for ICT seems to me a very poor proposal that really we all lose. So I wrote the previous post. I want an agreement for ICT, because my company, for their work, it must adhere to it, and there is no possibility of doubt. But I want a decent agreement, not something like what has been proposed, and it's over, the employer has blocked because they are convinced that something more we can get even.
0 comments:
Post a Comment