Terminated for availability change

Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
2
I dont know if anyone else has had this issue but I was terminated for changing my availability. So I had a job interview back in July for a full time job with benefits. I didnt think anything of it but about 2 weeks ago they called me to offer me the job so I planning on keeping target for the weekends since I will only being working 4 days a week at my other job. I understand that they dont have accept my availibility change but they are just terminating me cause I dont have open availiabilty, but yet they only schedule me 3 days a week. I understand the "at will law" but letting me go doesnt make any sense.
 
I dont know if anyone else has had this issue but I was terminated for changing my availability. So I had a job interview back in July for a full time job with benefits. I didnt think anything of it but about 2 weeks ago they called me to offer me the job so I planning on keeping target for the weekends since I will only being working 4 days a week at my other job. I understand that they dont have accept my availibility change but they are just terminating me cause I dont have open availiabilty, but yet they only schedule me 3 days a week. I understand the "at will law" but letting me go doesnt make any sense.
Are you under your 90 days?
 
If your revised availability no longer meets the needs of the store, then I can see it.

I already have a very reduced availability (Target is a second job), and because I've always been available for closing shifts, it's been accepted so far. But now I'm in the middle of moving, and the new place is just far enough away from the store that those closing shifts will interfere with my husband's commuting needs. And I can't jeopardize our full time jobs and health insurance.

I talked to my SETL and have been told that reducing my availability to get out before close will not be accepted. I'm currently on an LOA because he's hoping that "things will work out" and I can return, but I know that's just not going to happen. I haven't yet figured out what I'm going to do.
 
No I’m technically not in my 90 days but i did just transfer stores. And i understand going to a new store with open availability then changing it, is pretty crappy but if they are only scheduling me 3 days i can live off of that and taking a full time position that is going to give me hours to live i shouldn’t be punished for it
 
No I’m technically not in my 90 days but i did just transfer stores. And i understand going to a new store with open availability then changing it, is pretty crappy but if they are only scheduling me 3 days i can live off of that and taking a full time position that is going to give me hours to live i shouldn’t be punished for it
Resign, wait 60 days, then apply again, with your new availability..
 
They don’t want to work anybody that has limited availability that once had open availability because want somebody to call anytime they want so when somebody doesn’t show up they bug you to come in. It’s of kinda shitty of them really. They want you to drop your life and go to work.
 
They don’t want to work anybody that has limited availability that once had open availability because want somebody to call anytime they want so when somebody doesn’t show up they bug you to come in. It’s of kinda shitty of them really. They want you to drop your life and go to work.

HAHA, they are delusional. Nobody is going to drop everything else to be Spot's bitch. Even meaningful professional salaried careers have better work-life balance expectations.
 
Last edited:
They don’t want to work anybody that has limited availability that once had open availability because want somebody to call anytime they want so when somebody doesn’t show up they bug you to come in. It’s of kinda shitty of them really. They want you to drop your life and go to work.

It really is shitty. I hate it when my etl prioritizes open availability in new hires when I know fully well that person will get 2 to 3 days a week. I feel even worse when a tm opens up their availability, which wasn't bad to begin with, hoping it'll help them get hours. It never does. The Target leadership mentality can really suck sometimes.
 
I think this is just a bad time to ask for reduced availability. When new seasonal come in and state they are hoping to stay after the season, I suggest that mid January is a good time to revisit their availability. Hours can be hard to come by and HR seems more willing to let you add a few restrictions.
 
I prefer to just let people know how limiting their availability affects their hours.

Trucks are Tues and Thurs (for example) if you can't work those days you can't be a DBO, which means you aren't working the other truck days either (I get 4). So you might go from getting 4 truck days to one not truck day.
 
Was the availability change done before or after your first working day at Target? Was it a change between interview and job offer? Or after starting but within 90 days?
 
If your revised availability no longer meets the needs of the store, then I can see it.

I already have a very reduced availability (Target is a second job), and because I've always been available for closing shifts, it's been accepted so far. But now I'm in the middle of moving, and the new place is just far enough away from the store that those closing shifts will interfere with my husband's commuting needs. And I can't jeopardize our full time jobs and health insurance.

I talked to my SETL and have been told that reducing my availability to get out before close will not be accepted. I'm currently on an LOA because he's hoping that "things will work out" and I can return, but I know that's just not going to happen. I haven't yet figured out what I'm going to do.

Can you go over the SETLs head? Talk to your ETL-GE and/or ETL-HR? You've been there a few years so some times exceptions are made for TMs that they don't want to lose😃
 
Honestly, I need to get out. When I had the conversation with the SETL, I was intending to quit (couldn't get into Workday for some reason to just do it that way and felt like I owed him some sort of explanation anyway). So when he told me that reducing my availability further wasn't going to fly, I was actually happy to hear that as it gave me the perfect reason without saying "I've had enough, I'm outties". But then he convinced me to take an LOA specifically *because* he doesn't want to lose me for Q4. And between the fact that I don't like any sort of conflict and I could keep my TM discount during LOA, I went ahead with that plan. I just didn't think about it far enough at the time to realize that I would need to come back from LOA so I could be in good standing when I self-promote to guest for real.

So no, I'm not being terminated for reducing my availability like in the OP's post. And if I had a desire to stick around, I would talk to ETL-HR to see what could be done.

Going back to OP's situation.... a follow up post stated that they had just transferred to a new store before this all happened. I find myself wondering if the new store's HR and SD are considering them to be like a new hire in their first 90 days rather than an established TM. In the end, though, they're almost certain to be much better off with the full time job and benefits.
 
I think this is just a bad time to ask for reduced availability. When new seasonal come in and state they are hoping to stay after the season, I suggest that mid January is a good time to revisit their availability. Hours can be hard to come by and HR seems more willing to let you add a few restrictions.


So in the mean-time, they just starve.
 
Honestly, I need to get out. When I had the conversation with the SETL, I was intending to quit (couldn't get into Workday for some reason to just do it that way and felt like I owed him some sort of explanation anyway). So when he told me that reducing my availability further wasn't going to fly, I was actually happy to hear that as it gave me the perfect reason without saying "I've had enough, I'm outties". But then he convinced me to take an LOA specifically *because* he doesn't want to lose me for Q4. And between the fact that I don't like any sort of conflict and I could keep my TM discount during LOA, I went ahead with that plan. I just didn't think about it far enough at the time to realize that I would need to come back from LOA so I could be in good standing when I self-promote to guest for real.

Come off LOA and work your 2 weeks so you can be done before Q4. If your SETL isn't willing to work with you on the scheduling issue, seems silly for you to work with him on Q4 availability.
 
No I’m technically not in my 90 days but i did just transfer stores. And i understand going to a new store with open availability then changing it, is pretty crappy but if they are only scheduling me 3 days i can live off of that and taking a full time position that is going to give me hours to live i shouldn’t be punished for it

if you transferred with open availability, that was probably a big factor in them accepting your transfer. You’re not being punished, you just don’t fit business needs
 
It doesn't impede "business needs".

"Business need" is a bullshit made-up catch-all term for shit managers to hide behind instead of being actual leaders and justifying their decisions. Managers that drop the business need line are the same ones who punish an entire team instead of holding one person accountable, because they're afraid to make the hard call.

If a person has limited availability and they're valuble (they're not a shit worker) you schedule them when they are available because that's value added for the business. If they're not valuble, then you schedule them as you need them or you drop them. Be up front with them about why they get little or no hours. No one is guaranteed hours, it's a merit based system. Fairness is not required nor should it be expected.

The bottom line is to them, you aren't valuble enough for them to keep you within the confines of your new availability. Maybe it's because they already have a great pool of talent on the weekends. Maybe you're not very good. Maybe they think you shammed them by transferring and then changing your availability. Regardless of the reasoning, they should have the balls to tell you instead of just saying "because you don't have open availability".
 
It doesn't impede "business needs".

"Business need" is a bullshit made-up catch-all term for shit managers to hide behind instead of being actual leaders and justifying their decisions. Managers that drop the business need line are the same ones who punish an entire team instead of holding one person accountable, because they're afraid to make the hard call.

If a person has limited availability and they're valuble (they're not a shit worker) you schedule them when they are available because that's value added for the business. If they're not valuble, then you schedule them as you need them or you drop them. Be up front with them about why they get little or no hours. No one is guaranteed hours, it's a merit based system. Fairness is not required nor should it be expected.

The bottom line is to them, you aren't valuble enough for them to keep you within the confines of your new availability. Maybe it's because they already have a great pool of talent on the weekends. Maybe you're not very good. Maybe they think you shammed them by transferring and then changing your availability. Regardless of the reasoning, they should have the balls to tell you instead of just saying "because you don't have open availability".
DING! DING!DING!!! Nailed it!
 
Back
Top