Best in Class based on Performance Matrix

Hello! I'm working for a call centre of which performance is currently based on a number of categories: items worked per hour (IPH), absenteeism, and quality in a month. From what we know, our target IPH is 4 in a required 6.5 login hours in a day. We had challenges before wherein our volume is too high for the number of employees working on it, thus, the company allowed us to do overtime. To make it more enticing, they placed a rewards program for it wherein you get the chance to win gadgets and what not for rendering extra hours work. With this, some agents increased their IPH due to extended hours of work, which is great not just for the business but for the agent's performance overall. Last week, our senior manager said that for them to determine the top performers, in terms of IPH, they'll get the "Best In Class", that is, whoever gets the highest IPH will be the benchmark for everyone to hit.  When we checked closely on the numbers, those agents hitting the highest IPH (6.5) are those who rendered OT. For those who don't render OT, our average is between 4.5 to 5.6. When we discussed this observation with our manager, we were encouraged to do OT if we want to catch up with the "Best in Class". I told my manager that we find this unfair since it's not an equal playing field for everyone. Will this be considered forced OT or mandatory OT? Is this rightfully within the law? Your legal advise will be appreciated. Thanks.

dhidalgo1978 wrote:Hello! I'm working for a call centre of which performance is currently based on a number of categories: items worked per hour (IPH), absenteeism, and quality in a month. From what we know, our target IPH is 4 in a required 6.5 login hours in a day. We had challenges before wherein our volume is too high for the number of employees working on it, thus, the company allowed us to do overtime. To make it more enticing, they placed a rewards program for it wherein you get the chance to win gadgets and what not for rendering extra hours work. With this, some agents increased their IPH due to extended hours of work, which is great not just for the business but for the agent's performance overall. Last week, our senior manager said that for them to determine the top performers, in terms of IPH, they'll get the "Best In Class", that is, whoever gets the highest IPH will be the benchmark for everyone to hit.  When we checked closely on the numbers, those agents hitting the highest IPH (6.5) are those who rendered OT. For those who don't render OT, our average is between 4.5 to 5.6. When we discussed this observation with our manager, we were encouraged to do OT if we want to catch up with the "Best in Class". I told my manager that we find this unfair since it's not an equal playing field for everyone. Will this be considered forced OT or mandatory OT? Is this rightfully within the law? Your legal advise will be appreciated. Thanks.

I don't see a problem with the set up as long as the employees are paid accordingly.

So far I don't see anything that's "mandatory" or "forced" in the situation you describe.

Thanks. Just want to make sure we're being treated fairly, and within the law.

If you want to increase your IPH then you will render overtime, this should be paid overtime. If you don't want, then just do your regular hours. It's not mandatory.