Twice a week we publish the problems that will feature in a forthcoming Dear Jeremy advice column in the Guardian Money supplement so that readers can offer their own advice and suggestions. We then print the best of your comments alongside Jeremy's own insights. Here is the latest dilemma – what are your thoughts?
I have enjoyed working three days a week at a university since October. My role was initially for a year, then became continuous following an excellent six-month review. The job fits my lifestyle and I have been flexible in modifying my "fixed" days around events such as training.
Everyone else in the department works flexi-time, regularly taking time off for appointments, school commitments and social events. I was told that because of the nature of my work it would not be feasible for me to do the same. I didn't mind in the early days as I was eager to please, but having seen my colleagues using (and abusing) this system I now resent this, especially as my own hours regularly exceed my contracted hours – I have typically worked 15% to 20% over my contracted 22.5 hours a week, and more when busy.
I was also appointed at the top of a low pay grade and there is no room for enhancement, which I resent when I compare myself to those who simply "do their job" and get grade enhancements. My boss skips my reviews and treats me as a second-class employee. Any give-and-take on attendance has been very one-sided, and I feel as though I'm being taken advantage of. I have been asked to do work outside my remit, which I have (I think reasonably) not consented to do.
What should I do? The issue of hours has been dismissed as 'your choice', which I suppose is partly true. I have developed my role and had an excellent review, but I feel undervalued.
• Do you need advice on a work issue? For Jeremy's and readers' help, send a brief email to dear.jeremy@theguardian.com. Please note that he is unable to answer questions of a legal nature or reply personally
