the invisible man
Unregistered
Does anyone know the present legal position with the Working Hours Directive? I ask because I have noticed vacancies popping up on the BAJR list that effectively stipulate compulsory overtime: one requires a 6 day working week, and the other (from memory) had a 7 day working week. Both offered enhanced rates for weekend working.
Is this legal? If so, is it desirable, or an indication that insufficient time has been allowed (not necessarly the fault of the unit of course)?
We owe the dead nothing but the truth.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2004
On the subject of six and seven day weeks, I am thinking of one unit in particular, who work 12 hour days, 7-7. Is this really feasible? Digging and recording is mentally and physically intensive, is it realistic to expect to be able to do it for 12 hours a day all week? I worked for a unit who are the main exponents of this style of working and they do not have many fans.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
compulsary overtime is presently legal, if stated in the conditions of work. So really, you know what you are getting into. Whether or not it is moral or 'right' is another matter....
There must be a reason for this requirement - Any comments welcome... but remember the AUP.
Another day another WSI?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
compulsary overtime is presently legal, if stated in the conditions of work. So really, you know what you are getting into. Whether or not it is moral or 'right' is another matter....
However, the amount of hours that you can be expected to work beyond 48 is averaged over 17 weeks (or in exceptional circumstances over 26 or 52 weeks). A quick calculation (17 weeks x 48 hours) gives a working limit of 816 hours in any 17 week period.
When archaeological companies advertise jobs with compulsory overtime ( a recent example was a 40 hour week and 24 hours compulsory overtime) they need to offset the weekly hours against the 816-hour limit. In my example that would mean anyone working a continuous 64-hour week would 'use up' their 'limit-hours' part way through week 13. If an employer 'forced' employees to work beyond their '816 hours in 17 weeks' limit, they would be in breach of the law. Employers are obliged to keep records of hours worked by employees.
On the subject of 7 day working. Employees are entitled to one day off each week, 11 hours consecutive rest per day and a minimum of a 20 minute rest break if their working day is longer than six hours. These rights cannot be waived. An employer asking employees to work for 7 consecutive days is in breach of the law.
An interesting test case might be made of the 11 hours consecutive rest period. Does travelling to and from work for example count as a 'work' period or 'rest' period?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
Hmm, thanks for the info. IMHO it makes a mockery of having a working hours directive at all. The 17 week rule is probably not going to be relevant to fixed term contrcat workers.
Personally I don't see it as ethical or "right" at all. Sure, at one time during a boom period I used to work 7 days a week and to all hours (all office stuff), and as a "professional" have never clock watched, but it was never compulsory.
In due course maybe BAJR/IFA could campaign/insist on a reasonable 5 day/40 hour week? Somehow limited exceptional circumstances need to be catered for but without allowing exploitation of staff.
We owe the dead nothing but the truth.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
Thats a fair point....
I have talked to one advertiser, and there does seem to be justification for it, and, one must admit, it is up front about the ammount of hours to be worked. And the wages are pretty damn good...
I will indeed work with the IFA on this however.
Another day another WSI?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2006
[quote]
Originally posted by kevin wooldridge
An interesting test case might be made of the 11 hours consecutive rest period. Does travelling to and from work for example count as a 'work' period or 'rest' period? [quote]
As I understand it travel to and from work does not count as work time. Think about it, no-one gets paid for commuting otherwise delayed trains wouldn't be such an issue [:I] (I love living close enough to work to be able to walk in these days
)
Travel to work would only count as a 'work' period if the person were for example driving a works minibus to get other staff to site and back, etc.
"a pound of shelled peanuts was handsome pay by any apes standards" Pratchett 1998
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by ladyjen
[quote][i] As I understand it travel to and from work does not count as work time. Think about it, no-one gets paid for commuting otherwise delayed trains wouldn't be such an issue [:I] (I love living close enough to work to be able to walk in these days )
Travel to work would only count as a 'work' period if the person were for example driving a works minibus to get other staff to site and back, etc.
The point I was trying to make was that the law insists workers have 11 hours rest between shifts. Do you think that an hour (or maybe more) of travelling at either end of a 12 hour working day adequately qualifies as a 'rest period'?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by ladyjen
[snip] ...no-one gets paid for commuting... [snip]
As well you might expect, there are a few exceptions to this (I know of at least 2 or 3 units where this is the case) where the commute to a site is long, although this applies to staff whose normal place of work is the unit office rather than a specific site though I agree with Kevins point that I've never felt particularly rested after an hour or two in the car.
Of the Clan Sutton
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
I always compalined about oneguy I worked for.... I wanted paid for driving 1-2 hours to site ... as the rest of the team snoozed gently in the Minibus. He said no..... I doubt he would (or could ) say that now.
Another day another WSI?
