48 Hours Max Work Per Week

[steveo]

Agreed , but as this was abused before hand its why we had teh 48 hour law come in in teh first place . Free market must accept that like everything that exisits , it has limits .

So if they already work longer hours than they are paid for, why do you think changing the law will make any difference?

 

[Firestorm]

Why do people do it then? The obvious answer is so they keep their jobs but they shouldnt have to be "blackmailed" like this.

I found myself in that situation for a good 15 years. Work hard (unpaid overtime maybe 3-3 1/2 hours a day) in an organisation which , although not "punishing" those who did not do the 50+ our weeks, did give better pay increases, promotions etc to those who did. Primarily in order to give my wife and young kids the best I could (didn't dawn on me that me at home before 8.30 might be better...)

Should the EU be legislating to protect families from fathers like me ? I don't know about that ???

 

[MK Shrimper]

Sadly it won't. These "work hard, play hard" boss types will always favour those who come in early and stay late despite the effect on their families.

 

[steveo]

Should the EU be legislating to protect families from fathers like me ? I don't know about that ???

This is the point though, you were prepared to do it regardless of the law, so if they change the law it wont make any difference.

 

[sufcintheprem]

Why do people do it then? The obvious answer is so they keep their jobs but they shouldnt have to be "blackmailed" like this.

But even in principle it's not as simple as you're making out. When I signed my contract, it said 38 hours a week and sometimes you will be expected to work beyond this. the only problem being that the company standard starting hour is 9:00 and finishing at 18:00 with an hour lunch break which is 40 hours before you even get on to the shortened lunch time and longer hours. This isn't an appeal for sympathy but to illustrate that I work longer than we theoretically work.

If I'm not happy with it, you say I can just go and get another job. The problem is the fluidity in the labour market was never that good when the economy was booming and much worse that we're expecting to see the unemployment figure rise.

That's before you get on to the fact that whilst I might be able to work in other areas, my experience in my area and my specialist skills won't be relevant there so I have to either take a paycut or look for a job in a more specific area. The long and the short of this is that I will have to invest time looking for new jobs and maybe spend time out of work in between.

More simply put, I can't just walk out of one job and in to another which would be exactly the same barring the variable of working hours.

 

[steveo]

Great post Tarquers old chap. At least some people are still living in the real world.

 

[Southend_Lady]

I think the main point here is whether we are looking at paid or unpaid overtime.

At first when I heard this, I thought it sounded ridiculous. Now while, I don't actually agree with it wholeheartedly, I can see some of the sense behind it - but only in the cases of the workers who are expected to partake in unpaid overtime.

At the end of the day, it's all about freedom and choice. You sign a contract which normally has a clause written in about occasionally needing to stay on for overtime, when there is a demand for it. You never expect to be openly exploited so you agree and duly sign the contract. I work for a law firm and when one of my bosses has a big deal closing, I may be required to stay on and help out. This is though down to me and there are adequate overtime secretaries to cover in the instance I might chose to opt out. The overtime secrataries are on a rota which I am a part of. It is not compulsory but a chance to earn some extra money in your monthly pay. As far as I see it, as long as there are adequate systems in place to deal with overtime issues fairly and legally then there is no reason to impose a rule limiting what people are and aren't allowed to do.

On the flip side I can understand that there are many many people out there that need this kind of protection. Some are forced and/or expected to do overtime, unpaid too which is absurd. I at least get a tidy wedge for comitting myself to extra hours. The poor people that don't get such a luxury are being treated unfairly. I think it's a catch 22 situation to be honest.

 

[Lord Football]

Trade Union point of view....

The 48 hrs is there to stop people working long hours, get some worklife balance into place, reduce the risks of people having access due to excessive hours. However, there is also the understanding that some people need to work more hours just to make ends meet, and usually they do this by having two jobs. Currently, an employee can opt out of the regulations. As others have said "freedom of choice" is the key.

Essentially though an employee is only repsonsible for the hours and individual works for them. There is, as far as I know, no policing method for the lower paid who do two jobs, so they just ignore the regulation (most don't know it exists anyway). I'll be intersted to see what (if anything) is brought in to regulate those people in that trap.

The regulation is really there to stop being flogged to death by the employer and if it results in some better Employment legislation then it can't be all bad.

However, it really must be down to "freedom of choice".

 

[osymandus]

So if they already work longer hours than they are paid for, why do you think changing the law will make any difference?

It means if an employee is being unduly put upon they have legal protection . And at the end of teh day CEO director or owner is just another human being if their being an arsehold , or if teh worker is being the same or lazy then each must be delt with.

 

[Crabby Shrimper]

You just know it's a contentious issue when the two best posts are by Lord Football, and Rusty!

Here's an example from retail for you.

Where I work, the senior managers, and some of the department managers, are salaried. This means they're paid one sum for a 39.5 hr week "but some overtime is expected relating to the needs of the company"

Over the Christmas period, the senior managers are expected to do 6 day weeks, putting most of them around or above the 48hr maximimum. they have no option in this, and dont get paid for it.

Steve, before you say it's for the benefit of the company, during this hard financial period, I should point out that the company is currently doing very well, and expending.

in addition to these official hours, senior management are on call over several nights a week, in case the fire/security alarms go off. Somne nights they don't have to do anything, but it means they can't relax with a drink just in case they get called out. This would add a further 20hrs each of standby hours.

Yes, they have the choice of quitting, but with the job market as it is they're basically being held by their balls! Where the company in trouble, then fine, it's in everybody's interest, but it's just greed, and gives an example of where this legislation can help.


Having said that, there's always a way around things, and you can guarantee it'll be found!

 

[steveo]

Steve, before you say it's for the benefit of the company, during this hard financial period, I should point out that the company is currently doing very well, and expending.

This is ok as long as the people making the extra effort are suitably rewarded. If they arent its a case of knuckling down until the job market improves and then going to work somewhere where they will be more valued.

 

[Einstein]

Business has to be profitable to carry on. If you think the business owner is taking to big a share of the profits, you can always do what he did and start your own business.

I work my a*se off for my company - and the thought of a 48 hour working week is just laughable. (Especially at the moment given I'm on holiday in the US and still working!)

If I didn't "want to" work excessive hours, then I quite simply wouldn't. If I felt I was not paid adequately then quite simply I would not work as hard. I work excessive hours as I want to enjoy the good things in life. I do not expect anyone to give me a payrise for doing a bad job or working basic hours.

To give everyone a payrise for quite frankly doing bugger all is absolutely absurd. If someone wants a payrise then go out and earn it !! Or alternatively as Steveo said start your own company.

I think I agree with every point Steveo has made on this thread so far, so please continue to keep reading my mind and posting my views. It saves me a lot of time! :)

 

[MK Shrimper]

Depends what you qualify as "good things" surely?

I value my life with Mrs MK and my free time. I value the occasional trips to Roots Hall and a few beers with mates. I don't wear designer clothes, or have a fancy car or even the latest gadgets and nor do I want them.

There's not much money left after the bills have been paid, but hey, I get to spend a great deal of time with the woman I love even if we just sit on the sofa and watch the telly.

 

[Benji91]

The "Land of the Free" USA is probably the most oppressed of people on this planet and we are headed that way also.

There's a lot of truth in this, just this morning on the 7 train the conductor ensured the train ran on time by bull whipping an old lady who took too long to board...... and the daily tazer shock from my boss came at 8:13am when i stopped working for a second to sneeze... be careful.... it will be you next.... Anyway - Got to go, me and the other brits are building a tunnel to escape........

 

[Aberdeen Shrimper]

Depends what you qualify as "good things" surely?

I value my life with Mrs MK and my free time. I value the occasional trips to Roots Hall and a few beers with mates. I don't wear designer clothes, or have a fancy car or even the latest gadgets and nor do I want them.

There's not much money left after the bills have been paid, but hey, I get to spend a great deal of time with the woman I love even if we just sit on the sofa and watch the telly.

Kind of agree with you on this one Paul, as long Senga and I are together, healthy, can pay the bills and have some treats that is all we are wanting out of life.

It is so important to have a healthy work life balance, not only so you can enjoy your life away from the work place but so that you can give 8 hours of quality work instead of 16 hours of substandard work.

 

[sufcintheprem]

Great post Tarquers old chap. At least some people are still living in the real world.

Surely this belongs in the irony thread, doesn't it?

 

[Einstein]

There's a lot of truth in this, just this morning on the 7 train the conductor ensured the train ran on time by bull whipping an old lady who took too long to board...... and the daily tazer shock from my boss came at 8:13am when i stopped working for a second to sneeze... be careful.... it will be you next.... Anyway - Got to go, me and the other brits are building a tunnel to escape........

Thanks for the warning. Will be extra careful as I'm just about to go and get on a metro in DC. I really hope I don't get whipped - well at least until I get home anyway.

 

[SARF]

bollocks.. get some hours in get up the corporate ladder.. get filthy rich retire at 45 ..

 

[Einstein]

Depends what you qualify as "good things" surely?

I don't wear designer clothes, or have a fancy car or even the latest gadgets and nor do I want them.

Of course, everyone determines "good things" as differently. However, obviously others have lower & higher expectations accordingly.

I would never pay an excessive amount for clothes, and don't even own a car let alone a fancy car. (A rusty old bike in NL does the job for me!). I do however enjoy being able to buy the latest computer gadgets, DVDs, whatever. Some gadgets/items I'd rather spend more money on as well, as I know they are more reliable and will save money further down the line.

but hey, I get to spend a great deal of time with the woman I love even if we just sit on the sofa and watch the telly.

And there's another difference. In my opinion, I'm not sure how anyone could determine sitting infront of the TV as 'quality time'.

I'd rather work hard, and if that means I don't see my missus for a night or two a week then fine. This would be substituted for several weekends/holidays away every year. Travelling and spending 48/72 hours or even a month of solid time together is a far tougher test on the strength of a relationship IMO. Travelling is one of my biggest pleasures in life and without working hard, I would not be able to do it. Spending time doing things you both really want to do is 'quality time' in my opinion.

48 hour rule has got no hope of being introduced in my life or within my company. (My company in no way forces anyone to work over and above the 40 contracted hours though. You'll just have more opportunities if you do.)

 

[Aberdeen Shrimper]

bollocks.. get some hours in get up the corporate ladder.. get filthy rich retire at 45 ..

And have a heart attack and die at 50

:D