Advice on part time employer not giving breaks

[LCR265]

Hi all,

Just after some advice/views on the situation..

A friend has recently started working at a bar/restaurant chain that sounds similar to "The Snail and Lettuce". The problem is that they don't seem to understand what a break is, and since she began working there, she's done at least 10 shifts of 8+ hours work where they have been claiming she is not entitled to a break.

From what I've read online, you are entitled to a 20 minute break for every 6+ hours of work - her colleagues and superiors have said this doesn't apply to bar/restaurant work?

Also, they don't give her 11 hour gaps between shifts (sometimes finishing at 2:30am and starting again at 12pm).

Is anybody able to give any advice on who's correct, and how to approach the situation without causing problems? (She has already enquired about breaks several times).

Thanks

ETA: Sorry mods, only just spotted the employment section.

Edited by LCR265 on Sunday 7th October 00:06

[Tumbler]

What does her contract state?

[davepoth]

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/W...

http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/workingtime.htm

There it is. No exceptions for working in a bar, however there is an exception if there's a shift change. It's worth mentioning that the only real recourse she'll have is to quit if she doesn't like it; if she puts in a grievance I should imagine she'll fail her probationary period and that will be that anyway.

[NoNeed]

It is a statatuary right and if i were that person I would make a written request as if fired for aking would make it an automatic unfair dismissal. First though I would seek the advice of a lawyer and maybe even ask them to deal with it just to make sure the ground i was on is as solid as i believe.

[LCR265]

Would the contract be able to remove her basic employee rights?

I thought as much, she is already in the process of looking else where. Quite poor for a chain with 80+ bars, although I suspect it's extremely common amongst people who don't know their rights.

[icetea]

LCR265 said:

Would the contract be able to remove her basic employee rights?

No, a contract can't opt you out of legal rights like this so she is certainly due a break no matter what a contract, her boss or co-workers say.


If she complains its pretty obvious that they're going to find a way to get rid of her as a trouble maker... I'd be more inclined to keep my mouth shut till I had another job lined up. Then report the place to the appropriate authorities as I was leaving.

[The Moose]

A friend of mine works in the industry. Just asked his opinion and he said "tough st, that's the industry. Get on with it or fk off"

Take from that what you will

[davepoth]

NoNeed said:

It is a statatuary right and if i were that person I would make a written request as if fired for aking would make it an automatic unfair dismissal. First though I would seek the advice of a lawyer and maybe even ask them to deal with it just to make sure the ground i was on is as solid as i believe.

Sounds like she's within the first 12 months - so sacking her holds pretty much no fear for the employer. I'd be amazed if many staff lasted to 12 months on that basis.

[anonymous-user]

Incorrect: all workers are protected against detriment arising from asserting rights under the Working Time Directive, from the commencement of employment (section 45A Employment Rights Act 1996). The employee can and should complain. If dismissed, she will have a solid claim.

[Ekona]

With regards to the 8 hours between shifts, is the rota actually written down as a 2:30am finish? When I was in catering the usual trick was to end the shift officially at 11:30pm, but there was no chance you'd actually get to leave at that time as the place would still be a mess. You had to stay behind for another hour or so to get everything tidy, and always without pay.

Not really fair, but it was generally accepted by all.

[shunaphil]

Breadvan72 said:

Incorrect: all workers are protected against detriment arising from asserting rights under the Working Time Directive, from the commencement of employment (section 45A Employment Rights Act 1996). The employee can and should complain. If dismissed, she will have a solid claim.

But surely, inside the 12 month period she could be dismissed for 'something else' (and no reason need be given) , thus the employer can neatly sidestep above quoted?

[anonymous-user]

A Tribunal may readily draw the inference that a dismissal is connected to the assertion of a protected right. Contrived cases are usually detectable.

[davepoth]

Breadvan72 said:

A Tribunal may readily draw the inference that a dismissal is connected to the assertion of a protected right. Contrived cases are usually detectable.

If the company are the type that regularly "manages" people out of the business they'll have it down pat; a nice fat disciplinary file would be prepared one way or another before they let her go a week before 12 months' service.

[Dangerous Dan]

Is this establishment based in Bath.

If so, I know the manager, and he is a .

[NoNeed]

davepoth said:

NoNeed said:

It is a statutory right and if i were that person I would make a written request as if fired for aking would make it an automatic unfair dismissal. First though I would seek the advice of a lawyer and maybe even ask them to deal with it just to make sure the ground i was on is as solid as i believe.

Sounds like she's within the first 12 months - so sacking her holds pretty much no fear for the employer. I'd be amazed if many staff lasted to 12 months on that basis.

Less than twelve months mean nothing in cases where statutory rights are broken as tribunals are available in those cases.

Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 7th October 11:13

[anonymous-user]

Against any dodges attempted by the employer, the Tribunal would have evidence that the employer had breached its working time obligations, and that the employee had complained of this. This would likely temper the Tribunal's view of a contrived reason for dismissal.

[davepoth]

Breadvan72 said:

Against any dodges attempted by the employer, the Tribunal would have evidence that the employer had breached its working time obligations, and that the employee had complained of this. This would likely temper the Tribunal's view of a contrived reason for dismissal.

Of course. But if the employer is any good at being a heartless slavedriver he will know that he can counter that with a big fat HR file full of disciplinary issues. I agree that sacking her within a couple of days of moaning about the hours would look pretty damning, but four or five months down the line with a "documented history of disciplinary issues" would be a different matter surely?

[anonymous-user]

I would fancy my chances of persuading the Tribunal that manufactured complaints have been manufactured, whether by employer or employee. So should any experienced advocate.

[PAULJ5555]

Set up a hotmail address and e-mail head office/manager/whoever and remind them of the law and also what is happening in certain bars.

Also mention that it will not look good if someone lets slip to the press.