Arriving at work early
Discussion
GT03ROB said:
Not sure HMRC are interested.
I guess I've never worked in an environment where people are strict on start finish times, you get in when you get in you leave when you feel you've done a fair days work. It's give & take, but I find those that show the most rigidity generally do less well. However I do feel that if you need to be in 15mins early to get set up that should be on the companies dime.
I can assure you (from first hand experience at 3 different companies) that they are v interested if it would mean companies are effectively paying less than the minimum wage. I guess I've never worked in an environment where people are strict on start finish times, you get in when you get in you leave when you feel you've done a fair days work. It's give & take, but I find those that show the most rigidity generally do less well. However I do feel that if you need to be in 15mins early to get set up that should be on the companies dime.
Also, looking at it from the other end of the day, using the employer’s logic then presumably the company is okay that you can stop working 15 minutes early so you can be fully logged off ready to leave at 5pm?
Tall_Paul said:
I also worked in a call centre that had similar rules, however the be signed in and ready to take your first call at 9am rule is there for a reason and is reasonable.....
It’s not unreasonable for a call centre to expect you to start taking calls dead on 9. What is unreasonable is expecting you to do the setup prep in your own time and unpaid.Why dont they set the start time as 8:45. If there is a reasonable amount of setup required that takes some time - surely this is part of the job and should be paid.
Some might say ‘whats the harm, it’s only 15 minutes.......but by the same token, if it’s so insignificant, then whats the harm paying somebody for those 15 minutes. Surely that argument works both ways.
I have seen attitudes change on this during the last 20 years.
Back in the day, doing extra hours was seen as necessary if you wanted to get on and seek promotion. If you weren't doing extra hours, then it was seen as you had capacity to do more.
I used to regularly do 12 hour days for no extra recompense at all. If you weren't willing to do this, you were seen as inflexible and didn't last long.
Thankfully, some time ago, attitudes changed. People would only do overtime if it was paid. Managers would seek to have the correct structure around them so they could leave on time and actually have a life.
The modern way is to have the necessary structure and planning in place so that one does a full day's work in the hours you are supposed to work in (i.e 0900-1700) People who do long hours are seen as unorganised, unless that time can't be foreseen - be that because of the job you're in or because of circumstance (3rd party-caused crisis)
I like the flexibility I have now. I come in early out of choice - it means I beat the traffic - but if I want to, I can go early. I don't feel the need to stay for appearance's sake.
I don't expect hours 'back' for when I'm travelling with work, nor do I expect to be paid extra. But I expect flexibility back if I need to do something or be somewhere outside of work. It's give and take and a sign of trust.
For our operators, we always tell them that they should be at their desk, working at 0900. This was because some people would interpret their 0900 start time as literally when they should walk through the front door, after which point they would spend 20 minutes removing coats, stowing lunch, making tea, firing up PC and logging on to phones.
These were generally the same people that took their lunch break for an hour, then came back to the office and spent another 15 minutes eating a sandwich at their desk 'working' when in reality they were scoffing and gossiping with their workmates.
Same for the warehouse, they clock on when they step on to the shop floor, after they have got changed, packed stuff away, etc and clock off when they leave the shop floor.
Having said that, if it took 10 minutes for the Admin department's computers to get going, I would expect to be asked to reduce that time to something more reasonable and would agree with them.
Back in the day, doing extra hours was seen as necessary if you wanted to get on and seek promotion. If you weren't doing extra hours, then it was seen as you had capacity to do more.
I used to regularly do 12 hour days for no extra recompense at all. If you weren't willing to do this, you were seen as inflexible and didn't last long.
Thankfully, some time ago, attitudes changed. People would only do overtime if it was paid. Managers would seek to have the correct structure around them so they could leave on time and actually have a life.
The modern way is to have the necessary structure and planning in place so that one does a full day's work in the hours you are supposed to work in (i.e 0900-1700) People who do long hours are seen as unorganised, unless that time can't be foreseen - be that because of the job you're in or because of circumstance (3rd party-caused crisis)
I like the flexibility I have now. I come in early out of choice - it means I beat the traffic - but if I want to, I can go early. I don't feel the need to stay for appearance's sake.
I don't expect hours 'back' for when I'm travelling with work, nor do I expect to be paid extra. But I expect flexibility back if I need to do something or be somewhere outside of work. It's give and take and a sign of trust.
For our operators, we always tell them that they should be at their desk, working at 0900. This was because some people would interpret their 0900 start time as literally when they should walk through the front door, after which point they would spend 20 minutes removing coats, stowing lunch, making tea, firing up PC and logging on to phones.
These were generally the same people that took their lunch break for an hour, then came back to the office and spent another 15 minutes eating a sandwich at their desk 'working' when in reality they were scoffing and gossiping with their workmates.
Same for the warehouse, they clock on when they step on to the shop floor, after they have got changed, packed stuff away, etc and clock off when they leave the shop floor.
Having said that, if it took 10 minutes for the Admin department's computers to get going, I would expect to be asked to reduce that time to something more reasonable and would agree with them.
As we’ve seen from the thread though, the negatives of this company doing this far outweigh any positives in cost savings.
The OP thinks his employer is taking the piss. He/she isn’t going to have much good will towards the business, they’re not going to help out or point out cost savings or help innovate or motivate others.
People will go sick more be less efficient and generally the company will suffer as a result of not having motivated and engaged employees.
It’s all old rubbish management where stuff like goodwill isn’t valued as it can’t be quantified on some spreadsheet.
The OP thinks his employer is taking the piss. He/she isn’t going to have much good will towards the business, they’re not going to help out or point out cost savings or help innovate or motivate others.
People will go sick more be less efficient and generally the company will suffer as a result of not having motivated and engaged employees.
It’s all old rubbish management where stuff like goodwill isn’t valued as it can’t be quantified on some spreadsheet.
Moonhawk said:
Tall_Paul said:
I also worked in a call centre that had similar rules, however the be signed in and ready to take your first call at 9am rule is there for a reason and is reasonable.....
It’s not unreasonable for a call centre to expect you to start taking calls dead on 9. What is unreasonable is expecting you to do the setup prep in your own time and unpaid.Why dont they set the start time as 8:45. If there is a reasonable amount of setup required that takes some time - surely this is part of the job and should be paid.
Some might say ‘whats the harm, it’s only 15 minutes.......but by the same token, if it’s so insignificant, then whats the harm paying somebody for those 15 minutes. Surely that argument works both ways.
OP, does it say in your contract of employment what your working hours are, or what your contracted hours per week are?
Hi all,
I get paid for 40 hrs a week.
I’m going to raise this with my manager but I need a solid piece of evidence from somewhere like ACAS/gov uk which specifies that this isn’t allowed.
The computers are old hence why they take 10mins to boot, then an extra 5 mins for us to set up the systems.
If we sign in a minute later than our starting time we are told to ‘come in earlier’ so our systems can be up and running.
If anyone could provide me with any links on legislation for this I would be extremely grateful
I get paid for 40 hrs a week.
I’m going to raise this with my manager but I need a solid piece of evidence from somewhere like ACAS/gov uk which specifies that this isn’t allowed.
The computers are old hence why they take 10mins to boot, then an extra 5 mins for us to set up the systems.
If we sign in a minute later than our starting time we are told to ‘come in earlier’ so our systems can be up and running.
If anyone could provide me with any links on legislation for this I would be extremely grateful
The meaning pursuant to the WTR
Meaning of working time
The concept of "working time" is relevant to the WTR 1998 rules on the average maximum working week, night working, rest periods and rest breaks. Working time is defined as:
Any period during which the worker is:
working;
carrying out his duties; and
at the employer's disposal.
(All three criteria must be met.)
Meaning of working time
The concept of "working time" is relevant to the WTR 1998 rules on the average maximum working week, night working, rest periods and rest breaks. Working time is defined as:
Any period during which the worker is:
working;
carrying out his duties; and
at the employer's disposal.
(All three criteria must be met.)
Jasandjules said:
The meaning pursuant to the WTR
Meaning of working time
The concept of "working time" is relevant to the WTR 1998 rules on the average maximum working week, night working, rest periods and rest breaks. Working time is defined as:
Any period during which the worker is:
working;
carrying out his duties; and
at the employer's disposal.
(All three criteria must be met.)
So in my case,Meaning of working time
The concept of "working time" is relevant to the WTR 1998 rules on the average maximum working week, night working, rest periods and rest breaks. Working time is defined as:
Any period during which the worker is:
working;
carrying out his duties; and
at the employer's disposal.
(All three criteria must be met.)
Do you think I would have a leg to stand on?
Yes the relevant question is generally whether or not you are present at a place required by the employer and able to work. Would you like some ECJ caselaw?
But if you really want to do anything about it then you want to speak to an employment lawyer who can assist you as their client.
But if you really want to do anything about it then you want to speak to an employment lawyer who can assist you as their client.
Edited by Jasandjules on Wednesday 24th October 19:43
Just as a useless comment can I throw teachers into the mix.
They are paid for 1265 hours over 195 days each year but are also required to "undertake additional hours to fulfil their professional duties".
So what should work out to a paid 6.5 hour day, (32.5 hour week excluding breaks and lunch) rapidly becomes the infamous 50+ hour week some teachers do.
Should they be paid for more hours?
They are paid for 1265 hours over 195 days each year but are also required to "undertake additional hours to fulfil their professional duties".
So what should work out to a paid 6.5 hour day, (32.5 hour week excluding breaks and lunch) rapidly becomes the infamous 50+ hour week some teachers do.
Should they be paid for more hours?
Jasandjules said:
Yes the relevant question is generally whether or not you are present at a place required by the employer and able to work. Would you like some ECJ caselaw?
But if you really want to do anything about it then you want to speak to an employment lawyer who can assist you as their client.
Hi, yes I need as much info as I can get at this stage.But if you really want to do anything about it then you want to speak to an employment lawyer who can assist you as their client.
Edited by Jasandjules on Wednesday 24th October 19:43
Although my fear is, if I was to approach management with this they may see me as a problem and I could be tarnished for my remaining time there.
This is regarding being on call however the ECJ decided that as long as the worker was where the employer wanted (i.e. in the workplace) and ready for work, that was part of their hours.
http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2003/C15102.h...
http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2003/C15102.h...
James_B said:
Countdown said:
Conversely, what happens if you’re perfectly happy with the job that you’re doing, you like your team, you tolerate your boss, the money pays for a nice home/car/ couple of holidays a year, the Mrs works part time so it’s all comfortable thanks?
Then that’s great, but you have to be a bit “special” to think that salaried people (I.e. not on an hourly rate) are being taken for mugs for doing hours that don’t match their contract.It’s how some jobs work, very good pay, but with it being normal to work a longer week.
You’re no more of a mug being contracted to 37 hours, working 50, and being paid £250,000 a year than you are by working exactly what your contract says and getting £10 an hour.
Some posters above seem to think that nearly everyone in the law, medicine, banking etc must be a mug as they’ve chosen to do the extra hours in order to do well in a job that pays such good money.
I just don’t see it.
I’m not sure about banking or law but I’m not sure it’s a great idea for a Doctor or Nurse to be pulling very long shifts on a regular basis. In fact it would be pretty risky.
I think the whole start/end work times are a bit of a fluid thing, depending on the role you do.
My employees have to start work at 8:30 and finish at 5pm. By start work I mean actually be working on cars at 8:30.
Putting their lunch in the fridge, hanging their coats up, fiddling with the workshop radio, getting changed into work clothes, getting a cup of tea, and everything else that precedes actually 'working' is to be done prior to 8:30.
I know it's fairly standard for people who work in industrial or factory type roles to have to do all their getting changed into PPE and suchlike BEFORE their shift, and paid time, starts.
Before I owned my own business, I was 'middle management' (for want of a better expression) for a large company, and I regularly worked several hours a week more than my contact hours, because thats just what you do to progress up the ladder in business. I think we all accept that. I was completely fine with it, and did progress. I noted that those who kicked up a stink about it were the ones that didn't ever progress...
I often feel that our country still harbours some kind of militant trade-union view about being employed, and almost feel that it is their right to clock into the office while walking in at 9am, before spending the next 15 minutes hanging their coat up, going and making a cup of tea, chatting to collages, and so on, which is clearly just skiving in my opinion.
I would sum it all up quite simply as this: If you don't like where you work, or the rules they have, just leave. Work somewhere else that suits you. You aren't a prisoner.
My employees have to start work at 8:30 and finish at 5pm. By start work I mean actually be working on cars at 8:30.
Putting their lunch in the fridge, hanging their coats up, fiddling with the workshop radio, getting changed into work clothes, getting a cup of tea, and everything else that precedes actually 'working' is to be done prior to 8:30.
I know it's fairly standard for people who work in industrial or factory type roles to have to do all their getting changed into PPE and suchlike BEFORE their shift, and paid time, starts.
Before I owned my own business, I was 'middle management' (for want of a better expression) for a large company, and I regularly worked several hours a week more than my contact hours, because thats just what you do to progress up the ladder in business. I think we all accept that. I was completely fine with it, and did progress. I noted that those who kicked up a stink about it were the ones that didn't ever progress...
I often feel that our country still harbours some kind of militant trade-union view about being employed, and almost feel that it is their right to clock into the office while walking in at 9am, before spending the next 15 minutes hanging their coat up, going and making a cup of tea, chatting to collages, and so on, which is clearly just skiving in my opinion.
I would sum it all up quite simply as this: If you don't like where you work, or the rules they have, just leave. Work somewhere else that suits you. You aren't a prisoner.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 24th October 21:22
Lord Marylebone said:
I would sum it all up quite simply as this: If you don't like where you work, or the rules they have, just leave. Work somewhere else that suits you. You aren't a prisoner.
Whereas I would sum it up quite simply as: If you don't like the UK employment laws, don't be an employer.....Jasandjules said:
Lord Marylebone said:
I would sum it all up quite simply as this: If you don't like where you work, or the rules they have, just leave. Work somewhere else that suits you. You aren't a prisoner.
Whereas I would sum it up quite simply as: If you don't like the UK employment laws, don't be an employer.....As an employer, I know that I operate well within the law. But more importantly, I know my employees are happy working for me.
What I will say is that the law is a little vague on time spent before the actual employee clock-in time.
Courts have previously decided that "10 minutes per day" of carrying out tasks before starting work is acceptable, however not all cases taken to court will agree with that definition.
Where I am its fairly relaxed, get through the door at 8, we generally don't start doing productive work for 10 or so minutes unless continuing something from the evening before, have 15 min tea break, lunch for 30-60minutes, another 15 min tea break and out the door at 4:30-5 depending on how long lunch was.
This includes time to clear up and pack away, we generally do that around 4:15 to 4:45.
As long as you make up the hours and dont take the p, you'll be alright.
Overtime is paid although before now i have stayed behind for 30 minutes tidying stuff up or a few hours and not claimed overtime.
This includes time to clear up and pack away, we generally do that around 4:15 to 4:45.
As long as you make up the hours and dont take the p, you'll be alright.
Overtime is paid although before now i have stayed behind for 30 minutes tidying stuff up or a few hours and not claimed overtime.
WinstonWolf said:
The Selfish Gene said:
We don't all stuff chickens on an assembly line pal x x
That's the new PH frozen sausages right there...El stovey said:
The Selfish Gene said:
wow
oh my - me thinks you don't understand. I am the employer - I have clients. No brown nosing required. Not even considered.
We do what is necessary to succeed.
What we do is hugely important, and we are rewarded accordingly.
As for being inefficient - we don't all stuff chickens on an assembly line pal x x
oh my - me thinks you don't understand. I am the employer - I have clients. No brown nosing required. Not even considered.
We do what is necessary to succeed.
What we do is hugely important, and we are rewarded accordingly.
As for being inefficient - we don't all stuff chickens on an assembly line pal x x
What’s this hugely important job?
El stovey said:
As we’ve seen from the thread though, the negatives of this company doing this far outweigh any positives in cost savings.
The OP thinks his employer is taking the piss. He/she isn’t going to have much good will towards the business, they’re not going to help out or point out cost savings or help innovate or motivate others.
People will go sick more be less efficient and generally the company will suffer as a result of not having motivated and engaged employees.
It’s all old rubbish management where stuff like goodwill isn’t valued as it can’t be quantified on some spreadsheet.
Exactly this - and more.The OP thinks his employer is taking the piss. He/she isn’t going to have much good will towards the business, they’re not going to help out or point out cost savings or help innovate or motivate others.
People will go sick more be less efficient and generally the company will suffer as a result of not having motivated and engaged employees.
It’s all old rubbish management where stuff like goodwill isn’t valued as it can’t be quantified on some spreadsheet.
I was a technician for a world player electronics research company and with familiarity and time discovered improvements to established manufacturing process that might yield performance gains and reduced manufacturing losses from experimental and pilot production processes.
Company ethos was very much unless you had a first degree or better still a Phd and were employed on a scientist contract technicians and operators on lab rat contracts were just a waste of oxygen and office space.
Curious to see what the outcome might be I documented one improvement and designed experiments to quantify it. Upshot was it worked gaining a six figure annual saving for the company with management taking much of the credit and me getting a thinly veiled arse chewing for messing with their expensive toys and precious things of the lab.
After that I kept the others very much to myself and only "discovered" and implemented the rest years later following a big change of management and salary level.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff