work expects me to work through unpaid dinner hour

onlyforboards_2

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

On that basis you're travelling one way in their time and one way in yours

That doesn't make it reasonable! They are the employer! You do on average 8 hours a day in their time can they make you do an extra 8 in your own?
Being sat on a coach is not lunch when your lunch break is unpaid. In this context traveling is working.

moneysavingexpert79

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Put another way, you are on company time.

Exactly right. What the other guy is thinking is beyond me. His name must be Smithers.

looby-loo_2

Success and failure is determined by effort.

Oldernotwiser

moneysavingexpert79 wrote: »

Eg: If you were to go to a training day which required 3 hours of travel in the morning until 11am, training until 5pm, and the normal working day was 8-5, would you expect not to get paid for the return journey 5-8pm? Your employer did after all pay for you sitting on a bus 8-11am after all!
What nonsense!:rotfl:

No, I wouldn't expect to get paid for the extra travelling time, although I might well expect to get some TOIL or other goodwill gesture.

Some of your advice is totally irresponsible; I wouldn't want to encourage someone to risk their job because I enjoy feeling gung ho sitting at my keyboard! (Mind you, I wouldn't throw mindless insults around either!)

moneysavingexpert79

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

No, I wouldn't expect to get paid for the extra travelling time, although I might well expect to get some TOIL or other goodwill gesture.

Some of your advice is totally irresponsible; I wouldn't want to encourage someone to risk their job because I enjoy feeling gung ho sitting at my keyboard! (Mind you, I wouldn't throw mindless insults around either!)

TOIL is as good as getting paid, and will be the same expense to the employer, so they might as well pay you for it.

There is nothing irresponsible about standing up for yourself. Refusing to get on the bus when they arn't willing to pay is irresponsible on behalf of the employer. In the event of an accident on the bus during the lunch hour, would the employer be liable to pay compensation to her family because she wasn't actually 'at work' at the time / not getting paid for it? (I don't know, but it raises the question, and the question shouldn't have to be raised). If you can't take a joke, i.e. my 'advice' regarding bumping her head then that's your problem; my diagnosis is asperger's. (That's not an insult).

Rockporkchop

moneysavingexpert79 wrote: »

Yes it does, it makes perfect sense. He maybe could have said "you're not IN your own time." Does that make it any clearer?

Er, no it doesn't.

Are you currently employed, if you don't mind me asking? I must tell you how completely frustrating and annoying it is to work with people like yourself. All firms are struggling at the moment, and a bit of give and take is hardly taking a mile, as you describe it. Your attitude does nothing but promote bad feeling and misery, which is especially unhelpful in the current climate.

Also, I vaguely recall your sage wisdom on another thread where you said you pretended to be mentally ill when the debt collectors called. I was just wondering whether you are also doing the same thing on this thread?

onlyforboards_2

Rockporkchop wrote: »

Er, no it doesn't.

All firms are struggling at the moment, and a bit of give and take is hardly taking a mile, as you describe it.

Employees are also struggling too. Everyone wants to help their company if it means keeping themselves in employment. Some companies are taking advantage of the current climate to force their workforce to give up certain rights knowing they are more than likely to oblige though.
It is no good for anyone in the long-term. When things pick up employers expect more of their workforce and the workforce is resentful.

This section of the board might as well close down if eveytime someone posts a query about their working rights the standard reply becomes "put up with it we are in a recession".

chops22

If it's only a one off I would just go and eat the sarnie and listen to the speach. I get a lunch hour, sometimes I work it, sometimes I have an extra ten mins, sometimes I need to nip out and collect the kids etc.

Its all give and take. Are you not curious as to what the speech is about??

timmmers

If this were the same thing happening directly after work hours (in her own time again)...it would be obviously nonsense....no-one would be required to be there for no pay. The time of day makes only one difference....she needs to eat and be able to choose where and what.
She also may have errands like bill paying to do in her short lunch break (unpaid).

t

Rockporkchop

onlyforboards wrote: »

Employees are also struggling too. Everyone wants to help their company if it means keeping themselves in employment. Some companies are taking advantage of the current climate to force their workforce to give up certain rights knowing they are more than likely to oblige though.
It is no good for anyone in the long-term. When things pick up employers expect more of their workforce and the workforce is resentful.

This section of the board might as well close down if eveytime someone posts a query about their working rights the standard reply becomes "put up with it we are in a recession".

And you honestly believe that this particular company is being unreasonable by asking employees to spend just one isolated lunch hour on a coach eating a free lunch and chatting to the very same people they would usually be sharing their lunch hour in the break room with?

If it became a regular occurrence then that would be unreasonable but as a one off I don't think it is too much to ask.

I can bet I know what the meeting is about anyway.