work expects me to work through unpaid dinner hour

Bogof_Babe

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

Me too! In these times when so many people are out of work too!

But I'm thinking the OP is very young and so has that 'school rules', can't see past the nose on her face frame of mind so it's kind of understandable and most of us start off that way before we see how the real world is. She's got time to grow out of it - and she must grow out of it or limit her aspirations because that's dead-end job mentality and won't get you anywhere in life.

Most of all, I'm actually embarrassed that people from overseas will read this thread and think all those cliches they've heard about British workers are true!

Wish I could thank you twice for this post, it's the most succinct in the thread.

Attitudes like the OP's and several others on here are evidence of why the Great has gone from Great Britain, and it is a very sad indictment, not to mention a lousy example for the next generation.

People complain about immigrants coming here to do the jobs that no-one else wants to. It's beginning to make sense now why employers prefer them.

moneysavingexpert79

speedbird1973 wrote: »

So if I asked you to go to Barbados for a week on a business trip. You wouldn't go unless you could travel there, do your work and return between your contracted working hours. The last guy I sent there was working for 4 days from 7am until 7pm. Am I abusing him? or is he just happy to do a job, get well paid, keep our client happy and retain their business because we do the best we possibly can for them?

If you got 24 hours notice that you had to do a presentation for a client you'd stop working on it once your contracted day was over?

Is all that too much for you moneysavingexpert79?

1) Your examples can no way be compared to the original thread. However, I would also expect to be paid for travelling time, and for all my expenses (food, taxis, etc) to be paid for. I would also expect to be paid unsociable hours and overnight stay allowance.

2) If I got 24 hours notice to do a presentation for a client, and this wasn't enough time, I would expect TOIL for the amount of extra time it had taken me to do the work in my own time. I would also expect my boss to be extremely thankful. Otherwise, he/she can do it themselves. If not, it can't be that important.

3) Why would you expect 'that' to be too much for me?

Bogof_Babe

moneysavingexpert79 wrote: »

1) Your examples can no way be compared to the original thread. However, I would also expect to be paid for travelling time, and for all my expenses (food, taxis, etc) to be paid for. I would also expect to be paid unsociable hours and overnight stay allowance.

2) If I got 24 hours notice to do a presentation for a client, and this wasn't enough time, I would expect TOIL for the amount of extra time it had taken me to do the work in my own time. I would also expect my boss to be extremely thankful. Otherwise, he/she can do it themselves. If not, it can't be that important.

3) Why would you expect 'that' to be too much for me?

Some people seem to be overlooking the fact that the balance of power lies with the employer not the employee.

You wouldn't get very far in an unfair dismissal tribunal if it came out that you were totally inflexible and considered the job was there for your benefit, not the other way round.

It's plain greed and selfishness not to be prepared to put yourself out just a tiny little bit to accommodate the needs of your employer, for once in your life. Your comments demonstrate the difference between a professional approach and a wage slave.

And the sandwiches probably won't be "scabby" - language like that does nothing to add to your argument.

DaisyFlower

pinkkiss wrote: »

Wondering if anyone can give me advice. Im thinking of taking my dinner hour anyway but just want to make sure i cant get a diciplinary for it !

i work in a call centre for a major insurence company (not sure if im allowed to post their name)
On mondays i normally work between 8 - 5, with an unpaid dinner hour at 1:30 (and a paid 20 min break at 11:15).
Tomorrow, i am bein sent to hear a 'speach' by one of the main bosses, along with a few hundred other employees, all from different areas of the company. Its being held at a venue 45 mins from my normal place of work.
They are providing a coach, picking us up at 8:30 and will be dropped back off at work at 1:30.

Now we were told on friday that instead of getting a dinner hour on this day, we will be given a sandwich and bag of crisps to eat on the coach on the way back.
Is this legal?
I asked our union rep and she said its illegal but its too short notice for them to do anything about it.
It doesnt seem fair, since the dinner hour is unpaid
Also dont appreciate having to work 9 hours on just a sandwich and bag of crisps!

Also the part time people who normally finish at 12:30 are getting paid for an extra hour because they wont get back until 1:30.

I asked my manager if i could meet my collegue (who is also going) at 9 o clock near her house so she could drive us to the place where the speach is being held (it doesnt start until half 10). My manager said no, because my shift starts at 8 o clock, i have to come and take calls for the 1st half an hour.
If im spending a hour of my time travelling to my normal place of work, surely if they want me to travel to another place it should be done in their time ??

Your travelling time to work is irrelevant, you took the job so your choice to have to travel in.

I actually cant believe you approached the union re what looks like a one off of travelling through your lunch hour, they are providing lunch so that nobody misses out on eating etc.

What s work shy nation we are becoming when complaints are made re things so trivial.

speedbird1973

moneysavingexpert79 wrote: »

1) Your examples can no way be compared to the original thread. However, I would also expect to be paid for travelling time, and for all my expenses (food, taxis, etc) to be paid for. I would also expect to be paid unsociable hours and overnight stay allowance.

2) If I got 24 hours notice to do a presentation for a client, and this wasn't enough time, I would expect TOIL for the amount of extra time it had taken me to do the work in my own time. I would also expect my boss to be extremely thankful. Otherwise, he/she can do it themselves. If not, it can't be that important.

3) Why would you expect 'that' to be too much for me?

But it IS too much for you!! If you're on a salary on you're on a salary. You don't get unsocial hours, you don't get paid for your travelling time, although we'd expect you to travel on a working day not a weekend. And expenses are of course covered. But you're not on the clock. I'm afraid that's how the more successful, lucrative professions work, don't like it go to McDonalds.

In reference to number 2. No chance, you'd get a thankful boss and beer or two in the pub, but you don't get TOIL or overtime. That said our people work at home when it works for all of us. If they need to leave early then they can do, if they struggle to get into work for one reason or another they're not penalised. They get short term sick leave at full pay so long as they don't take the p1ss.

It's all about give and take. Sounds to me like you have no idea what "effort" is. Fortunatly, people like are you are dead easy to spot in an interview!

what do you do? (genuinly interested)

moneysavingexpert79

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Some people seem to be overlooking the fact that the balance of power lies with the employer not the employee.

You wouldn't get very far in an unfair dismissal tribunal if it came out that you were totally inflexible and considered the job was there for your benefit, not the other way round.

It's plain greed and selfishness not to be prepared to put yourself out just a tiny little bit to accommodate the needs of your employer, for once in your life. Your comments demonstrate the difference between a professional approach and a wage slave.

And the sandwiches probably won't be "scabby" - language like that does nothing to add to your argument.

The balance of power does NOT lie with the employer. It is a mutual agreement with no favourability of power, enforced by a contract of employment.

It's nothing about being inflexible - it's about getting paid for participating in duties that are demanded by the employer. I have already said that the employer's request isn't anything unreasonable, but the fact that they are not paying for the hour IS unreasonable. I would also expect the lunch to be paid for.

By 'professional approach' I presume you mean butt muncher. The salary that someone is on in a call centre doesn't warrant a 'professional approach' when the employer is trying to CHEAT their way out of paying probably 100's of employees for 1 hour's worth of wages. It is obvious they have thought this through, and have chosen not to pay the employees, saving them £1000's.

Are you a sandwich maker by trade? Why do you take offence regarding my reference to factory made sandwiches as 'scabby'? And I can bet, if they arn't paying their employees out of choice for this hour, then they'll have phoned the cheapest, scabbiest sandwich company of them all.

moneysavingexpert79

speedbird1973 wrote: »

I'm afraid that's how the more successful, lucrative professions work...

Working in a call centre is not a successful or lucrative profession, which is what the original post is about. With the hourly wage / salary she is on (she didn't specify) then that hour of her time is valuable. If you're on a monster salary then things like this can be taken on the chin, however much of a bain they are. When you're on less than £10 an hour like this lady is probably on, and you know your boss is on £30k+ and are making the decision not to pay you, then it's time to stand up for the little man.

speedbird1973

it's partly my fault for using a different type of job as an example! However, what's to stop someone in a call centre being successful. It's a step away from bigger less rapid telesales, which is a step away from real sales (if that floats your boat). But you need the right attitude to start with. The employer is asking for not much at all, and giving the equivolent amount of not much back! fuss about nothing!

moneysavingexpert79

speedbird1973 wrote: »

fuss about nothing!

Then just pay her to what she is entitled to by law. Like I have already said, if the employer had done the right, proper and lawful thing to begin with, and pay her for the hour, then this post wouldn't exist.

Zazen999

moneysavingexpert79 wrote: »

Then just pay her to what she is entitled to by law. Like I have already said, if the employer had done the right, proper and lawful thing to begin with, and pay her for the hour, then this post wouldn't exist.

Is this on top of the 20 minutes PAID break that the OP gets every day?

As I said earlier; we should all choose our fights carefully. The employer would be well within their rights to start looking at this paid break time in a cost cutting exercise if staff are inflexible on other time issues.