ok to sign Working Time Directive form?

bob_dob

Well after making redundancies late last year it's odd really-
there is lots of overtime, people aren't doing enough of it, i believe. I have never seen the place as busy. They have introduced a bonus system with overtime to encourage people to do it but not everyone is taking them up on it.......however, we are regularly running out of such things as toilet roll and soap (the rumour...and i know what you guys will say about rumours....is that they are struggling to pay the bills for such things).

So not signing the WDT opt out (which is optional) is reason enough to make employees redundant then?

anamenottaken

bob_dob wrote: »

Just to confirm, the 'revised' WTD opt out form has been re-issued to the workforce who didn't sign the original and the ONLY thing that has been changed is the addition of 'If i change my mind, I will give my employer one months notice in writing to end this agreement'.

So, together, this is the final paragraph-
'This agreement will remain in force for the duration of my employment with X If i change my mind, i will give my employer one months notice in writing to end this agreement'

I dont see anything improved to warrant signing this.

Any thoughts please?

My thought is that you should remove your employer's name from the post.

bob_dob

Done!!
Thank you!!

bob_dob

Hi, thanks for the answer.

I might be wrong but i find it difficult to believe how a company could ever legitamise docking points off an employee for being 'inflexible' for deciding not to take up his/her option to opt-out of the WTD. After all, the WTD is there for a good reason- an employees health!

liney

Alternatively if they are put in the position that they have to take on new staff to order to meet demand, then an overtime ban could ensue.

How would people feel living on their basic pay after being used to overtime whenever they liked?

chainsaw

My advice is you should sign the form.

I suspect its very unlikely you will work an average 48hr week over 17 weeks so there is nothing to be gained by not signing but you could wind your employers up by not signing.

If you found that you were working more than the 48 hr week and didn't want to then you could opt out with a months notice anyway.

bob_dob

Well Liney, fortunately a 'ban' on overtime for those who haven't signed the form is illegal so that is highly unlikely to happen.
Chainsaw- fortunately advice has been taken by the workforce from ACAS and two different Unions+all 3 advise strongly against signing it. The main reason being our working week could be changed from 40 hours to 60 hourse, hence no overtime being paid. Doesn't sound much of an incentive now does it? ;o)

liney

bob_dob wrote: »

Well Liney, fortunately a 'ban' on overtime for those who haven't signed the form is illegal so that is highly unlikely to happen.
Chainsaw- fortunately advice has been taken by the workforce from ACAS and two different Unions+all 3 advise strongly against signing it. The main reason being our working week could be changed from 40 hours to 60 hourse, hence no overtime being paid. Doesn't sound much of an incentive now does it? ;o)

If the employer takes on more staff because the workforce are unwilling to sign Opt Outs and they fear a senario where they are unable to meet demand, there could simply be no overtime available anymore. That is not an illegal act: the 'ban' would apply to everyone equally.

I'm not saying that will happen, simply that it could happen.

There is also the possibility that the company may consider changing it's working hours anyway, and they don't need you to sign an Opt Out in order for them to do so.

chainsaw

Bob Dob



I have also contacted ACAS, a high level member of one of the Unions responsible for bringing a number of test cases, CAB, HSE and BIS whose job it is to introduce the WTD / WTR in England.

I have spent many hours researching the subject and have learned that all of these organisations and others have their own agenda's which don't usually involve helping you or introducing the working time regulations.

I contacted ACAS a couple of years ago who told me my interpretation of the WTD was right but that European law would change soon so they were ignoring it. When the European Parliament overwhelmingly voted to for the status quo I contacted ACAS again who said they would still continue to ignore it in case it changed in the future.

I contacted BIS whose job it is to enforced the WTD. They told me that people would have to fight test cases individually and each case would only apply to that company. In my opinion BIS are working on behalf of the government trying not to introduce the WTR.

The problem as I see it is if the WTD was implemented in full the country would go bust, all sorts of essential services would find themselves short of staff. Doctors nurses police and so on

Bob there is not a chance your company would make your working week 60 hours instead of 40 hours without paying you overtime.. Whoever told you that is an idiot. Apart from all the other reasons it would not happen everyone would simply opt back into a 48 hour week if your company tried to do that

If your company was going to make you work a 60 hour week without overtime why don’t they make you do a 48 hour week now without overtime?

[FONT=&quot]You asked why suddenly after all these years your company is asking you to sign the opt out. I would suggest that the weight of all the test cases and from Europe is meaning companies are now having to take notice.

Having said all that telling you not to sign is not bad advice, I just thought as it made little difference either way and you seemed to be worried about refusing to sign then why not do it.
[/FONT]

bob_dob

Hello all.
Just an update- apparently our manager is making a list of all employees and recording how many hours overtime each employee is doing over a 17week period (as he should, really).
My question is this- am i correct in thinking that unpaid breaks (we have 30 minutes dinner time) and any holidays taken should be included in this calculation over the 17 week period?