Exploitation and no lunch hour.

ILW

ceridwen wrote: »

Errr...HELLO!!!! - because 3 meals a day is the norm in our Society - ie breakfast, lunch and dinner.

I find this most odd that someone could even think in terms of someone who worked, say, 9-5 not having a break for lunch at some point 12 noon - 1pm. In our society - lunchbreak starts at some point between 12 noon and 1pm and lasts at least half an hour. That is what is necessary. That is what is the norm. It is entirely fair to expect to have this lunchbreak too.

If someone starts work at, say, 9am and works for less than 6 hours - then that is their decision and THEIR decision only as to whether to forego a lunchbreak (ie because the law doesnt allow for a lunchbreak unless someone has worked at least 6 hours) - but it is not up to anyone else to decide that one does not require a lunchbreak at lunchbreak time.

Blimey, we seem to have reverted to 1957.

ceridwen

Emmzi wrote: »

Then get a doctors note spellingout what the illness/ condition you have is that requires regular feeding. Then discuss it with your employer.

WHAT??????!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek:

It comes with the territory - ie having a body that requires feeding at regular intervals. It's not an illness to need a meal at mealtime - I've never heard that one before....:rotfl:

Certainly there are, at least, a large number of people who HAVE to have a meal pretty promptly at mealtime. That is - because if we don't - then we come over feeling more or less weak and a bit ill. That is entirely normal - and not a symptom of being ill forgawdsake.

I know this - because I'm one of the MANY people who HAVE to have a meal each mealtime without fail - because otherwise I will feel weak/sick/a bit ill (delete as appropriate). But - I can assure you I am perfectly healthy and perfectly normal - and our bodies are quite right too on insisting that "Its mealtime - so eat". Mother Nature's way of looking after us and making sure we don't get ill.:D

I'm horrified actually at anyone thinking we should expect our bodies to go straight through a "mealtime" and not eat and would consider we were ill for needing a meal at mealtime.:eek:. Didnt think there was much left that would shock me by now - but that certainly does...

ceridwen

ILW wrote: »

Blimey, we seem to have reverted to 1957.

Explain please.

kiss_me_now9

ceridwen wrote: »

WHAT??????!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek:

It comes with the territory - ie having a body that requires feeding at regular intervals. It's not an illness to need a meal at mealtime - I've never heard that one before....:rotfl:

Certainly there are, at least, a large number of people who HAVE to have a meal pretty promptly at mealtime. That is - because if we don't - then we come over feeling more or less weak and a bit ill. That is entirely normal - and not a symptom of being ill forgawdsake.

I know this - because I'm one of the MANY people who HAVE to have a meal each mealtime without fail - because otherwise I will feel weak/sick/a bit ill (delete as appropriate). But - I can assure you I am perfectly healthy and perfectly normal - and our bodies are quite right too on insisting that "Its mealtime - so eat". Mother Nature's way of looking after us and making sure we don't get ill.:D

I'm horrified actually at anyone thinking we should expect our bodies to go straight through a "mealtime" and not eat and would consider we were ill for needing a meal at mealtime.:eek:. Didnt think there was much left that would shock me by now - but that certainly does...

I hope you never work in a bar/pub, I used to do 13.5 hour shifts with one 20 minute break around 9pm when I'd started at 2pm. Different industries have different demands and in the pub I worked in, it was constantly busy all day and night and the only time we could get a break was when the night shift would come in and we'd get a few extra people on the bar. Worked through until 3:30am.

ceridwen

WHEW!

O.P. - you're better off outa here...there would appear to be only two of us that accept a persons need/right to have a meal at mealtime.

The others seem to be treating this as an excuse for a bit of a "feeding frenzy" bullyfest...so you are better off out of it and not bother to come back again - because it would appear you arent going to get any helpful advice here I'm sorry to say.

dandelionclock30

I think its really sad that someone is expected to work for nothing without a lunch break of even 20 mins. I would just say to the company that I needed a lunch break for something to eat and what time was convienient for them between 12-1.30.They will not kick the person off the programme for what is a reasonable request.
Generally most people do need a light bite at lunch time as this is most peoples routine although obviously different people have differing needs with food etc. I dont think many people have a sit down cooked big dinner at work, unless their a dinner lady or something.

Smiling_Ducky

I know this post is about your not getting a break to eat but I'd like to ask something.
If this was your first day doing voluntary work why have you spent the entire time "working"?
Don't misunderstand me, I think you should be working but generally most companies spend at least the first day giving some sort of training and considering you have been moving "heavy metal shelving" I would have hoped you would have been given instructions on the correct way to lift. Also, their fire procedures/meeting point, first aid etc.
Employers have an obligation to ensure their staff are working in a safe manor.

Murtle

ceridwen wrote: »

WHEW!

O.P. - you're better off outa here...there would appear to be only two of us that accept a persons need/right to have a meal at mealtime.

The others seem to be treating this as an excuse for a bit of a "feeding frenzy" bullyfest...so you are better off out of it and not bother to come back again - because it would appear you arent going to get any helpful advice here I'm sorry to say.

Clicked thanks, not quote :rotfl:

Anyway, I need to eat regularly but I can do that quite quickly and don't need to make a meal of it (pun intended).

He finished at 1pm so surely he can have his 30 minute lunch about then?

liney

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

I think its really sad that someone is expected to work for nothing without a lunch break of even 20 mins. I would just say to the company that I needed a lunch break for something to eat and what time was convienient for them between 12-1.30.They will not kick the person off the programme for what is a reasonable request.
Generally most people do need a light bite at lunch time as this is most peoples routine although obviously different people have differing needs with food etc. I dont think many people have a sit down cooked big dinner at work, unless their a dinner lady or something.

Considering he works from 8am until 1pm why can't he eat at 1.30 when he get's home? Asking a for a lunch break when you finish work at lunch time is unreasonable. I could see your point if he worked 10am - 3pm, for example, but it's 8am-1pm for goodness sake.

Oldernotwiser

Martynb_ wrote: »

I don't want them to think I'm funny or anything.

Depends whether you mean funny ha ha or funny peculiar!