Can you be sacked for not doing overtime?

Welshwoofs

falko89 wrote: »

My 3 month probation is up end of July, as long as I am entitled to JSA I would rather be let go, money is not the be all and end all especially when I wasn't any worse of previously on benefits, I want to work yes just not for an employer who wants everything for nothing.

Christ almighty. No wonder so many employers prefer to give these minimum wage jobs to Eastern Europeans when we get Brits whining that 43 hours a week is too much and that they'd prefer to be on JSA than working.

josie.d wrote: »

OP's other problem is that he isn't seeing his children before they go to bed.

Awww boo hoo. How bloody awful. I wonder how on earth those people who work away from home for week and months on end manage.

Good god us Brits are becoming spineless, pathetic jellies.

Mista_C

Welshwoofs wrote: »

Awww boo hoo. How bloody awful. I wonder how on earth those people who work away from home for week and months on end manage.

Good god us Brits are becoming spineless, pathetic jellies.

What's spineless about wanting to spend time with his children? Will you be there to defend these parents working away from home for months on end in the next thread that pops up with a complaint about schools being expected to raise kids? You know the kind where there's no excuse for the parents to be expecting someone else to take responsibility for their kids upbringing or the next time someone asks "where were the parents?" when a group of kids are involved in some unpleasant incident? You'll be the first to say it's not the parents fault, won't you?

If you've taken on a 9-5 job it's not unreasonable to expect your working hours to be 9-5. A couple of hours overtime here and there when needed but not for an employer to be taking the mickey because, in the current climate, employees are too afraid to say no.

duchy

LittleVoice wrote: »

So that's good insofar as it supports a refusal to do more than the 48 hours on average.

The original intention was that any opt-out should be a definite separate statement but I have certainly seen that it is now included in standard contractual terms and, if it is signed, there can be a notice period of up to 3 months for an employee to withdraw their consent. It is something that does require a signature and should not be implied by an employer providing a standard T&C document which includes the opt-out.

I remember getting an application form for a job with a large well known company and the opt out was halfway though the application form. A very clear implication what woud happen to the application if you didn't agree and sign that section. I thought it was disgusting.

TrickyWicky

CKhalvashi wrote: »

IMO, you should be happy that it’s being offered, as it means your job is secure (and that’s taking an employers POV as an employer myself).

On the contrary, if the company is only paying the normal hourly rate it means they're probably in financial trouble because they can't pay their staff anything better.

It doesn't matter what sort of angle you try to put on it, your arguement is flawed and pointless. Companies that are making good money and want to keep a good workforce pay more for OT it's as simple as that.

Welshwoofs wrote: »

Awww boo hoo. How bloody awful. I wonder how on earth those people who work away from home for week and months on end manage.

As someone else pointed out, no doubt you in the future will be slating parents who work away for weeks on end for abandoning their parental rights? No doubt you'll be saying parents should be at home?

People like you always take the moral high ground in any arguement like this thread just to try and put others down irrespective of what you really think, do or how you live you'll always take the moral high ground just to try and be 'right'. You're a sad twisted person.

Welshwoofs wrote: »

Good god us Brits are becoming spineless, pathetic jellies.

Blame the politicians and people like you who are always looking to blame people for their own misfortune whilst people like you completely mis-manage problematic situations.

falko89

Mista_C wrote: »

What's spineless about wanting to spend time with his children? Will you be there to defend these parents working away from home for months on end in the next thread that pops up with a complaint about schools being expected to raise kids? You know the kind where there's no excuse for the parents to be expecting someone else to take responsibility for their kids upbringing or the next time someone asks "where were the parents?" when a group of kids are involved in some unpleasant incident? You'll be the first to say it's not the parents fault, won't you?

If you've taken on a 9-5 job it's not unreasonable to expect your working hours to be 9-5. A couple of hours overtime here and there when needed but not for an employer to be taking the mickey because, in the current climate, employees are too afraid to say no.

Sadly I think that's the way things are at the moment, people motivated by fear of losing their jobs, it might work for the young 20 something living at home etc who would be entitled to nothing, for people like myself we are almost as well off on benefits, so at worst it just won't look good on a CV, I am not prepared to be treated like crap for £6 odd per hour, while I would never walk out or leave a job without having something lined up if I get sacked so be it.

scooby088

I think the whole British way of working to be flawed in many aspects, there are those who give up their free time so freely for a company that has no respect for them. I would rather have time with my family rather than a full bank balance. Why have you got to be inspired to do overtime or even feel threatened to do it when there is little or no reward.

It has been said that those eastern europeans who work for minimum wage are doing a great dis service to those who have fought for better conditions in the workplace, many who contribute on this thread are more than likely never really done a hard physically demanding job in their lives day in day out for 8/9 hours per day an yet are quick to condemn those who do not want to do another hour/s of overtime. Some people need to get their head out of their own backsides.

marybelle01

scooby088 wrote: »

It has been said that those eastern europeans who work for minimum wage are doing a great dis service to those who have fought for better conditions in the workplace,

It is only Eastern Europeans who work for the minimum wage, or is it only a disservice when they do it?

bluenoseam

I've done full shifts up to and over 12 hours in the past, however my priorities have changed since the days where I did that without questioning it. Simply put my only priority now is me, i don't feel the need to put in 12 hour shifts to make profits for faceless people if it's detrimental to my wellbeing.

scooby088

marybelle01 wrote: »

It is only Eastern Europeans who work for the minimum wage, or is it only a disservice when they do it?

Not only eastern europeans that work for minimum wage but it seems to me that NMW workers seem to get a disservice from all those on higher wages, when some of the service industries and other industries provide such an essential service.

warehouse

I've been in a similar situation and I walked away from the job. My hours were 9 to 5 but I regularly got called to work extra hours sometimes up to 9pm with no extra pay.

I have 3 children and to me they are everything. You only get one chance in your lifetime to be part of them growing up, so missing seeing them most nights and being part of their lives during the week is more important by a long way than any job on the planet.

Leave.