Flexible Working. Reduce lunch break...

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

You can't drop an unpaid half hour, you have to drop a paid half hour. You have to do that because they say so. it's not nonsense because that's the rule they made.

FBaby

No they havent, shes had an informal chat, they also haven't given a valid reason (listed above) for refusal

That's incorrect. She asked to leave early, and they've agreed. They however didn't agree to her taking only 1/2 hour which they can do. I expect it's probably written in their policy that staff has to take 1 hour at lunch and therefore they don't require to give a reason, just to point to the policy.

bluenose2

Wow, thanks for all of the responses, it appears that I have caused a storm!

Just to confirm, work have informally already clarified that they are more than happy for me to start work later (as there will be no business impact) but have confirmed that as my lunch break is UNPAID, I cannot make up the half an hour during this time.

I hope this clears things up.

jobbingmusician

Clear as mud, to me. Where did starting work later come from, all of a sudden? Do you mean starting work earlier, by any chance?

bluenose2

jobbingmusician wrote: »

Clear as mud, to me. Where did starting work later come from, all of a sudden? Do you mean starting work earlier, by any chance?

Oops, my mistake!

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

I thought you wanted to finish work earlier.

getmore4less

bluenose2 wrote: »

Wow, thanks for all of the responses, it appears that I have caused a storm!

Just to confirm, work have informally already clarified that they are more than happy for me to start work later (as there will be no business impact) but have confirmed that as my lunch break is UNPAID, I cannot make up the half an hour during this time.

I hope this clears things up.

That's the nonsense if you work it becomes work time and paid.

The lunch break if it is not paid is not work time it is free time.

What they are saying is you cannot convert time you are not working to time you are working.

lush_walrus

So as they have agreed to reduce the hours you are in the building but not the lunch break, is the problem that under that agreement you will earn 2.5 hours less per week? The hours they have informally agreed suit you, just that you would prefer to shorten your lunch break and be paid for the same hours as now.

Seems rather petty of them to not agree to a reduced lunch break, not something I would do but the upside is if you can stomach the loss in earnings you do have the start and end times you need.

Or have I misunderstood as I seem to be seeing a different issue to everyone else

jobbingmusician

My current understanding is this.

For some reason, employer does not want staff to take less than an hour for lunch. The lunch break is unpaid. This is a pain, but is the employer's right.

The employer has, however, agreed that the OP can work 8.30-4.30 instead of 9-5, which solves the end of day problem. (This is what the OP meant when she said 'I can start work later.' She should have written 'I can start work earlier.' but made a mistake.)

Have I got it right?

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

lush_walrus wrote: »

Seems rather petty of them to not agree to a reduced lunch break, not something I would do but the upside is if you can stomach the loss in earnings you do have the start and end times you need.

How is it petty? They want people in the office from 9 until 5.

If they let her be in the office from 9 until 4:30 with no loss of pay, everyone will want to do the same.

They'd be stupid to agree.