Travel Time for Meetings

1985rabbit

Hi everyone, I'm hoping to get a bit of advice from you knowledgeable lot. I commute into work for a company based in central London, that is my regular place of work as listed in my employment contract with a working day of 9am to 5.30pm. We are currently working with a client who are based in the midlands and I have been asked to attend a weekly project meeting at their offices. I'm happy to go up there but in order for me to make the 10am start, I need to be on the train an hour and 45 minutes earlier than I would normally be if I was coming to our office.


I had the first one on Monday and by the time that the meeting finished I could have feasibly made it back into my London office for around 3.30ish. This was without taking any time out to stop for my 1hr lunch break. With that in mind and with the fact that I was on the train an hour and 45 minutes earlier than usual, I just headed home.


This morning, my line manager has sent me a snotty email saying that I when I go to these meetings, I should return to the office and complete the working day if I am able to get back before 5.30. They have stated that they do not class travel to and from work as part of the working day and essentially accused me of only working 2 and a half hours on Monday. I understand travelling doesn't count when I'm commuting to our London base but surely it does when I'm going further afield? I'm not going via the London office, it's straight to the clients offices.


So my queries are; when I'm going to these meetings, when does my working day legally start and end? Is it when I start my journey in the morning and when I get home? Also, where does my lunch break fit in? Can they class sitting on the train as a break?


Any advice is most welcome. Many thanks

agrinnall

Where are you starting your journey? It might help people to understand the timings.

PasturesNew

In the main you have to "fall in with a company's usual procedure". Many do not count travelling time and see it as "part of the job". I see you've used the word "project meeting" in there and project teams are often all over the place doing "extra hours for free".

I used to be a PM and worked all day at the office (9am to 6pm) then had to load my car up with equipment and drive 400 miles, stay in a hotel overnight, on client site at 8am in the morning, meetings and work ... leave there at 6pm and drive back home, arriving home about midnight - and I'd still be in the office the next morning at 9am prompt.

It's unreasonable. Yes.
It's not what you signed up for. No

But if it's what they expect then you need to either learn how to cover your tracks and "create your own time and slope off home early without saying" ..... or find another job. I found another job when I wasn't happy with the amount of hours/travel I was doing as compared to the promises at interview about working hours and locations.

In another project job, working 9 to 5.30, they wanted me to go to London for meetings. That meant getting up at 4am, taking the train, arriving at 10am, be there all day then catch the last possible train home and arriving home just before 11pm that night. All, again, "expected". Hated that too, but they never tell you this !!!!!! at the interview!

Or the job where I packed 3 days of knickers to stay away 2 nights ... and ended up having to stay on-site at the client's town, for 3 WEEKS!

1985rabbit

agrinnall wrote: »

Where are you starting your journey? It might help people to understand the timings.

I commute from Essex. The meeting I need to get to for 10am is just North of Nottingham.

1985rabbit

PasturesNew wrote: »

In the main you have to "fall in with a company's usual procedure". Many do not count travelling time and see it as "part of the job". I see you've used the word "project meeting" in there and project teams are often all over the place doing "extra hours for free".

I used to be a PM and worked all day at the office (9am to 6pm) then had to load my car up with equipment and drive 400 miles, stay in a hotel overnight, on client site at 8am in the morning, meetings and work ... leave there at 6pm and drive back home, arriving home about midnight - and I'd still be in the office the next morning at 9am prompt.

It's unreasonable. Yes.
It's not what you signed up for. No

But if it's what they expect then you need to either learn how to cover your tracks and "create your own time and slope off home early without saying" ..... or find another job. I found another job when I wasn't happy with the amount of hours/travel I was doing as compared to the promises at interview about working hours and locations.

In another project job, working 9 to 5.30, they wanted me to go to London for meetings. That meant getting up at 4am, taking the train, arriving at 10am, be there all day then catch the last possible train home and arriving home just before 11pm that night. All, again, "expected". Hated that too, but they never tell you this !!!!!! at the interview!

Or the job where I packed 3 days of knickers to stay away 2 nights ... and ended up having to stay on-site at the client's town, for 3 WEEKS!

I totally understand that and I am well versed on the subject of working extra hours for nowt. It's not irregular for me to work late in our offices; that is expected and not an issue for me, the role is very much office based 99% of the time. But it is very much out of the ordinary for me to be travelling these sorts of distances for meetings on a regular basis.


I wouldn't normally be bothered about any of the travel etc, it's just the email I got this morning riled me as I still maintain that I was not unreasonable by heading straight home. So I just wondered if there was any kind of formal/legal standpoint on the issue.

TELLIT01

There is no simple answer to the question. Different companies view things in different ways. I do think expecting you to go back into the office for about 1 hour at the end of the day to be counter productive if nothing else. You'd started very much earlier than usual, so as a manager I would have accepted the fact that you went straight home as a reasonable thing to do.
When I worked in IT in the finance sector I regularly had to drive for 2 hours to get to meetings which started at 9am and went through to after 4 pm. I would be paid overtime rates and mileage for the additional time and distance compared to commute time to my normal office.
In the situation the OP is finding himself/herself I would take the 1 hour break after the meeting just to be bloody minded.

1985rabbit

TELLIT01 wrote: »

In the situation the OP is finding himself/herself I would take the 1 hour break after the meeting just to be bloody minded.

Ha! This is exactly what crossed my mind for next weeks meeting. It's good to know that I'm not alone in thinking that I was perfectly reasonable by going home. Thanks for the reply.

Comms69

Could you theoretically do work on the train?

1985rabbit

Comms69 wrote: »

Could you theoretically do work on the train?

Not really. Certainly nothing meaningful. To properly do what I need to, I need powerful software and large files which are shared with the rest of the team back at base. It would probably require a laptop with a specification far in excess of those used by NASA owing to the fact that NASA use outdated laptops which are in fact inferior to those which you'll find in PC World and a reliable wifi connection.

Comms69

1985rabbit wrote: »

Not really. Certainly nothing meaningful. To properly do what I need to, I need powerful software and large files which are shared with the rest of the team back at base. It would probably require a NASA spec laptop and a reliable wifi connection.

No I understand, but most jobs have an element of admin involved. Scheduling meetings, replying to emails, report writing.


I think your case would be stronger if you could satisfy the hours as work

ohreally

Turn up at your usual office for normal start time and commence your site travel from there at your normal start time, until mutual agreement is reached for alternative arrangements.