What counts as starting work?

paycre

Hiya. Kind of interested in the general consensus of people or if anyone knows the actual employment law even better :-)
I’m a remote worker and my job entirely requires the use of multiple operating systems on a laptop along with a phone system on the laptop. I am on an hourly rate.  Recently I received an email from work ticking me for not taking my first call of the day, until 5 min after my rostered time to start work. Now I start the pc up on time but by the time I’ve logged into all of the systems and read the notices and emails from managers I am at 5 min after my start time. So my question…do you think this set up time should be classed within the work day? Or should I be starting 5 min earlier without pay? American law says the former but can’t find anything about the U.K.  Really just interested in peoples thoughts. Thanks 

[Deleted User]

I'd posit work related activity starts at the point your pay starts, not your issue if employers systems don't come online to enable work function until several minutes later.

yksi

I would consider that you need to have the pc up and running at start time, but that actually reading emails or notices should be in work time.

The pc is a tool you need to have ready to do your job. In the same way that I expect my employees to have ALREADY walked into the building, swiped in and been back on the shop floor ready to work by 9am. Them arguing that they were walking through front doors at 9am doesn't cut it if they still have their coat on, are still carrying their lunch bag and aren't ready to start working right on 9am. 

It really is a question of what's reasonable here to me. If you argued this point with me, to be candid, I would probably wait a few weeks then dismiss you "for the needs of the business" because if you're going to be so petty about pressing the "on" button at five to nine, you'll probably have far more petty and ridiculous things for me to deal with in the future.

paycre

yksi said:

I would consider that you need to have the pc up and running at start time, but that actually reading emails or notices should be in work time.

The pc is a tool you need to have ready to do your job. In the same way that I expect my employees to have ALREADY walked into the building, swiped in and been back on the shop floor ready to work by 9am. Them arguing that they were walking through front doors at 9am doesn't cut it if they still have their coat on, are still carrying their lunch bag and aren't ready to start working right on 9am. 

It really is a question of what's reasonable here to me. If you argued this point with me, to be candid, I would probably wait a few weeks then dismiss you "for the needs of the business" because if you're going to be so petty about pressing the "on" button at five to nine, you'll probably have far more petty and ridiculous things for me to deal with in the future.

Thank your for feedback but I wouldn’t consider that it is myself being petty when I didn’t send the email bringing it up in the first place, to someone that has never had to have been spoken to about anything before by management. 

paycre

arctic_ghost said:

I'd posit work related activity starts at the point your pay starts, not your issue if employers systems don't come online to enable work function until several minutes later

This does seem to be the general direction of advice I can find. 

yksi

paycre said:
Thank your for feedback but I wouldn’t consider that it is myself being petty when I didn’t send the email bringing it up in the first place, to someone that has never had to have been spoken to about anything before by management. 

Of course you're entitled to your opinion on it. Most managers, however, will think that you not being willing to press the on button at five to nine, is petty. Hence dismissing you without giving you a reason. Or other repercussions (not considering you for promotion; excluding you from things; giving you less favourable work to do). Nobody says those things are fair, they're definitely not, but they are possibilities.

Really what you need to ask yourself is this. Is it worth the argument? Do you have enough "capital" saved up to spend on this issue - and by that I mean, are you a brilliant employer, are you difficult to replace, have you been there a long time, and do you have the sort of relationship with your manager that a discussion like this would not harm your working relationship?

There are times in the workplace when things are worth fighting for, and times where you should really consider whether it's actually in your best interests to do that. I routinely see (young people in particular) bristle about unexpected workplace norms, or they attempt to renegotiate their working conditions in their first month, or complain bitterly that their manager won't "be reasonable" about some perceived slight. There's very much an air of whether or not this is "fair". But they are missing the bigger picture and that is: if you have earned workplace capital, you will be in a position to expect things to be more flexible in your favour. If you have not, then you will appear demanding.

Make sure you've assessed that before you pick this as a battle, because you want to make sure you protect your job and do what's in your own best interests.

Dakta

My main work generally starts at 9 so the computers on and ready by 9 and ito do that I give it a bit of a  head start. Have been a bit late on occasion and cut it fine but I've been slightly earlier just as often too. If I'm still logging on (it takes a while) and I'm not available on teams or whatever and it's like 9:02 then I'd consider myself a tad late.

In an old job I had the debate with my manager, in one perspective arriving at your start time makes sense because you are on site and getting logged in or set up is part of the job, but on the counter argument if you are paid to handle calls between 9-5 for example and aren't picking them up at 9:02 because the 9-5 person isn't ready then the business can argue these minutes are having a measurable impact.

I see both sides but 5 minutes of anyone's time isn't worth the aggro, And being a bit early and therefore able to start on time projects a professional image. I don't want to call it petty but if I was a boss and someone seriously objected to coming on just before start so they could start on time I'd likely judge it that those couple of minutes means more to them than any impact it might have. 

You could also look at it in the simpler way as your title puts it:

Q: What counts as starting work?
A: Starting work

i.e if you're a programmer, starting programming.

Personally, in your own description if its the case that after logging in, you HAVE to read through some emails in order to make calls, then I would consider it a bit petty of the company to criticise you as i'd consider reading emails to do your job working.

But if the computers only just being switched at the start of work time, i'd swing the other way and say the employee is being a bit petty or cheeky in cutting it so fine rather than risk being a minute or too early. 

Ultimate answer is you can either side is being petty, and you're entitled to hold either view but the bosses generally hold the cards.

MalMonroe

paycre said:

Hiya. Kind of interested in the general consensus of people or if anyone knows the actual employment law even better :-)
I’m a remote worker and my job entirely requires the use of multiple operating systems on a laptop along with a phone system on the laptop. I am on an hourly rate.  Recently I received an email from work ticking me for not taking my first call of the day, until 5 min after my rostered time to start work. Now I start the pc up on time but by the time I’ve logged into all of the systems and read the notices and emails from managers I am at 5 min after my start time. So my question…do you think this set up time should be classed within the work day? Or should I be starting 5 min earlier without pay? American law says the former but can’t find anything about the U.K.  Really just interested in peoples thoughts. Thanks 

 
I think, that before sending you a 'ticking off' email, they should have ensured that you were familiar with all the terms and conditions of your employment. Have you been given a Job Description? Who sent the scathing email? Just anyone from work or your line manager? 

It is most unfair of them to send you such an email anyway if it hasn't been made clear that you are expected to set up the PC before you start in your own time. This small but obviously important detail should have been sorted out and agreed with you before you even started your job. If they never even told you, how are you supposed to know? ESP?

If you had to go into an office, would they expect you to get there five minutes early so you could set up? If so, they'd have to put something in your Job Description about it. But telling you off about something you weren't aware of isn't on.

Setting up your equipment so you can actually do your job should be part of your work day. It has been with all of the jobs I've ever had (now self employed so there's only me to tell me off).

I think they are being petty and unreasonable because in general people working from home aren't more likely to try to pull the wool over their employer's eyes, they are more likely to work harder. And five minutes could be easily made up during the day anyway, if you knew that that was what they wanted. In your case you know that your employer can track you, so why would you try to swindle them?
 
I'd definitely be contacting my line manager to discuss what had occurred, ask why I hadn't been told what to do and why I felt it was a very unfair criticism. 

It doesn't really matter what employment law says, employers are allowed flexibility to fix their own rules and regs with something like that but they are also expected to tell their employees what they expect of them without them having to guess what to do. 

I'd be looking round for another job with more competent and trusting managers for one thing. When you are a hardworking competent employee, it really stings when some employers are so petty.

MalMonroe

yksi said:

paycre said:
Thank your for feedback but I wouldn’t consider that it is myself being petty when I didn’t send the email bringing it up in the first place, to someone that has never had to have been spoken to about anything before by management. 

Of course you're entitled to your opinion on it. Most managers, however, will think that you not being willing to press the on button at five to nine, is petty. Hence dismissing you without giving you a reason. Or other repercussions (not considering you for promotion; excluding you from things; giving you less favourable work to do). Nobody says those things are fair, they're definitely not, but they are possibilities.

Really what you need to ask yourself is this. Is it worth the argument? Do you have enough "capital" saved up to spend on this issue - and by that I mean, are you a brilliant employer, are you difficult to replace, have you been there a long time, and do you have the sort of relationship with your manager that a discussion like this would not harm your working relationship?

There are times in the workplace when things are worth fighting for, and times where you should really consider whether it's actually in your best interests to do that. I routinely see (young people in particular) bristle about unexpected workplace norms, or they attempt to renegotiate their working conditions in their first month, or complain bitterly that their manager won't "be reasonable" about some perceived slight. There's very much an air of whether or not this is "fair". But they are missing the bigger picture and that is: if you have earned workplace capital, you will be in a position to expect things to be more flexible in your favour. If you have not, then you will appear demanding.

Make sure you've assessed that before you pick this as a battle, because you want to make sure you protect your job and do what's in your own best interests.

You have assumed that the OP was told about the fact that their PC should be ready to go dead on start time. It seems that they weren't. In which case, that's most unfair and you are no different from their boss who appears to have just popped up to criticise them for not doing something that they weren't even aware of. The OP hasn't said they are unwilling to do anything. Just that they've been told off for not doing something they didn't even know about. 

It IS worth the argument because the OP obviously hasn't been given a Job Description and assumptions have been made. This OP needs to have a word with their line manager because (a) they just had an email 'from work', which could be anybody, even a cleaner as far as we are aware and (b) they need to be told, officially, what is expected of them.  That hasn't happened.

You have just assumed that the employer is in the right here, when it appears that isn't the case. I do hope you aren't an employer because you've not got all the facts but you do have all the answers. 

74jax

How do you know what emails you have to read before you take a call, without logging on. 

You could log on at 8.55 and have 30 emails to read, but you don't know until 8.55, or you could log on at 9 and have none.

I definately think Reading emails is to be done in paid time. 

Merlin139

If you were not working from home what time would you leave to travel to work? You would not be paid to travel. Turn your Laptop on at 08:50 and have everything ready to run for 09:00. Use the ten minutes to make sure your work space is set up. 

Reading emails and notices from 09:00 in between calls.