Working Hours & Break Entitlements

trixie_belle12

I am working in the retail industry since the beginning of the year during which time the company have changed our break time allowances and I'm wondering if this is correct.

Previously for an 8 hours shift ie. 9-6 we had 1 hour lunch break (unpaid) plus a 20 minute tea break (paid).

Now they have altered our shift times slightly so a full day might be 9 - 5.30 or 9.45 - 6.15. The breaks are now 2 periods of 30 minutes apiece (one paid and one unpaid).

I have checked this online and according to citizens information:

Shop Employees whose hours of work include the hours 11.30am - 2.30pm must after 6 hours work be allowed a break of one hour which must commence between the hours 11.30am - 2.30pm.

Does this not mean that we are still entitled to a 1 hour consecutive break provided we are working over 6 hours and are rostered to work for a shift inclusive of the 11.30 - 2.30 period?

Would really appreciate feedback on this cheers.

wmpdd3

The minimum breaks for the new shifts are 1 hr unpaid and a paid 15 min. The piece from the citizens info is a retail agreement rather than a piece of law.

Contact a union and they will give you the details.

http://www.employmentrights.ie/en/media/Workingtimeact.pdf

trixie_belle12

Thanks, do you mean the 1 hour consecutive or just 1 hour broken down in any way? I've already mentioned this to my manager and was initially shot down and now I haven't heard about it since. I just want to know if it's legal or if we have a case to have the breaks reinstated as they were.

Not a member of a union, small company, but I guess I can try calling them for advice.

D.McC

The information referred too by wmpdd3 is considered to be as good as law, as it is something all retailers big and small have to conform too.

OP, in your case there would be little or no point in taking action. Your employer has spilt your break, but the new arrangement is more beneficial to you than the old arrangement.

If you made a case to the Rights Commissioner, your employer would simply argue they are keeping to the spirit of the agreement as you still get the same rest time during the working day, but only lose 30minutes pay instead of an hour.

wmpdd3

trixie_belle12 wrote: »

Thanks, do you mean the 1 hour consecutive or just 1 hour broken down in any way? I've already mentioned this to my manager and was initially shot down and now I haven't heard about it since. I just want to know if it's legal or if we have a case to have the breaks reinstated as they were.

Not a member of a union, small company, but I guess I can try calling them for advice.

As d.mcc said, I don't think you have a case as you are gaining 10 mins paid. Unless you have a case for why a 1 hr unpaid break in the middle of the day is needed. ie ye have no canteen and have to go out and buy lunch which would take longer than 30 mins etc.

In my opinion, you are not getting the exact conditions of the agreement but the pay for the extra 15 mins per day makes up for it.

Usually with a 9:00 - 5:30 shift in retail you would get 12-1 lunch and 15mins 3-3:15. 15 min paid 1 hr unpaid.

trixie_belle12

thanks for the feedback.

we don't have a canteen or any facilities which is why the hour would really be more beneficial to us but as you say not really all that much point in fighting it.