How many hours in a working week?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Long story short here. Recently started a job of which the hours are 8 to 5 (9 hour working day)

9x5=45 hours a week.

Was handed my contract today and it has 42.5 hours on it as the working week, they've deducted 30 mins a day for my breaks (2x15). All of these hours are paid at standard rate. Everywhere I've ever worked before I would be paid 39 at standard plus the extra 3.5 hours at time and a half, in fact every other place I've worked in before I've got paid breaks so to me this company are getting 6 hours a week for free out of me.

The second issue I have is that I'm actually only being paid for 39 hours a week as there's a clause in my contract saying that from time to time the company may ask me to work additional voluntary hours as they see fit.

Am I being totally made a fool of here? Because I feel like I am.

Slippin Jimmy

Unless your contract states you get paid for your breaks I fail to see the issue here.

Duiske

Mis-read that.

Stheno

Do you get a lunch bteak as well as the two short breaks and how long us it?

Uncle Ben

The Honey Monster wrote: »

Long story short here. Recently started a job of which the hours are 8 to 5 (9 hour working day)

9x5=45 hours a week.

Was handed my contract today and it has 42.5 hours on it as the working week, they've deducted 30 mins a day for my breaks (2x15). All of these hours are paid at standard rate. Everywhere I've ever worked before I would be paid 39 at standard plus the extra 3.5 hours at time and a half, in fact every other place I've worked in before I've got paid breaks so to me this company are getting 6 hours a week for free out of me.

The second issue I have is that I'm actually only being paid for 39 hours a week as there's a clause in my contract saying that from time to time the company may ask me to work additional voluntary hours as they see fit.

Am I being totally made a fool of here? Because I feel like I am.

Regarding your second issue. What if the company wants you to work 2 hours extra every evening over the 12 days of Xmas! As they see fit. Would you be happy to do it?
You should be making a few alterations to that contract in my opinion.

Slippin Jimmy

You seemed to have asked the same first question here and got an answer.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

I'm more concerned with not getting paid for anything I do over 39 hours.

Stheno

The Honey Monster wrote: »

I'm more concerned with not getting paid for anything I do over 39 hours.

How long have you been working there?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Two weeks.
45 hours the first week. Paid 39.
I was told I'd be fired if I asked to be paid for the extra.
It's a steel mill, the work is intense.

Stheno

The Honey Monster wrote: »

Two weeks.
45 hours the first week. Paid 39.
I was told I'd be fired if I asked to be paid for the extra.
It's a steel mill, the work is intense.

Did you query this with your manager? Are you paid an hourly rate?

Uncle Ben

The Honey Monster wrote: »

I'm more concerned with not getting paid for anything I do over 39 hours.

I work and get paid for 39 hrs week also however that does not include the half hour per day I have for my breaks. And I would not expect it either.
In some jobs people are also expected to clock in and out when having breaks.

Where I do agree with you is in terms of what is and isn't o/t. I would be certainly getting that ironed out.
Seems like there are plenty of entrepreneurs out there expecting people to work for nothing.

Uncle Ben

The Honey Monster wrote: »

Two weeks.
45 hours the first week. Paid 39.
I was told I'd be fired if I asked to be paid for the extra.
It's a steel mill, the work is intense.

It appears you found work with a very fair minded employer. Working in a steel mill, was wondering does he provide and comply with all the H&S legislation.

smokingman

I don't know anything about that industry but in IT, I'm always wary of people who just do their hours and then fek off. I find people who go the extra mile are the ones you want around you when there's a deadline or issue looming. I don't get paid for all the extra hours I do but I go home satisfied and happy when I've achieved something. Mine isn't a job though, it's a career.

Uncle Ben

smokingman wrote: »

I don't know anything about that industry but in IT, I'm always wary of people who just do their hours and then fek off. I find people who go the extra mile are the ones you want around you when there's a deadline or issue looming. I don't get paid for all the extra hours I do but I go home satisfied and happy when I've achieved something. Mine isn't a job though, it's a career.

I've a job I'm very happy in, always was. However I don't do over time and at this stage no one ever asks me to.
My boss gets value from me for a. 39 hour week. After that I prefer to be with my family. I've a job and a life.

Nib

smokingman wrote: »

I don't know anything about that industry but in IT, I'm always wary of people who just do their hours and then fek off. I find people who go the extra mile are the ones you want around you when there's a deadline or issue looming. I don't get paid for all the extra hours I do but I go home satisfied and happy when I've achieved something. Mine isn't a job though, it's a career.

How very condescending.

Some people have lives outside of their job.

easygoing1982

smokingman wrote: »

I don't know anything about that industry but in IT, I'm always wary of people who just do their hours and then fek off. I find people who go the extra mile are the ones you want around you when there's a deadline or issue looming. I don't get paid for all the extra hours I do but I go home satisfied and happy when I've achieved something. Mine isn't a job though, it's a career.

I disagree. You work to live , not live to work.
If the OP is working 45hrs he should be paid for 45hrs likewise if he works 10hrs he should be paid 10hrs and any job I've worked on pays time and a half.

The only thing i agree with the employer on is the breaks in the condition that the break belongs to the OP and is not expected to hang around the canteen/office etc

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

OP here.

I can't seem to quote all of ye as I'm on mobile.
To the guy who said he has a career and not a job, and you do extra hours unpaid, you're a reall hero. This is the only job I could find and I find your comment extremely condescending.

Back on topic.

Unpaid breaks aside. Let's leave that, I accept I wont be paid.

The reall issue is a 42.5 hour a week contract... Is it not supposed to be 39 and anything over is time plus one half? No hourly rate on my contract either...
Theres also a clause that states that should there be a need for me to work more than the stated 42.5 hours I'm contracted for I'm obliged to do this 'voluntary'. I feel I'm already giving them enough considering I'm only getting paid for 39 and I'm working 42.5.

Stheno

The Honey Monster wrote: »

OP here.

I can't seem to quote all of ye as I'm on mobile.
To the guy who said he has a career and not a job, and you do extra hours unpaid, you're a reall hero. This is the only job I could find and I find your comment extremely condescending.

Back on topic.

Unpaid breaks aside. Let's leave that, I accept I wont be paid.

The reall issue is a 42.5 hour a week contract... Is it not supposed to be 39 and anything over is time plus one half? No hourly rate on my contract either...
Theres also a clause that states that should there be a need for me to work more than the stated 42.5 hours I'm contracted for I'm obliged to do this 'voluntary'. I feel I'm already giving them enough considering I'm only getting paid for 39 and I'm working 42.5.

No it's not your weekly hours are what's in the contract. Are you getting a salary as opposed to a set rate per hour? And if you are how are you figuring you are only paid for 39? Is it because that's what you think should be the most hours you work in a week before overtime kicks in?

Sounds to me like you are on a set salary with set hours and are unfamiliar with how those work. What you are describing is fairly standard tbh it's just different from being paid per hour

28064212

The Honey Monster wrote: »

The reall issue is a 42.5 hour a week contract... Is it not supposed to be 39 and anything over is time plus one half?

No. Your working week can't average out at more than 48 hours per week, but there's nothing that says there's a limit of 39 for regular pay

The Honey Monster wrote: »

No hourly rate on my contract either...

Are you paid by the hour? This sounds like a salaried job tbh. The "voluntary hours" clause is pretty common in many salaried contracts. It's basically saying if some work really has to be done tomorrow, you might be asked to work late.

Your contract sounds perfectly normal

road_high

smokingman wrote: »

I don't know anything about that industry but in IT, I'm always wary of people who just do their hours and then fek off. I find people who go the extra mile are the ones you want around you when there's a deadline or issue looming. I don't get paid for all the extra hours I do but I go home satisfied and happy when I've achieved something. Mine isn't a job though, it's a career.

The ones I'm wary of are those that love to be seen doing "extra" by sitting at their desk for an extra hour or two. In my experience these are not the best or efficient workers, often just poor time managers.

road_high

Strange op you wouldn't have sorted all this before stating the job? Did they not issue a contract pre starting? I'd never start a new job without going through all aspects with a fine toothecomb and discussing if necessary.

Mrs OBumble

The Honey Monster wrote: »

To the guy who said he has a career and not a job, and you do extra hours unpaid, you're a reall hero.

Less of this please. Posters are taking time out of their day to educate you about how salaried employment works. You may not agree with their philosophies, but there's no need for being smart about it.

/moderation


Can you tell us where you got the idea about 39 hours per week being standard?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Again sorry for not quoting anyone.

In my interview I was told that the hours would be 8-4 Monday to Friday. The extra hour every day is part of this 'voluntary' thing. I haven't signed the contract yet.

MouseTail

It sounds like dodgy practice. Is the mill unionised?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

MouseTail wrote: »

It sounds like dodgy practice. Is the mill unionised?

Not anymore.

Went from 40+ lads during boom times to 8 lads now. I'm on minimum wage when you take into account a 42.5 hour week which is why I've such a a gripe doing anything over 39 for the same money. Payslip says paid for 39 actual hours. Everything over is just expected.

28064212

The Honey Monster wrote: »

In my interview I was told that the hours would be 8-4 Monday to Friday. The extra hour every day is part of this 'voluntary' thing.

It's not voluntary if it's stated in your contract as part of the working week. Was "8-4" explicitly stated in the interview? And "8-5" is explicitly stated on the contract? Sounds like a case of misleading a potential employee, sadly not an uncommon tactic.

Unfortunately, you don't have many options here. The actual contract terms sound perfectly normal. You can try negotiating a better contract, but it doesn't sound likely to be successful. Your only other options are to suck it up and accept the job's not as good as you thought it was, or leave and find somewhere else

yosser hughes

smokingman wrote: »

I don't know anything about that industry but in IT, I'm always wary of people who just do their hours and then fek off. I find people who go the extra mile are the ones you want around you when there's a deadline or issue looming. I don't get paid for all the extra hours I do but I go home satisfied and happy when I've achieved something. Mine isn't a job though, it's a career.

"going the extra mile" as you put it, is management speak.It's used to convince people they are all in it together, which is fine if you are actually sharing in the profits etc. However "going the extra mile" is double-speak to get more out of an employee without actually paying them.
This kind of indoctrination, ultimately erodes everyone's rights in the end.
People are being made to feel grateful for just having a job; and some kind of freeloader if they don't stay late or work a few hours a week for free.If you are working hard and doing your job, then pay people properly for it and pay them overtime if you want them to stay longer. let's not pretend it's something that it isn't.
OP If I were you I'd get this sorted out soon; as it will eat away at you if you don't. You will feel like the piss is been taken and you're right, it is.

daheff

OP- sounds to me (regardless of whats written in the contract) that your basic work week is 40 hours with 1 hour of unpaid breaks. This would be reasonably common in a lot of companies. I don't know what the norm is in Steel Mills though.

Companies are not obliged to pay you for your breaks. They are obliged to give you a break though.


It also kinda sounds like you are in a salaried job too...but being paid weekly may contradict that somewhat.

BizzyC

It sounds like you've been given a 40 hour week and are being paid for a 40 hour week.

I agree completely with the career vs job comments though, companies like to see employees who don't run out the door as soon as 5pm hits.
That's not to say you'll be in their bad books by doing it, it will just hurt chances of advancement.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

But it's not a 40hour week.
It's 8 to 5 everyday.... It's 42.5 every week.

From what I'm reading, you are on a salary, your salary is for a 42.5 week.

You previously worked in jobs where anything over 39 hours was paid as overtime.

The latter however is not standard and I get the feeling from your posts that that's where your issue lies.

Kristopherus

The Honey Monster wrote: »

But it's not a 40hour week.
It's 8 to 5 everyday.... It's 42.5 every week.

Stheno asked earlier in the thread if the 42.5 hrs includes lunch hour. How long is lunch hour?

Greenmachine

I do feel for the OP's work situation. However it does seem like, the contract is perfectly legitimate. Op can you answer a question, were you shown a copy of the contract before you accepted the job.
I have worked my share of jobs, with the minimum of entitlements. It can feel disillusioning, if you are used to better terms, in a previous contract. The best policy in situations like this is to forget about the past, or what other people are on. Do you feel misled, or did you jump to the conclusion, without confirmation that your take home pay would be higher than your quoted salary. It seems like you were expecting to be payed 3.5hr at 1.5x rate on top of 39 salary hours. For 44.25hr pay versus 39.

28064212

Kristopherus wrote: »

Stheno asked earlier in the thread if the 42.5 hrs includes lunch hour. How long is lunch hour?

Sounds like they don't have a lunch hour, they just have 2*15 minute breaks (which is perfectly legal). Which means their work week is 42.5 hours (8 to 5 * 5 minus 5*30 minutes). Which is perfectly legal. And they're paid a standard rate for that working week. Which, again, is perfectly legal.

There are only 3 options here:

• Accept the contract as is
• Attempt to negotiate the terms of the contract before signing (unlikely to be successful unless you're difficult to replace)
• Don't accept the contract, and lose the job

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Kristopherus wrote: »

Stheno asked earlier in the thread if the 42.5 hrs includes lunch hour. How long is lunch hour?

2 breaks, 15 min each unpaid.

Lads again it's 8 to 5 mon to Fri = 9 hours a day, 45 a week.
Take my breaks out and that's 42.5 hours actual I'm on the floor working for.

My payslip said 39 hours. I'm not getting paid anything over.

Uncle Ben

BizzyC wrote: »

It sounds like you've been given a 40 hour week and are being paid for a 40 hour week.

I agree completely with the career vs job comments though, companies like to see employees who don't run out the door as soon as 5pm hits.
That's not to say you'll be in their bad books by doing it, it will just hurt chances of advancement.

I'll have to disagree with you where you state advancement could be inhibited. When I worked in management it was preferable that employees completed their work within their rostered hours.It kept the wage bill down not having to pay the o/time, plus all of the other costs associated with same.
I suppose it's different now with management expecting their employees to' go the extra mile'. It's far cheaper when you get a couple of hours free per week.
2 hours per week equates to 96 hours per working year. Unpaid.

Hasmunch

How can your contract states 42.5 hours per week but your payslip only says 39 hours per week?

Does your contract state daily 8-5?

28064212

The Honey Monster wrote: »

My payslip said 39 hours. I'm not getting paid anything over.

Your contract is what's important. You can raise the payslip disrepancy with the company, but they'll almost certainly say it's "just the way the system is set up". Unless your contract explicitly states that you are paid by the hour (as opposed to an annual/monthly/weekly salary), it's irrelevant

Reoil

Two 15-minute breaks in a 9 hour day?! Feck that!
In the UK anyway, as far as I'm aware, you're legally entitled to a half hour break for every four hours of work.

Alf Veedersane

BizzyC wrote: »

I agree completely with the career vs job comments though, companies like to see employees who don't run out the door as soon as 5pm hits.
That's not to say you'll be in their bad books by doing it, it will just hurt chances of advancement.

Not true. If you're able to bill for all of the time you're being paid to be there, then it makes no difference if you leave at 5/5.30 whenever.

Reoil

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Not true. If you're able to bill for all of the time you're being paid to be there, then it makes no difference if you leave at 5/5.30 whenever.

I disagree. If you're a manager, looking to promote somebody, who do you choose - the person first out the door at the end of the day, or the person who stays to make sure they get the work done?

seamus

28064212 wrote: »

Your contract is what's important. You can raise the payslip disrepancy with the company, but they'll almost certainly say it's "just the way the system is set up". Unless your contract explicitly states that you are paid by the hour (as opposed to an annual/monthly/weekly salary), it's irrelevant

Yep. OP, you're getting hung up on this 39 hour work week thing. If your contract does not state an hourly rate and rather states a weekly/monthly/yearly rate, then you're on a salary. You work the hours stated in the contract, and you get paid that amount. What it says on the payslip doesn't matter. That's a piece of data in a computer. They could just change this to read "basic salary". And when you complain about it, that's probably what they'll do.

What likely happened is that the mill previously had some workers on fixed salaries - office staff, etc. When doing the payslips, they were entered in as "39 hour week". When the mill downsized, everyone got moved to the fixed salary model, but the text still just reads, "39 hour week" because they don't want to have to pay someone to change their payroll system.

You're getting paid for a 42.5 hour work week because that's what your contract says.

The only thing you need to look at is calculation of your rate of pay based on that 42.5 hour work week. If it falls below minimum wage, then they may be breaching the law.

seamus

Reoil wrote: »

I disagree. If you're a manager, looking to promote somebody, who do you choose - the person first out the door at the end of the day, or the person who stays to make sure they get the work done?

That depends. I would probably be asking myself before why the guy needs to stay back to get the work done.
Putting in long hours does not necessarily equate with someone being productive and hard working.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Seems I'll just be singing it and looking for a new job. I appreciate all the feedback lads. It's just not what was said to me at interview stage. I fully believed it was 8-4. It's simply not worth it for the lousy to wages when all is considered working those hours. I'd get the same for working 39 in Tesco.

28064212

Reoil wrote: »

Two 15-minute breaks in a 9 hour day?! Feck that!
In the UK anyway, as far as I'm aware, you're legally entitled to a half hour break for every four hours of work.

Nope: https://www.gov.uk/rest-breaks-work/overview

Workers have the right to one uninterrupted 20 minute rest break during their working day (this could be a tea or lunch break), if they work more than 6 hours a day.

Legally, things are slightly better here: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/hours_of_work/rest_periods_and_breaks.html

The general rule on breaks is that you are entitled to a break of 15 minutes after a 4 ½ hour work period. If you work more than 6 hours you are entitled to a break of 30 minutes, which can include the first 15-minute break

i.e. if you work more than 6 hours, you're entitled to 1*30min break or 2*15min breaks

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

I was always under the impression it was more than 30 mins if over 8 hours.

BizzyC

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Not true. If you're able to bill for all of the time you're being paid to be there, then it makes no difference if you leave at 5/5.30 whenever.

This is true if you're paid per hour or billing them.
If you're an employee on a salary then it's a different story.

Greenmachine

The Honey Monster wrote: »

I was always under the impression it was more than 30 mins if over 8 hours.

Over 10 hours before you are entitled to an hour.

28064212

Greenmachine wrote: »

Over 10 hours before you are entitled to an hour.

There's no law I'm aware of that states that. The entirety of the section of the Organisation of Working Time Act relating to rest periods:

12.—(1) An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 4 hours and 30 minutes without allowing him or her a break of at least 15 minutes.
(2) An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 6 hours without allowing him or her a break of at least 30 minutes; such a break may include the break referred to in subsection (1).
(3) The Minister may by regulations provide, as respects a specified class or classes of employee, that the minimum duration of the break to be allowed to such an employee under subsection (2) shall be more than 30 minutes (but not more than 1 hour).
(4) A break allowed to an employee at the end of the working day shall not be regarded as satisfying the requirement contained in subsection (1) or (2).

It's perfectly legal for an employer to have a contract where the working week is, say, 09:00 to 19:30, 5 days a week, with just 2*15 minute breaks a day. Or for that matter, 07:00 to 19:00, 4 days a week, again with just 2*15 minute breaks a day.

Whether any employee would ever sign up to a 12-hour day with just two 15 minute breaks is another discussion

Panda_Turtle

Spare a thought for us whose standard hours are not 9-5 but fall within the hours 8-6 or 7-5; with additional "overtime required from time to time which is reflected in your salary".

Greenmachine

28064212 wrote: »

There's no law I'm aware of that states that. The entirety of the section of the Organisation of Working Time Act relating to rest periods:

It's perfectly legal for an employer to have a contract where the working week is, say, 09:00 to 19:30, 5 days a week, with just 2*15 minute breaks a day. Or for that matter, 07:00 to 19:00, 4 days a week, again with just 2*15 minute breaks a day.

Whether any employee would ever sign up to a 12-hour day with just two 15 minute breaks is another discussion

I have had another look. The breaks I have mentioned appear to only apply to certain retail areas.