UK Employers Want to Keep 48-hour Week Opt Out

Anonymous

Well put together Paul Sellers! I couldn't agree more with your comments. It's a fact tiredness kills, injures and causes phychological problems. The working Time Directive is not about Productivity or Profitability, it about the human factors. I have to deal with some of the people who are bullied into having to work sometimes up to 80 hours a week, trying to make unrealistic targets and journey times. The last one was a car driver who fell asleep on the M6 at 2am in the morning after starting his shift at 6am the previouse morning. When questioned his response was "I have to do this on a regular basis. Who wants to tell his wife "he died in his sleep on the M6". There are far too many employers who play lip service to health and safety and will only react to legislation. We must fight to scrap the opt out and make employers accountable.

Anonymous

THE WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE, WAS BROUGHT IN TO HELP EASE THE PRESSURE ON THE EMPOLYEES OF ALL COMPANIES AS A WHOLE HAVE REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE GUIDLINES LAID DOWN.LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE WE BRITAINS, ARE ALWAYS THE LAST TO THE GATE WHERE OUR GENERAL WELFARE IS A CONCERN.WE SHOULD BE SAYING NO, TO THE 48 HOURS AND GOING FOR THE SAME HOURS OTHER COUNTRIES IN EUROPE ARE WORKING.
COMPANIES AND EMPLOYERS, SAY THE SAME EVERY TIME, IF WE DO THIS WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TRADE, WHAT THEY MEAN IS, THE GENERAL BRITISH WORKER WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO SUPPORT ALL OTHERS, WHAT YOU HAVE TO ASK IS WHY IS MOST OF OUR GENERAL GOODS DEARER THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. SIMPLE WE CARRY EVERY ONE ELSE,ALL OF THE BRITISH WORKING PUBLIC, WORK THEIR SOCKS OFF, FOR LITTLE REWARD, WHEN OUR COUNTER PARTS IN EUROPE HAVE BETTER EVERYTHING,IT TIME BRUSSELS SAID NO TO THE BRITISH GOVERMENT,WE EITHER ALL WORK TO THE SAME REGULATIONS,AND ADHERE TO THEM OR BRITAIN GO IT ALONE,WE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO HAVE DUAL REGULATIONS, PEOPLE ARE DYING ALL BECAUSE OF PROFIT AND COST....THIS GOVERMENT SHOULD SAY YES WE AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE EUROPEAN REGULATIONS OR GET OUT.THE GOVERMENTS OF THIS COUNTRY HAVE HAD IT TO EASY FOR FAR TO LONG, SO COME ON BRUSSELS LAY DOWN THE LAW AND MAKE THE GOVERMENT AND COMPANYS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE LACK OF SUPPORT AND THEIR TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFTEY OF ITS WORK FORCE.

Anonymous

I echo Paul Sellers comments there is absolutely no need for uk enterprises to continue with the opt out clause from the 48 hour week. The main reason for lower productivity is a chronic lack of investment by most companies in training of their workforce long hours are no subsitute for properly trained and motivated staff.

Anonymous

What is the debate here? how many other laws can people choose to opt out of?

Anonymous

It is wise to remember that in the US workers do not have the luxury of a 48 hour work week. The norm is more often 60 hours per week with only two weeks annual vacation and fewer public holidays. No one can say that the US has a lower standard of living than Europe. However companies in the US are generally more likely to employ double shifts, use flexible working hours or a greater number of minimum wage employees are utilised to maximise output but reduce costs. It should be a case that each company has the right to structure their working hours in accordance with thier needs. However, as always it comes down to the fact that you need company owners that are in tune with thier employees and understand that "wages alone do not make the man".

Anonymous

I would like my workforce to opt out, but many of them cannot survive on the hourly wage x 48 hrs. that they will be earning. If I then have to employ more staff to cover the shortfall in hours, I will not be able to afford to increase their wages to the level that they currently earn per week. Many of my staff do not wish to opt out, for this reason.

Anonymous

It is difficult to disagree with the points raised by Paul Sellers. It is, however, a sad fact that a large proportion of the UK workforce earn very low wages, and have to work long hours just to survive and keep a roof over their heads. Could any of us manage on the National minimum Wage? Also take into account the way house prices have increased; Who could afford to buy a house when earning less than £5 per hour?
Should the 48 hour opt out end, I fear that those who need to work long hours will "moonlight" for cash in hand jobs to cheat the system, accepting even lower pay and unsafe conditions from disreputable employers happy to maintain the "Black Economy". I appreciate the good intention behind the WTR, but there are many
underlying issues to consider, not just productivity. Increased productivity does not usually mean increased standards of living for employees, but in most cases increased profits for employers and fewer jobs in the long run.

Anonymous

here we go again the same people who said the minimum wage would cost jobs, now saying that working time regulations will cost jobs or reduce pay.
The real truth is that british bosses are not up to the standards of their european counterparts, who on the whole are able to pay more, ask for less hours and command far greater respect from their workforce who recipricate by working their socks off for them.
Oh for a britain with such commonsence management.

Anonymous

The British Security Industry Association represents professional security companies. The removal of the opt-out clause to work more than a 48-hour week would have a huge impact on the sector, however, the BSIA welcomes the debate and would like to see a reduction in the long hours that security officers work. We recently issued a press release on this subject, see News at www.bsia.co.uk

Anonymous

"It is, however, a sad fact that a large proportion of the UK workforce earn very low wages, and have to work long hours just to survive and keep a roof over their heads. " That's more than a 'sad fact'. It's a national disgrace. We should be ashamed of the fact that our government, and by association each one of us, thinks profit, enjoyed by a few who already have more than they need, is more important than the welfare of hundreds of thousands of low-paid workers. If we must look at it selfishly, what are the children of these parents working 60 or 70 hours a week doing with themselves? I think we can give a pretty good guess as to the activities of some of them. Allow these people a decent standard of living and the knock-on effects will benefit society as a whole.

Anonymous

I work n the contract security industry, where the vast majority of employees work upto 60 hours per week. What will happen to these workers who ill lose a huge chunk of their weekly wages when we are cut to 48 hours. Will employers up our hourly rate to compensate. I doubt it. Will the companies, that we supply security services for, be willing to pay for this increas in hourly pay. I also doubt that. After all, one major factor that companies outsource their security, cleaning, catering etc. is too enable them to keep their costs own. I'm all for more user frienly working hours. But not with the likely effect that my colleagues and I are financially penalised to the extent that we will be.