|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 14:13:31 GMT
Angela Rayner’s plans to give workers a right to switch off threatens to create a “playground for ambulance chasers”, an employers’ group has claimed. A new survey by the Institute of Directors (IoD) found that most employers disagree with the Government’s plans to restrict contact with staff outside of working hours and fear a slew of legal action. One business leader in the health and social work sector told the IoD: “The ability to contact an employee ‘in extremis’ is valuable and, depending on the business and their role, potentially critical. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/11/angela-rayner-right-to-switch-off-playground-ambulance/I have mixed feelings on this one. A quick anecdote; for reasons I wont bore you with I didn't want a company smart phone but apparently I had no choice so reluctantly I acquiesced. However it became a bone of contention between me and my employer when it was discovered I switched it off when I left work, switching it on again when I arrived at work the following day. My line manager asked me not to switch it off in future. I said OK, and from then on when I left work I left it switched on, in my desk drawer. In my case, my employer could require me to accept and carry a company mobile phone while I was at work or on work business. But much to my employers annoyance, I could not be required to take it home. |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Jul 20, 2024 14:46:32 GMT
Angela Rayner’s plans to give workers a right to switch off threatens to create a “playground for ambulance chasers”, an employers’ group has claimed. A new survey by the Institute of Directors (IoD) found that most employers disagree with the Government’s plans to restrict contact with staff outside of working hours and fear a slew of legal action. One business leader in the health and social work sector told the IoD: “The ability to contact an employee ‘in extremis’ is valuable and, depending on the business and their role, potentially critical. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/11/angela-rayner-right-to-switch-off-playground-ambulance/I have mixed feelings on this one. A quick anecdote; for reasons I wont bore you with I didn't want a company smart phone but apparently I had no choice so reluctantly I acquiesced. However it became a bone of contention between me and my employer when it was discovered I switched it off when I left work, switching it on again when I arrived at work the following day. My line manager asked me not to switch it off in future. I said OK, and from then on when I left work I left it switched on, in my desk drawer. In my case, my employer could require me to accept and carry a company mobile phone while I was at work or on work business. But much to my employers annoyance, I could not be required to take it home. If you lived in France, Red, your employer would not be allowed to contact you after hours. "Beginning January 2017, in companies with over 50 employees, the annual negotiation on professional equality between female and male employees and life quality at the workplace which was already in force must also include the conditions of exercise by the employees of a right to disconnect from all devices, and the implementation of rules to regulate the use of digital devices to ensure observance of rest time and leave and personal and family life. Failing any agreement, it is incumbent upon the employer to implement a policy to this effect." www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/f1d8c939/ten-things-to-know-about-labour-and-employment-law-in-france |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 15:18:45 GMT
If you lived in France, Red, your employer would not be allowed to contact you after hours. "Beginning January 2017, in companies with over 50 employees, the annual negotiation on professional equality between female and male employees and life quality at the workplace which was already in force must also include the conditions of exercise by the employees of a right to disconnect from all devices, and the implementation of rules to regulate the use of digital devices to ensure observance of rest time and leave and personal and family life. Failing any agreement, it is incumbent upon the employer to implement a policy to this effect." www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/f1d8c939/ten-things-to-know-about-labour-and-employment-law-in-franceMy son lives in France, I wouldn't dream of it. I think there are probably some situations in which it may be reasonable for an employer to contact an employee out of work hours, depending on circumstances. Plus of course, if an employee wants to get on in a company, if he wants progression/promotion, he will probably want to be seen as flexible/cooperative. |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Jul 20, 2024 15:43:51 GMT
If you lived in France, Red, your employer would not be allowed to contact you after hours. "Beginning January 2017, in companies with over 50 employees, the annual negotiation on professional equality between female and male employees and life quality at the workplace which was already in force must also include the conditions of exercise by the employees of a right to disconnect from all devices, and the implementation of rules to regulate the use of digital devices to ensure observance of rest time and leave and personal and family life. Failing any agreement, it is incumbent upon the employer to implement a policy to this effect." www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/f1d8c939/ten-things-to-know-about-labour-and-employment-law-in-france I think there are probably some situations in which it may be reasonable for an employer to contact an employee out of work hours, depending on circumstances. Plus of course, if an employee wants to get on in a company, if he wants progression/promotion, he will probably want to be seen as flexible/cooperative. They know how to live. They understand the importance of work/life balance. Long lunches, no eating at your desk...that sort of thing. I think it's wise in the long run not to burn out employees, especially the most valued ones. The Americans, on the other hand, expect their high level employees to be available from early morning to after business hours and weekends. They expect them to travel on their own time and to work overtime without compensation, all in the name of justifying their salaries. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 16:04:04 GMT
My son lives in France, I wouldn't dream of it. I think there are probably some situations in which it may be reasonable for an employer to contact an employee out of work hours, depending on circumstances. Plus of course, if an employee wants to get on in a company, if he wants progression/promotion, he will probably want to be seen as flexible/cooperative. They know how to live. They understand the importance of work/life balance. Long lunches, no eating at your desk...that sort of thing. I think it's wise in the long run not to burn out employees, especially the most valued ones. The Americans, on the other hand, expect their high level employees to be available from early morning to after business hours and weekends. They expect them to travel on their own time and to work overtime without compensation, all in the name of justifying their salaries. The way they do things in France is mad, it's wonder the country isn't bankrupt. On the other hand, I agree the US is the opposite end of the scale. As George Carlin said: That's why it's called the American dream - you have to be asleep to believe it. |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Jul 20, 2024 16:21:37 GMT
They know how to live. They understand the importance of work/life balance. Long lunches, no eating at your desk...that sort of thing. I think it's wise in the long run not to burn out employees, especially the most valued ones. The Americans, on the other hand, expect their high level employees to be available from early morning to after business hours and weekends. They expect them to travel on their own time and to work overtime without compensation, all in the name of justifying their salaries. The way they do things in France is mad, it's wonder the country isn't bankrupt. On the other hand, I agree the US is the opposite end of the scale. As George Carlin said: That's why it's called the American dream - you have to be asleep to believe it. I've not been to France in quite a long time so I'm not au fait with the current state of affairs. As for the US, I think it's fair to say that the average American is not badly off. An interesting and groundbreaking study by Just Facts has discovered that, after accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and food stamps, the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries. This includes the majority of countries in the prestigious Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including its European members. In other words, if the U.S. “poor” were a nation, it would be one of the world’s richest. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 16:33:14 GMT
The way they do things in France is mad, it's wonder the country isn't bankrupt. On the other hand, I agree the US is the opposite end of the scale. As George Carlin said: That's why it's called the American dream - you have to be asleep to believe it. I've not been to France in quite a long time so I'm not au fait with the current state of affairs. As for the US, I think it's fair to say that the average American is not badly off. An interesting and groundbreaking study by Just Facts has discovered that, after accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and food stamps, the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries. This includes the majority of countries in the prestigious Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including its European members. In other words, if the U.S. “poor” were a nation, it would be one of the world’s richest. Oh I dunno about that. Courtesy of the font of knowledge: Fifty-one percent of working-age Americans struggle to afford health care and about one in three (32%) struggle with medical debt... about 8% or 26 million cannot afford medical insurance...I'll be honest Ripley, as a model, that doesn't sound very prestigious to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Jul 20, 2024 16:48:15 GMT
I've not been to France in quite a long time so I'm not au fait with the current state of affairs. As for the US, I think it's fair to say that the average American is not badly off. An interesting and groundbreaking study by Just Facts has discovered that, after accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and food stamps, the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries. This includes the majority of countries in the prestigious Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including its European members. In other words, if the U.S. “poor” were a nation, it would be one of the world’s richest. Oh I dunno about that. Courtesy of the font of knowledge: Fifty-one percent of working-age Americans struggle to afford health care and about one in three (32%) struggle with medical debt... about 8% or 26 million cannot afford medical insurance...I'll be honest Ripley, as a model, that doesn't sound very prestigious to me.
It's true that 51% said that it was very difficult or somewhat difficult to afford health care. It was a small sampling (6000), comprising people under age 65 who self-reported. There have been efforts to deliver an NHS style health care system that would cover everyone, but the Republicans are always against that. On the plus side of American health care, care is always available. If your doctor tells you this morning that you need an MRI, you can have one this afternoon. Appointments are made by phone or online. You don't need to wait weeks or months for an invitation by letter. There are pros and cons, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 20, 2024 16:56:57 GMT
If you lived in France, Red, your employer would not be allowed to contact you after hours. "Beginning January 2017, in companies with over 50 employees, the annual negotiation on professional equality between female and male employees and life quality at the workplace which was already in force must also include the conditions of exercise by the employees of a right to disconnect from all devices, and the implementation of rules to regulate the use of digital devices to ensure observance of rest time and leave and personal and family life. Failing any agreement, it is incumbent upon the employer to implement a policy to this effect." www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/f1d8c939/ten-things-to-know-about-labour-and-employment-law-in-franceMy son lives in France, I wouldn't dream of it. I think there are probably some situations in which it may be reasonable for an employer to contact an employee out of work hours, depending on circumstances. Plus of course, if an employee wants to get on in a company, if he wants progression/promotion, he will probably want to be seen as flexible/cooperative. You want a halfway house where the employee can decide if he wants to take calls after hours as part of the job and if the agreement is he should not call except in exceptional circumstances then that should work pretty well. Most jobs are 9-5 so if it is after 5, why can't it wait until 9am. Perhaps someone is ill and the employer desperately needs someone else to cover and will give good money for the favour, then that would be reasonable. What would be unreasonable is pestering them for no good reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 20, 2024 17:04:19 GMT
I think its a daft idea - for my entire working life every role has needed me to be contactable in an emergency. It is simply part of the job.
I can think of instances where this would turn into a disaster.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 17:16:28 GMT
I think its a daft idea - for my entire working life every role has needed me to be contactable in an emergency. It is simply part of the job. I can think of instances where this would turn into a disaster. It depends entirely on the circumstances. I see no reason why an overbearing employer should demand that low level/shop floor employees should be contactable during out of work hours. There will obviously be exceptions depending on level of responsibility. To be expected. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 17:23:21 GMT
You want a halfway house where the employee can decide if he wants to take calls after hours as part of the job and if the agreement is he should not call except in exceptional circumstances then that should work pretty well. Most jobs are 9-5 so if it is after 5, why can't it wait until 9am. Perhaps someone is ill and the employer desperately needs someone else to cover and will give good money for the favour, then that would be reasonable. What would be unreasonable is pestering them for no good reason. It's not a case of a 'halfway house', it's about levels of responsibility. If you're in a position of responsibility you should reasonably, I would suggest, be contactable out of hours. |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jul 20, 2024 17:28:24 GMT
Angela Rayner’s plans to give workers a right to switch off threatens to create a “playground for ambulance chasers”, an employers’ group has claimed. A new survey by the Institute of Directors (IoD) found that most employers disagree with the Government’s plans to restrict contact with staff outside of working hours and fear a slew of legal action. One business leader in the health and social work sector told the IoD: “The ability to contact an employee ‘in extremis’ is valuable and, depending on the business and their role, potentially critical. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/11/angela-rayner-right-to-switch-off-playground-ambulance/I have mixed feelings on this one. A quick anecdote; for reasons I wont bore you with I didn't want a company smart phone but apparently I had no choice so reluctantly I acquiesced. However it became a bone of contention between me and my employer when it was discovered I switched it off when I left work, switching it on again when I arrived at work the following day. My line manager asked me not to switch it off in future. I said OK, and from then on when I left work I left it switched on, in my desk drawer. In my case, my employer could require me to accept and carry a company mobile phone while I was at work or on work business. But much to my employers annoyance, I could not be required to take it home. It's a ridiculous idea , there are 101 reasons why an evening email might be sent and that doesn't necessarily mean that said email needs to be dealt with immediately It could be in preparation for the next day (there was discussion some time ago on this forum that an adult worker who said that he is on the autistic spectrum and requires allocated jobs to be confirmed to him in writing on a to do list- if that waits till the following day the employee charged with writing to do lists will be unecssrily occupied handholding andthe worker will be doing SFA while waiting for the updated to do list) many businesses operate in different time zones and attention is needed outside 9-5, a job might require finishing after office hours etc etc |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 20, 2024 17:30:19 GMT
In my previous role they desperately wanted me to have a work mobile and laptop and I steadfastly refused.
They screwed enough out of me during the time I was at work.
They could poke any extra curricular activity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 20, 2024 17:37:51 GMT
It's a ridiculous idea , there are 101 reasons why an evening email might be sent and that doesn't necessarily mean that said email needs to be dealt with immediately It could be in preparation for the next day (there was discussion some time ago on this forum that an adult worker who said that he is on the autistic spectrum and requires allocated jobs to be confirmed to him in writing on a to do list- if that waits till the following day the employee charged with writing to do lists will be unecssrily occupied handholding andthe worker will be doing SFA while waiting for the updated to do list) many businesses operate in different time zones and attention is needed outside 9-5, a job might require finishing after office hours etc etc On the face of it your comments may be seen as perfectly reasonable, however. In the example you gave in which an employer may want to email an employee, what happens if the employee says he doesn't have an email address? And it's no use saying oh come on everyone has email, the fact is an employer cannot 'require' an employee to have a mobile phone number or an email address which is why key personnel, supervisors/managers usually get company mobile phones/laptops. |
|
