Metropol

Sput wrote:So if every shop was open all day every day of the year you'd call that progress?

I think everyone should have the right to work when they want and every store should have the right to open when they want. Lets face it if we invented the shop today, we probably wouldn't implement such a rule.

Gavin Scott wrote:

barcode wrote:
h yes 2nd Jan V Good Friday, most Scottish bank staff don not care for Good Friday.

saying that half of scotland does not have Good Friday off, ( lothians and Edinburgh do) Most of Scotland also don;t take Easter monday off either

*pfft*

I don't get any public holidays in this office. None.

That said they do give us 27 days, so I think that works out in my favour.

Alot of people are like that now, scotland really does not like the public holidays much, there local area on my area where the schools are still open!

wells wrote:

Sput wrote:So if every shop was open all day every day of the year you'd call that progress?

I think everyone should have the right to work when they want and every store should have the right to open when they want. Lets face it if we invented the shop today, we probably wouldn't implement such a rule.

Germany has now over turn a ruling meaning sunday trading will be ban or something? need to doube check

Sput wrote:So if every shop was open all day every day of the year you'd call that progress?

I'm sure not every single shop would choose to open all day every day if they had the choice.

Shops could stay open all day and night at the moment if they wanted to (apart from Sundays) but most of them shut at 5.30pm out of choice.

The key word is choice.

You're right, the key word IS choice. and I think in this case the choice that's being supported is that of workers to have the choice whether to work on a particular day or not. in a sense that's more progressive because it's about social equality: the worker has a situation where they can say no to the employer.

wells wrote:

Sput wrote:So if every shop was open all day every day of the year you'd call that progress?

I think everyone should have the right to work when they want and every store should have the right to open when they want. Lets face it if we invented the shop today, we probably wouldn't implement such a rule.

I'd go along with that, but at the same time you have to factor that staff must be allowed to have one day in seven where they're not required to work.

Whether that's a Sunday or another day is perhaps less important these days, but the current working times regulations insist that staff can refuse Sundays, and should be rewarded appropriately for agreeing - with greater remuneration or even time and a half in lieu.

A day off per week is the important bit though.

Gavin Scott wrote:A day off per week is the important bit though.

Personally, I'd prefer the right to only work a maximum number of hours per week instead.

Chie wrote:

Gavin Scott wrote:A day off per week is the important bit though.

Personally, I'd prefer the right to only work a maximum number of hours per week instead.

How do you mean?

In such a way that your employer is entitled to shit all over your weekend plans?

"I see you've got six minutes left over, would you mind coming in at 11am on Sunday please Chie?"

Sput wrote:In such a way that your employer is entitled to shit all over your weekend plans?

"I see you've got six minutes left over, would you mind coming in at 11am on Sunday please Chie?"

How much are they going to pay me for that? 60 pence?

This kind of scenario is easily prevented by legally obliging employers to pay the full hourly rate even if the employee only works for six minutes. Such a caveat would put irresponsible employers off playing silly games like that. The government could also stipulate in the law that employers must agree shifts with their employees at least a fortnight in advance, meaning they wouldn't be able to shit all over your plans.

The French have their own law that says people can only work a maximum of 35 hours per week, while in the rest of Europe it's 48 hours under the EU Working Time Directive. I think we should have our own maximum of 35 hours too, then the 'one day off a week' thing wouldn't be necessary.

Chie, I think it's fair to say that you don't live in the real world, or have ever had a real job.

Say we had a legal maximum working week of 35 hours. I work as part of a management team of 4, and each of us works 39 hours a week on a normal week, which is about right to cover the amount of shifts that are needed to be worked, plus a bit extra for other bits of work we need to do. If we weren't allowed to work more than 35 hours then fine, we could just about manage most of the time - when this would not work, however, is when someone is off on holiday, ill, on a training course, or any of the things that crop up occasionally that takes one of us out of action temporarily, raising everybody else's hours. To limit the amount of hours an individual can work to 35 hours, by law, would mean that we would have to either employ somebody else to work alongside us (thus raising the payroll cost by 25% for no benefit most of the time) or close when we'd all worked our hours. We currently have the flexibility to work extra if the business requires it.

But hey, don't let the real world get in the way of your naive, uninformed ramblings!

all new Phil wrote:Chie, I think it's fair to say that you don't live in the real world, or have ever had a real job.

Say we had a legal maximum working week of 35 hours. I work as part of a management team of 4, and each of us works 39 hours a week on a normal week, which is about right to cover the amount of shifts that are needed to be worked, plus a bit extra for other bits of work we need to do. If we weren't allowed to work more than 35 hours then fine, we could just about manage most of the time - when this would not work, however, is when someone is off on holiday, ill, on a training course, or any of the things that crop up occasionally that takes one of us out of action temporarily, raising everybody else's hours. To limit the amount of hours an individual can work to 35 hours, by law, would mean that we would have to either employ somebody else to work alongside us (thus raising the payroll cost by 25% for no benefit most of the time) or close when we'd all worked our hours. We currently have the flexibility to work extra if the business requires it.

No, your hours would be raised by overtime, which would allow you to work over the 35 hour limit and cover the ill person's work. If none of you felt like volunteering for overtime then the fact that your employer will save money by employing you for 35 hours instead of 39 hours would mean they could afford to employ temporary staff.

I can't believe I've just had to literally spell that out for you. I thought it would've been obvious.

all new Phil wrote:But hey, don't let the real world get in the way of your naive, uninformed ramblings!

Get lost.