# going on reduced working hours. is it legal to have two jobs



## Maximus152 (29 Sep 2009)

Sister is working in a company west of Ireland. She has been given a reduced working hours, still does 35 hour week but needs more hours for mortgage and so on. She has been offered part time work in evenings, is it leagl for her to have 2 jobs? This will be one job in a few weeks time as her main job is on a thread? Any ideas?


Maximus


----------



## Darthvadar (29 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*

Nothing at all to stop your sister having two (or more) jobs.... I admire her for taking the second job to keep up with her bills, and I wish her all the very best of luck!...

Of course her income from her second job will be taxable...

Darth...


----------



## Maximus152 (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*

Thank you Darth,
yes she has little choice, in any case she is doing it until things stabilize in this land. Yes I am sure there will be tax! Thank you for the info.

Rgds
Maximus


----------



## Darthvadar (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*

You're very welcome, Maximus....

I hope it all works out well for her... She's obviously a hard worker, and I hope it pays off....

Darth....


----------



## missdaisy (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*

Hi Maximus 152, I too say well done to your girlfriend! Your girlfriend is working for a company at the moment - just check her contract of employment for any kind of exclusive service clause. Also if a second job impacts somehow negatively on the job she already has her employer could have a legitimate complaint. Otherwise good luck!


----------



## Purple (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*

Do remember that the working time act still applies (that's the stupid law that stops hard working people doing the best for their families). She cannot work an average of more than 48 hours a week.
Personally I'd ignore it but that's just my opinion.


----------



## paddyc (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*



Purple said:


> She cannot work an average of more than 48 hours a week.


 
Is that not just your employer can't force you to do more than 48 hours a week, sure how many people have a "unpaid job" at home looking after kids etc after a days works.


----------



## Purple (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*



paddyc said:


> Is that not just your employer can't force you to do more than 48 hours a week, sure how many people have a "unpaid job" at home looking after kids etc after a days works.



Nope, you can't work more than 48 hours a week. That's the law.
You're not meant to work in the black economy either.


----------



## Maximus152 (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*

Okay folks I am getting a picture of what the issues are, tahnk you all! And not my Girlfriend Miss D 


Maximus...


----------



## becky (30 Sep 2009)

*Re: double job*



Purple said:


> She cannot work an average of more than 48 hours a week.quote]
> Is that not just your employer can't force you to do more than 48 hours a week, sure how many people have a "unpaid job" at home looking after kids etc after a days works.


 The act  limits the working  hours of paid employment only.  As an employee you are limited to 48 paid working hours a week. A reference period of six months can apply.


----------



## Purple (1 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*

Becky, can you fix your quote please?

I took the quotation marks around "unpaid job" to mean black economy, i.e. cash in hand. Black economy work is, by its nature, not covered since it shouldn't be happening anyway.

I am not sure if payment in kind, e.g. reciprocal child minding while two friends work different shifts, is counted as work as far as the act is concerned.


----------



## becky (1 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*

Purple, I can't do it now. I was posting from my phone so not sure what happened.

What I mean by unpaid work is voluntary work, work at home such as washing the dishes, minding your own kids etc.

Black economy work would not come under this act in my opinion as it is illegal and would be tax fraud.


----------



## Protocol (2 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*



Maximus152 said:


> She has been offered part time work in evenings, is it leagl for her to have 2 jobs? This will be one job in a few weeks time as her main job is on a thread? Any ideas?
> 
> Maximus


 

I have 2 employers.

I think my father had three at one stage.

*You can have as many employers as you like.*

As long as you can fulfill their wishes.


----------



## becky (2 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*



Protocol said:


> I have 2 employers.
> 
> I think my father had three at one stage.
> 
> ...


 
The 48 hour limit still applies though, but I don't know how it's monitored.


----------



## ajapale (2 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*



Purple said:


> Personally I'd ignore it but that's just my opinion.



Im inclined to agree BUT...I just hope that after working 48 hours shes not driving *my* bus or controlling *my* jet ect or looking after the safety of that chemical plant next *my* door!


...unless of course shes a junior doctor in one of our hospitals!


----------



## dave28 (3 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*



becky said:


> The 48 hour limit still applies though, but I don't know how it's monitored.



Isnt there an option for the employee to opt out of this limit and work more that 48 hours ? Its there to protect the employee, to avoid expolitation ... but if the employee wishes , they can work more hours i think


----------



## Purple (4 Oct 2009)

*Re: double job*



ajapale said:


> Im inclined to agree BUT...I just hope that after working 48 hours shes not driving *my* bus or controlling *my* jet ect or looking after the safety of that chemical plant next *my* door!



What if she worked 35 hours a week but spend each evening in the pub, or just watched TV 'till the small hours, getting 4-5 hours sleep a night. Would that be better?


----------



## bugler (5 Oct 2009)

Ajapale is making the legitimate point that work performance     deteriorates   over a given continuous working period. In some occupations (I'm sure not those of the OPs GF) this has serious consequences for the worker and others. I would hope any such professions have specialised guidelines and processes on this matter, though who knows. 

We can't overly control people or workers. And some of them will perform poorly for reasons we can't control (I had alcoholic and mentally ill teachers during secondary school, and physically violent ones in primary school). There should however be legislation in place to try and avoid people from working too many hours, though I imagine 48 hours in the current climate might be restrictive. I would assume that figure wasn't plucked out of the air and is based off some research that indicates undesirable consequences if you regularly cross the 48 hour mark. I have no idea how this compares with our European neighbours, or what the latest research has to say about working hours.

That said, if what my HR manager told me recently is correct, the 48 hour directive only relates to paid employment. Quite why you should be free to run yourself into the ground for no pay but not *for* pay isn't immediately clear, I suppose it's what we call a point of principle.


----------

