Is it time to remove the working time directive?

Spotted this article in Health & Safety Review today;

Aviva, the British insurance company which owns Hibernian, is warning that the ‘long hours’ culture in Britain could be putting employees’ health at risk.

According to James Draper, of Aviva Risk Management Solutions, among the problems caused by long hours working are musculoskeletal disorders, cardiovascular disorders, chronic infections, depression, stress and diabetes.

Mr Draper delivered his comments when Aviva published a report on the health of the UK’s workforce, Health of the Workplace 3. Continuing, he said: “Other problems associated with the long hours culture include headaches, reduced immune systems, extreme fatigue and insomnia”.

He said that in 2007/2008 (the HSE’s statistical reporting year), 13.5m workdays were lost in the UK due to work-related stress, depression and anxiety.

According to the Aviva report, nearly 60% of British workers believe that the recession is adding to workers’ stress, while GPs are predicting that during the recession, stress-related illnesses will be the biggest health issue.

Aviva’s UK occupational health business development manager, Alex Marshall, said that around 37% of workers are failing to take lunch breaks. He said there is a need for a strong focus on stress management, which should be treated like any other workplace hazard. Solutions, such as employee assistance programmes, should be put in place.

Given the similarities between the Irish and British labour markets and the impact of the recession on both countries, the Aviva report is relevant to Irish employers. It would be interesting to see an Irish insurer publish a report on the health of the Irish workforce. Given that there are three insurance companies in Ireland in the occupational healthcare market, the ability to publish such a report exists.
Click to expand...
 
Yet another nail biting article from the Health & Safety review. No real surprise that an insurance company is trying to sell more workplace insurance. I wonder did Aviva happen to take out any advertising in the magazine?
 
BeanPole said:
I wonder did Aviva happen to take out any advertising in the magazine?
Click to expand...
Nope - no Aviva advert in the magazine. In fact, no advertising at all in the magazine, so no compromises there. But you would have known that from your previous reading of the magazine - right? You wouldn't have made a 'nail-biting' dig at a magazine you had never read, I'm sure.
 
the are alot of people saying that it takes away peoples write to work the hours they choose this is a load of rubish because you can opt out of the directive. Also dont you think it is wrong to choose long hours when it can potential be a hazzard to the people around you or customers. actualy it gives you more freadom of your working hours in a way as without this in place organisations could make people work watever hours they wanted to make them work
 
bggb said:
the are alot of people saying that it takes away peoples write to work the hours they choose this is a load of rubish because you can opt out of the directive.
Click to expand...
A country can opt out but once it is accepted, as it has been here, individuals or businesses cannot. Therefore you are completely incorrect in that ascertion.

bggb said:
Also dont you think it is wrong to choose long hours when it can potential be a hazzard to the people around you or customers.
Click to expand...
I agree, people should not work so long that it is potentially dangerous for themselves or others but many people have worked more than 48 hours a week for years (me, for example) with no detrimental impact on anyone.

bggb said:
actualy it gives you more freadom of your working hours in a way as without this in place organisations could make people work watever hours they wanted to make them work
Click to expand...
No employer can force you to work more than your contracted hours. If they do that’s bullying and there are plenty of laws to protect you. I don’t understand how it gives you more freedom.
 
It will increase unemployment, I think 48hr a week is much better option.
 
Purple said:
We make it clear that overtime will be required. If you don't want to work it then don't take the job.

I agree, the employee should be paid for their overtime. If this happens then both parties benefit.
Click to expand...

With regard to your first remark it is clear you would find it next to impossible to accomodate single parents or others with childcare requirements that are not 100% flexable.
 
lightswitch said:
With regard to your first remark it is clear you would find it next to impossible to accomodate single parents or others with childcare requirements that are not 100% flexable.
Click to expand...

If your personal circumstances don’t suit the job description them don’t take the job.
I find it very hard to arrange my childminding requirements around my hours but why should I get special treatment because I have 4 children and my wife works full time as well?
Some degree of flexibility is required by all involved as long as everyone gets their job done but people shouldn’t get penalised because they have no children.
 
Purple said:
If your personal circumstances don’t suit the job description them don’t take the job.
I find it very hard to arrange my childminding requirements around my hours but why should I get special treatment because I have 4 children and my wife works full time as well?
Some degree of flexibility is required by all involved as long as everyone gets their job done but people shouldn’t get penalised because they have no children.
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons that there is a maximum working week. Quite a number of people prefer to work to live rather than live to work hence don't want to spend more than a certain amount of hours working. Others have dependent family members that they need time to take care of.

Some day you may have a better understanding of peoples varying circumstances.
 
lightswitch said:
This is one of the reasons that there is a maximum working week.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. I take it that you are an adult. If so then you are responsible for organising your own life. If you don’t want to work long hours then don’t take a job that requires you to work long hours. If you want to work long hours (because you love working, because your are obsessive, because you hate your family, because you have no friends; whatever) then you should be free to do so as long as you don’t pose a danger to yourself or others.

lightswitch said:
Quite a number of people prefer to work to live rather than live to work hence don't want to spend more than a certain amount of hours working. Others have dependent family members that they need time to take care of.
Click to expand...
Bully for them. I’d prefer to stay at home and have an attractive call girl arrive at my house every week with a bundle of cash but I can’t seem to land that job.
I have four children, one of whom has special needs (mild) but that’s not my employers problem. Do you think it should be? Do you think an employer should have to pay someone to stay at home to mind their dependants on a regular basis?
You enter into a contract with your employer; X pay for Y job. The rest is your own business.

lightswitch said:
Some day you may have a better understanding of peoples varying circumstances.
Click to expand...
Maybe someday you’ll have a better understanding of how the real world works and maybe you’ll realise that being a grown up means that you can’t expect a “mammy state” to hold your hand all the time.
 
Other than to point out that the state has never held my hand I have no intention to responding to the rest of your rant............

Either way lets face it pigs will fly before the Government, inept as they are, will change the working hours to favour your suggestion.
 
lightswitch said:
Other than to point out that the state has never held my hand I have no intention to responding to the rest of your rant............

Either way lets face it pigs will fly before the Government, inept as they are, will change the working hours to favour your suggestion.
Click to expand...
But if the first part of your post is true then you would have no problem if they do change it.
 
The first part of my post is true and as far as I can tell it will remain that way. There is no conflict between the first part of my post and my previous posts on this subject.
 
lightswitch said:
The first part of my post is true and as far as I can tell it will remain that way. There is no conflict between the first part of my post and my previous posts on this subject.
Click to expand...

Good for you, now don't start posting comments like "Some day you may have a better understanding of peoples varying circumstances." unless you want the same sort of comment thrown back at you.

You were doing oh so well 'till you started getting condescending ;)
 
podgerodge said:
I see that people who "control their own hours" are exempt - can someone elaborate on how wide an interpretation can be made on this statement for me please? Does it include someone who decides "I'll do 40 hours this week and 30 next week" or does it only include people that, while employees, can pretty do whatever they want?


http://www.entemp.ie/publications/employment/1997/workingtimeact.pdf
Click to expand...

I don't think this has been tested in court but I would welcome clarification by another poster.
 
sunday work

i think the wtd should stay in place, and sundays should command a premium if employers wish work to be done on sundays, why, because this encourages employers only to employ people for essential work on sundays and organising the week so that most work is done during the week. However i agree that the minimum wage should fall, and also that social welfare rates should fall. However I think as always we are looking at the wrong areas for cuts and efficiencies, the biggest costs in ireland are because of the vested interests such as state companies, local authorities, public services, publicans, and the legal system who have unbridled power in the irish economy, and who are over represented in government
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top