42.5 hour standard week on my contract?

ClioQ

Hi all,

I started with a new company this week and have been a bit confused about my working hours, but I received my contract today and it is as I suspected, they are expecting me to sign up for a standard 42.5 hour week. I thought that legally in Ireland a standard working week was 39 hours (but that you may be expected to work on occasionally if required).

I have 2 kids and a life outside work so I am not happy about signing a contract with a 42.5 hr standard week. That 3.5 extra hours a week I would rather spend with my kids. Occasionally if it was warranted I could work on a bit - I'm not just being inflexible!

Does anyone know what my rights are on this and any suggestions how I could approach the issue with my employer? (The others that I work with are on hourly or daily rates, so me and one other are different in that we are on salary - she's not happy about it either, but unfortunately did sign the contract whereas I didn't).

Any help or advise would be greatly appreciated.

jesus_thats_gre

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/act/pub/0020/sec0015.html#sec15

SpencerT

Hey,
The working time directive says 48 hours pw is the max as far as I am aware. So your schedule is fine as long as overtime not excessive .

wmpdd3

I had a standard 45hr week, with 1hr unpaid for lunch, that was retail. what are the actual hours? Is id 8 to 5.30 per day of is it dif hours every week?

Condatis

Forty to forty five hours is a reasonable condition for a working week.

The boom time trend to a shorter week damaged productivity across the economy.

tunedout

Condatis wrote: »

Forty to forty five hours is a reasonable condition for a working week.

The boom time trend to a shorter week damaged productivity across the economy.

I disagree. Research has shown that working weeks greater than 38 hours tend to have a negative effect on overall productivity.

tatli_lokma

does the 42.5 include or exclude lunch? I ask because many contracts state 37.5 or 40 hrs, and this is the actual hours you work and get paid for, but the employee is actually in work 42.5 hrs as they get either 30 or 60 mins per day unpaid for lunch. I have however seen it (not often, but I have seen it) where the contract says something along the lines of 'you will be rostered for a 42.5 hour working week, inclusive of 30 mins lunch break'. This usually only happens however if you get paid lunches, and it is quite unusual to get paid over your lunch breaks.

Mrs OBumble

ClioQ wrote: »

Does anyone know what my rights are on this and any suggestions how I could approach the issue with my employer? ...
Any help or advise would be greatly appreciated.

It's well within the working time rules, so the way I see it, your options, right now are:

1) Accept it and look for a new job with shorter hours

2) Change your mind, quit immediately ... and do you have another job lined up? (Do you need one???)

3) Negotiate with your employer ... but really what is an employer going to think of your if you raise this sort of issue now. And unless you've got a particularly rare skillset, there's a high chance that they'll just say you've failed probation and get rid of you.


Good luck.

Next time - check the conditions of the contract before you accept the job.

Condatis

tunedout wrote: »

I disagree. Research has shown that working weeks greater than 38 hours tend to have a negative effect on overall productivity.

To what research do you refer?

rainbowdrop

Sounds about average to me.

I do a 41.5 hour week (39hrs plus 2.5hrs for 5 half hour unpaid lunch breaks). If I tried to 'broach the subject' with my boss, I'd be shown the door!

SCOOP 64

50 hrs per week, 45 hrs paid, 5 hrs lunch, (39 hrs per week ,i wish:D.)

wmpdd3

Thats what i was working, never got out on time, 8 to 6.30 most days. But i would see my 7 month old for 30 minutes everyday. Also the creche closed at 5.45 so i had a childminder too. There is no way i could do it now i have 2 under 2. All these things need to be considered.

Condatis

wmpdd3 wrote: »

Thats what i was working, never got out on time, 8 to 6.30 most days. But i would see my 7 month old for 30 minutes everyday. Also the creche closed at 5.45 so i had a childminder too. There is no way i could do it now i have 2 under 2. All these things need to be considered.

Well either you want to work or you don't! Before you have children it's your responsibility to know whether or not you will be able to arrange for their care while you work.

If not; then you'll just have to defer having them until you can cope.

wmpdd3

Condatis wrote: »

Well either you want to work or you don't! Before you have children it's your responsibility to know whether or not you will be able to arrange for their care while you work.

If not; then you'll just have to defer having them until you can cope.

What does this have to do with the OP? :cool:

Condatis

wmpdd3 wrote: »

What does this have to do with the OP? :cool:

Clearly it's specific to the post that I quoted.

However it also has a relevance to the opening post which whinges about having to make a reasonable commitment to an employer.

fasttalkerchat

Once you're under 60 hours and an average of 48 hours you're fine legally.

Caseywhale

ClioQ wrote: »

Hi all,

I started with a new company this week and have been a bit confused about my working hours, but I received my contract today and it is as I suspected, they are expecting me to sign up for a standard 42.5 hour week. I thought that legally in Ireland a standard working week was 39 hours (but that you may be expected to work on occasionally if required).

I have 2 kids and a life outside work so I am not happy about signing a contract with a 42.5 hr standard week. That 3.5 extra hours a week I would rather spend with my kids. Occasionally if it was warranted I could work on a bit - I'm not just being inflexible!

Does anyone know what my rights are on this and any suggestions how I could approach the issue with my employer? (The others that I work with are on hourly or daily rates, so me and one other are different in that we are on salary - she's not happy about it either, but unfortunately did sign the contract whereas I didn't).

Any help or advise would be greatly appreciated.

Tell them you think they are being unreasonable.
i do mostly contracting now, but i always insist on a 7 hour week.. Sometimes they refuse, so i either go for another job or increase my hourly rate.
you dont have to take the job. if you do have to take it then they do call the shots. no employer is going to pass up an opportunity to milk a recession.

mr_edge_to_you

I think you need to see your HR manager (or department manager) and ask what the contracted hours of work are. If it is 42.5hours which includes 5 "lunch" hours then it think it's fine. However if the contract excludes lunch hours then it does sound a bit excessive. You're then looking at an 8.5 hour day plus an hour for lunch. That would mean that you'd be working from 7:3am to 5:00pm. I've often worked 50-60 hours a week but my contract was never more 40 hours per week.

You're contract should clearly state what your normal hours of work are and what your break entitlements are.

Just seek clarification on the standard working day and then take it from there.

Have you signed the contract of employment yet?

actuallylike

Condatis wrote: »

Well either you want to work or you don't! Before you have children it's your responsibility to know whether or not you will be able to arrange for their care while you work.

If not; then you'll just have to defer having them until you can cope.

Oh dear .

But he...
I mean...
...
ah forget it.

LegacyUser

There is absolutely nothing illegal with this contract.I have had contracts which were a minimum of 45 hours per week and it would be a godsend to only do a week of that length.

As a manager I would not be impressed with a new employee approaching me about the hours in their contract after starting in a position,espcially if there had been no mention of this during the recruitment process.

ongarboy

nig1 wrote: »

50 hrs per week, 45 hrs paid, 5 hrs lunch, (39 hrs per week ,i wish:D.)

I don't understand why people are factoring their lunch breaks into their working week hour count. My understanding of a working week constitutes the hours you work and does not include lunch.

OP, if you are factoring in your daily lunch hour or half hour then 42.5 hours does not seem excessive. If you are not factoring it in then it is on the high side but not illegal as long as it is under 48 hours. Again as someone said, you should have paid closer attention to this when accepting the terms and conditions of the job contract offered. I doubt you could renegotiate with a new employer at this time while you are on probation and it would not portray you positively so early if you are trying to essentially "backtrack" on what you signed up for (unwittingly or not).

Shelflife

OP we are in the middle of a recession and you are quibbleing over 42mins extra per day that you will have to work over what you expected to work.

To me, if a new employee came in emploring me to think of the children over 42mins id be seriously worried about them.

as long as you get your required breaks and are paid for the hours worked then its legal.

Id be very slow to bring this to HR if i was you.

Stheno

OP my hours of work are 9-6 with an hour for lunch, which is either 40 hours when you exclude lunch, or 45 hours in total in work including lunch.


Check if those hours include lunch, then deduct it, and you are working 37.5 hours a week, so compared to my 9-6, you are doing nine to half five, which is pretty standard these days.