Leaving work on time frowned upon. Mod warning post 1

Wanderer78

Stheno wrote: »

IT, the subject I deal with everyday! Rather a very specific area of IT that I work in.

best of luck with it.

i suspect your lifestyle is reasonably typical in regards available free time. whats actually happening in order for people to do so, sacrifices to both physical and mental well being must be made in order to achieve the goals and activities of the typical week. is this good for the individual and indeed society as a whole? i suspect its not. im not criticizing you directly, just grappling with the ideas. i suspect most dont have time to do much exercise weekly due to this kind of lifestyle. this is very unhealthy for the individual and indeed for society as a whole.

20 hours a week exercise!

I'd cycle in and out to work and play five a side four hours a week and I thought I was doing well!

Stheno

Deleted User wrote: »

No kids and none planned. Commute is about thirty minutes each way. Im in a new role after a promotion and I don't feel the time passing to be honest, I'd stay another ten hours if I could.

Wouldn't and won't do it forever but can honestly say that regardless of the jump in money I'm happier at work now than I was in a less interesting position for ten hours a week less this time last year.

See I think this is key. I regularly work from home, and it can be eight o'clock if I'm caught up in something.

That's very different from working in an organisation who have ingrained an attitude that if you leave on time there is something wrong with you doing so.

One customer I have at the moment, I start before eight in the morning and usually leave about 4:30 which is fine with them.

My customer whom I report to and has no problem with the hours I do, regularly will be there until six as they prefer that to dealing with stuff in the evening/at night.

Now both of us are in relatively senior roles, so 9-5 is out the window but we both deal with it differently.

Were I expected to be there until 5:30 for no reason than saving face, I'd be pissed off. Like most companies I've worked with recently it's what you produce that matters, not how long it takes you unless it's excessively long.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

20 hours a week exercise!

I'd cycle in and out to work and play five a side four hours a week and I thought I was doing well!

ah there abouts. some times more sometimes less. sure was in the health club for about 5/6 hours yesterday

at least you're doing something. hard to fit it in

Stheno

Wanderer78 wrote: »

ah there abouts. some times more sometimes less. sure was in the health club for about 5/6 hours yesterday

at least you're doing something. hard to fit it in

Now I'm genuinely not taking the mick, but what were you doing in a health club for 5-6 hours?

Jaysis even sailing took less time. When I used go to a gym, it was in, class/exercise for up to 90 mins, then half an hour in the sauna/steam room, then gone!

Wanderer78

Stheno wrote: »

Now I'm genuinely not taking the mick, but what were you doing in a health club for 5-6 hours?

Jaysis even sailing took less time. When I used go to a gym, it was in, class/exercise for up to 90 mins, then half an hour in the sauna/steam room, then gone!

hahaha ah think it was 3.5 hr workout. 45 min foam roll rest of the time chatting, stream/sauna etc

Stheno

Wanderer78 wrote: »

hahaha ah think it was 3.5 hr workout. 45 min foam roll rest of the time chatting, stream/sauna etc

as see I'm antisocial so that's all that chat time back

KomradeBishop

People may be able to find examples of good employers being reasonable about lack of overtime and providing time off to compensate - but nobody has presented a good reason why this should be left up to employer discretion, rather than nailed-down in the contract or in the law - like it is in the US (where overtime pay greater than regular salary, is mandatory for a very large number of professions).

Simply put, there's no good excuse at all, for not paying workers overtime - I don't see a single good reason this shouldn't be written down and enforced legally either.


Wage theft from employers actually costs workers over €90 million in wages per week (adding up to around €4+ billion lost a year), which is a direct cost on the whole economy, as that's less disposable income for workers to spend (money which, instead, stays in corporate coffers - which doesn't stimulate economic activity nearly as much):
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/careers/2014/06/17/work-life-imbalance-as-irish-workers-miss-out-on-92m-in-lost-wages-per-week
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/employees-losing-out-on-millions-by-working-for-free-30359278.html

There's also evidence of a large percentage of workers being dissatisfied with their work life balance, as a result of the pressures/stress the increased work hours place on them.


Seems to me like something in deep need of change - preferably with legislation matching what the US have in place.

Stheno

KomradeBishop wrote: »

People may be able to find examples of good employers being reasonable about lack of overtime and providing time off to compensate - but nobody has presented a good reason why this should be left up to employer discretion, rather than nailed-down in the contract or in the law - like it is in the US (where overtime pay greater than regular salary, is mandatory for a very large number of professions).

Simply put, there's no good excuse at all, for not paying workers overtime - I don't see a single good reason this shouldn't be written down and enforced legally either.


Wage theft from employers actually costs workers over €90 million in wages per week (adding up to around €4+ billion lost a year), which is a direct cost on the whole economy, as that's less disposable income for workers to spend (money which, instead, stays in corporate coffers - which doesn't stimulate economic activity nearly as much):
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/careers/2014/06/17/work-life-imbalance-as-irish-workers-miss-out-on-92m-in-lost-wages-per-week

There's also evidence of a large percentage of workers being dissatisfied with their work life balance, as a result of the pressures/stress the increased work hours place on them.


Seems to me like something in deep need of change - preferably with legislation matching what the US have in place.

Anyplace I've worked unpaid overtime, it was firstly called out in the contract, and secondly very well recognised.

Sometimes it's not all about the money

KomradeBishop

Stheno wrote: »

Anyplace I've worked unpaid overtime, it was firstly called out in the contract, and secondly very well recognised.

Sometimes it's not all about the money

You misread what I said: I didn't say unpaid overtime should be nailed down in the contract, I meant paid overtime should be nailed down in the contract - and there's no good excuse for not having this; unpaid overtime should not be allowed, outside of some rare exceptions, if it can be justified.

Given the prevalence of wage theft in Ireland, it should be nailed down in law, like it is in the US.


If it's not all about the money then why aren't so many employers paying people for their overtime? Sounds like it's all about the money, to me...

Stheno

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You misread what I said: I didn't say unpaid overtime should be nailed down in the contract, I meant paid overtime should be nailed down in the contract - and there's no good excuse for not having this; unpaid overtime should not be allowed, outside of some rare exceptions, if it can be justified.

Given the prevalence of wage theft in Ireland, it should be nailed down in law, like it is in the US.


If it's not all about the money then why aren't so many employers paying people for their overtime? Sounds like it's all about the money, to me...

Did you read my posts about the benefits I've accrued working in a flexible environment?

Those were all salaried posts mind, perhaps you are thinking of per hour wage roles?

KomradeBishop

Stheno wrote: »

Did you read my posts about the benefits I've accrued working in a flexible environment?

Those were all salaried posts mind, perhaps you are thinking of per hour wage roles?

Yes, and as I said in my own post:

People may be able to find examples of good employers being reasonable about lack of overtime and providing time off to compensate - but nobody has presented a good reason why this should be left up to employer discretion, rather than nailed-down in the contract or in the law - like it is in the US (where overtime pay greater than regular salary, is mandatory for a very large number of professions).

Simply put, there's no good excuse at all, for not paying workers overtime - I don't see a single good reason this shouldn't be written down and enforced legally either.

Flexi-time or time in lieu is one thing - that's a valid replacement for overtime - but what I am discussing, is the evidence of people simply not being paid for overtime - this does not mean, replacing overtime with another way to compensate workers, but simply not paying them for overtime.

Stheno

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Yes, and as I said in my own post:

People may be able to find examples of good employers being reasonable about lack of overtime and providing time off to compensate - but nobody has presented a good reason why this should be left up to employer discretion, rather than nailed-down in the contract or in the law - like it is in the US (where overtime pay greater than regular salary, is mandatory for a very large number of professions).

Simply put, there's no good excuse at all, for not paying workers overtime - I don't see a single good reason this shouldn't be written down and enforced legally either.

Flexi-time or time in lieu is one thing - that's a valid replacement for overtime - but what I am discussing, is the evidence of people simply not being paid for overtime - this does not mean, replacing overtime with another way to compensate workers, but simply not paying them for overtime.

No one in this entire thread has clarified if the expectation of overtime is in a salaried situation apart from mine, where I clearly stated it was so and was happy to accept it was so, so in this case your argument is moot, unless you can post a link showing people not being paid for overtime in instances in this thread where they were supposed to be but were not?

Salaried employees being asked to work overtime without pay is very common. Can I ask what are you work in?

KomradeBishop

Stheno wrote: »

No one in this entire thread has clarified if the expectation of overtime is in a salaried situation apart from mine, where I clearly stated it was so and was happy to accept it was so, so in this case your argument is moot, unless you can post a link showing people not being paid for overtime in instances in this thread where they were supposed to be but were not?

Salaried employees being asked to work overtime without pay is very common. Can I ask what are you work in?

You're not listening to what I'm saying, or looking at the links I've already posted. I don't care if that is common, salaried or not, I've said unpaid overtime shouldn't be left up to employer discretion (there should be laws regarding it, like in the US) - that something is common doesn't mean it is ok - and I've provided news links with stats showing that unpaid overtime is rife.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/employees-losing-out-on-millions-by-working-for-free-30359278.html

I've also pointed out how in the US, it is illegal to have job contracts like that, for a very wide variety of jobs. Salaried or not, it does not matter - that's a red herring.


I'm self-employed myself, also in IT - possibly not too dissimilar to how things are for you now.

Stheno

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You're not listening to what I'm saying, or looking at the links I've already posted. I don't care if that is common, salaried or not, I've said unpaid overtime shouldn't be left up to employer discretion (there should be laws regarding it, like in the US) - that something is common doesn't mean it is ok - and I've provided news links with stats showing that unpaid overtime is rife.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/employees-losing-out-on-millions-by-working-for-free-30359278.html

I've also pointed out how in the US, it is illegal to have job contracts like that, for a very wide variety of jobs. Salaried or not, it does not matter - that's a red herring.


I'm self-employed myself, also in IT - possibly not too dissimilar to how things are for you now.

Have you a link to those US laws?

KomradeBishop

Ya - they've been whittled down quite a bit since the New Deal era, and various loopholes around them are coming online, but they set a good standard:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtime#Federal_overtime_law

davo10

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Ya - they've been whittled down quite a bit since the New Deal era, and various loopholes around them are coming online, but they set a good standard:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtime#Federal_overtime_law

Here's a tip, never use Wikipedia to back up an argument, it is an open source portal and is often wrong. Read the whole paragraph relating to the U.S., it does not back up your argument in the way you hoped, not every American works in the area of production of goods for interstate commerce and there are a broad list of categories who are exempt from the legislation.

Have you ever worked in the U.S.? I have, there is no tenure of employment until confirmed by contract and employers are not required to include that tenure in a contract. There is no right to work in the U.S. The employer can let you go at any time? Only the Unions fight your cause.

Did you know that some states don't even have a minimum wage and those that do are for the most part much much lower than ours? Look it up. In states like NY, workers in the entertainment industry are expected to work long hours for little or in some cases no pay, relying instead on tips earned as their income.

Did you know that unpaid internships are seen as the norm in many sectors including IT, law, accounting, finance etc?

Did you know that in most companies you are expected to be at work regardless of weather/travel/family conditions? If you don't show up, they will find someone who will.

mfceiling

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Yeah because everyone will know you are a fool that will work for free, or course they will give you work.

Time and effort are two things you don't give to companies for free, you start that then where doe it end. You may as well do you 40hr week for nothing and give your pay check back to the company.

I've been there and done that and now I make sure I get paid for every second I do and if not I clock out on the dot. I have got 3 promotions in the past year by not being a mug for my company anymore while the yes people are stuck where they are getting more and more work while going nowhere.

You have to stand up to these work practices, they don't work for nothing so why should I, my time is as valuable as anyone elses.

This^^

Believe me that the more you do the more is expected of you. I've worked in construction for over 15 years and I've seen every kind of employer. Lads coming in at 4 o'clock and basically roaring out "we're all working late tonight"...not "can you" or "will you"

The lads that stood their ground laughed at the fools who put their head down and said nothing. They still came to work the next day. You can be a busy fool.

I do some work for a subbie in dublin and he is a gentleman. Paid on time, manners when he is looking something done and doesn't have a fit if you need to leave to do something. If he needs an extra few minutes to finish a job I have no issue with it. It's the idiots who bark in your face about you "needing" to work on late. For who's benefit?

Saipanne

C4Kid wrote: »

Currently in a job on a trial basis for the last 3 weeks. It's a small organisation with about 15-20 people.

Since starting I work the full 8-4:30 day and I always leave on time along with a few others however some people always stay on. This morning one of the directors came out to me while sitting in my car before work and said people who do the 8-4:30 don't last long around here.

I was a little taken aback but I'm just wondering is this common place, should I just suck it up or as its only a trial keep applying for other jobs.I can't stand being looked down on just for leaving on time at this stage I'd rather find a job where 4:30 means 4:30 the day is long enough as it is.

Other jobs similar to this which I have worked in finished on time without issue, this is the first time I've had this said to me !!

Thanks !

//MOD

Only a reminder to keep things civil people; it's a very heated topic and there's a good discussion going on (even if both sides disagree with each other) and I'd hate to have to lock the thread.

//MOD

I would never work in such a place.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

I feel sorry for people who have picked a Job over children, really sorry. What is the point of working crazy hours to earn highly taxed wages to spend on what, yourself. Bizarre.

davo10

Russell Nutty Socialism wrote: »

I feel sorry for people who have picked a Job over children, really sorry. What is the point of working crazy hours to earn highly taxed wages to spend on what, yourself. Bizarre.

For some it is a necessity to make ends meet. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to survive on their basic wage.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

davo10 wrote: »

For some it is a necessity to make ends meet. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to survive on their basic wage.

Why are people scared of having children, its like they dont want to grow up, become adults and they give answers like you did above to try and explain it away.
My advice to People who say they dont want kids whether they are working at a basic wage or any wage, whatever the excuse you will regret it as you get older.

Russell Nutty Socialism

Russell Nutty Socialism wrote: »

I feel sorry for people who have picked a Job over children, really sorry. What is the point of working crazy hours to earn highly taxed wages to spend on what, yourself. Bizarre.

If you come across any such in this thread or otherwise, I'm sure they'd value your input appropriately.

Captain Flaps

My contracted hours are 9-5.30 and generally people come in a bit before that and leave a bit after it. The flip side is that if I say to my manager 'hey, I have to leave at 4pm today' or 'Sorry, got a puncture so I'll be an hour late' there'll be absolutely no hassle. I think a bit of respect and goodwill each way is the way to handle things, If I was given absolutely no flexibility I wouldn't be staying a minute longer than my contract stated.

Example, there was some stuff that needed to go up for 9 this morning so I was at my desk at 7.30 (made sure to send a mail around about something unrelated so everyone knew I was in). I've since told my manager I'll be making the 5pm screening of Star Wars and there wasn't even a hint of that being a problem.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Deleted User wrote: »

If you come across any such in this thread or otherwise, I'm sure they'd value your input appropriately.

all I am saying is that 6 figure sums and power do not equal true happiness, having children does.

Russell Nutty Socialism

Russell Nutty Socialism wrote: »

all I am saying is that 6 figure sums and power do not equal true happiness, having children does.

I know exactly what you are saying. Congrats on equating all human achievement with breeding despite the question never having come up- and making your point so gracefully too!

davo10

Russell Nutty Socialism wrote: »

all I am saying is that 6 figure sums and power do not equal true happiness, having children does.

Not for everyone. Also it can depend on what stage of life you are at, a twenty two year old new graduate looking for a job isn't necessarily thinking about children, the "little bundles of joy" they are interested in are bundles of the paper kind.

Wanderer2010

Children do not equal happiness for a lot of people. They could be a mistake and lead to added expenses and stress for a young family, they could have medical difficulties and cause more heartache, plus there is nothing worse than the employee who assumes that every other person on the planet wants to hear how well little Jack/Izzy is doing and shoving pictures in their face and generally being a complete bore about their children. :mad:

Saipanne

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Children do not equal happiness for a lot of people. They could be a mistake and lead to added expenses and stress for a young family, they could have medical difficulties and cause more heartache, plus there is nothing worse than the employee who assumes that every other person on the planet wants to hear how well little Jack/Izzy is doing and shoving pictures in their face and generally being a complete bore about their children. :mad:

Some people choose not to have children because of genetic illnesses they carry themselves.

But this is well off topic.

KomradeBishop

davo10 wrote: »

Here's a tip, never use Wikipedia to back up an argument, it is an open source portal and is often wrong. Read the whole paragraph relating to the U.S., it does not back up your argument in the way you hoped, not every American works in the area of production of goods for interstate commerce and there are a broad list of categories who are exempt from the legislation.

Have you ever worked in the U.S.? I have, there is no tenure of employment until confirmed by contract and employers are not required to include that tenure in a contract. There is no right to work in the U.S. The employer can let you go at any time? Only the Unions fight your cause.

Did you know that some states don't even have a minimum wage and those that do are for the most part much much lower than ours? Look it up. In states like NY, workers in the entertainment industry are expected to work long hours for little or in some cases no pay, relying instead on tips earned as their income.

Did you know that unpaid internships are seen as the norm in many sectors including IT, law, accounting, finance etc?

Did you know that in most companies you are expected to be at work regardless of weather/travel/family conditions? If you don't show up, they will find someone who will.

This isn't the early 2000's - Wikipedia is a perfectly good starting point as a source.

It backs up my argument in exactly the way I described - as I had mentioned that it doesn't cover all jobs.

We're not talking about tenure of employment. Nor minimum wage, or right to work, or internships - it's about overtime.
In fact - the US's poor standards when it comes to worker rights, should make their better standards on overtime than Ireland and the EU, even more notable.