Is it time to remove the working time directive?

P

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,986
There is much talk about the need to cut the minimum wage since people can’t afford to live on any less.
Why not remove this law which limits the right of a person to work when and how much they choose? That way a person on €6.00 an hour could work 60-70 hours a week and have a reasonable income. 70 hours is 85.5 pay hours. That’s €513 (or about €25’000 a year) at €6 an hour.
 
Re: Isit time to remove the working time directive?

No.

It would open the door to exploit workers. It would introduce slavery by the back door.
 
Re: Isit time to remove the working time directive?

Is there not a risk that by doing so you would actually increase unemployment(less staff needed)?
 
Re: Isit time to remove the working time directive?

Mpsox said:
Is there not a risk that by doing so you would actually increase unemployment(less staff needed)?
Click to expand...
Also it would encourage people not to look for work. People are not going to work for peanuts.

This is like the US system. People working 100 hours a week just to make ends meet. Crazy. Do we really want that here?
 
I think it would be better to reduce everybodys working time (and pay) at the same time to 35 hours per week (like france).

At least then there would be potentially more jobs and people would have a better standard of living (id prefer this to tax increases anyways :D)
 
Purple said:
There is much talk about the need to cut the minimum wage since people can’t afford to live on any less.
Why not remove this law which limits the right of a person to work when and how much they choose? That way a person on €6.00 an hour could work 60-70 hours a week and have a reasonable income. 70 hours is 85.5 pay hours. That’s €513 (or about €25’000 a year) at €6 an hour.
Click to expand...

There is the additional benefit that they wouldn't have so much time to spend it, so it would seem like even more.
 
Nah leave it, if nothing else it helps in the great contradiction of Unions fighting to have the legislation brought in and the getting apoplectic when they realise it means less overtime and less pay.
 
Re: Isit time to remove the working time directive?

Purple said:
How? Would it not just reintroduce free will?
.
Click to expand...

would it really? or would people be left with 2 choces, work an 80-100 hour a week for a low hourly wage or lose their social welfare? is that free will?
 
Re: Isit time to remove the working time directive?

bond-007 said:
Also it would encourage people not to look for work. People are not going to work for peanuts.

This is like the US system. People working 100 hours a week just to make ends meet. Crazy. Do we really want that here?
Click to expand...
No, we don’t want people working 100 hours a week and still staying under the poverty line but since we have nowhere near the levels of immigration that they have in the USA (or a border with Mexico) and we do have a welfare system that provides family income support etc this is very unlikely to happen.
 
steve1234 said:
I think it would be better to reduce everybodys working time (and pay) at the same time to 35 hours per week (like france).

At least then there would be potentially more jobs and people would have a better standard of living (id prefer this to tax increases anyways :D)
Click to expand...

They got rid of that (or at least emasculated it) last year.
 
Re: Isit time to remove the working time directive?

Mpsox said:
would it really? or would people be left with 2 choces, work an 80-100 hour a week for a low hourly wage or lose their social welfare? is that free will?
Click to expand...
How would it leave people with only those two choices?
 
In my line of work, we put in a good 60 - 70 hours per week. If you started on about your "rights" to limit your working hours, you'd be out the door.

This is not exploitation: merely giving people the freedom to work as many hours as they choose. It is Europe at its worst when some distant Eurocrat decides the maximum number of hours anyone should work.

Big brother at its worst
 
BeanPole said:
In my line of work, we put in a good 60 - 70 hours per week. If you started on about your "rights" to limit your working hours, you'd be out the door.

This is not exploitation: merely giving people the freedom to work as many hours as they choose...
Click to expand...

You must be kidding. You make it clear that in your place of work there is no place for those who choose to work 40 hours per week.

Working heroic hours for the benefit of an employer is a mug's game. Believing that it is the right and proper way to act compounds the mistake.
 
Padraigb said:
You must be kidding. You make it clear that in your place of work there is no place for those who choose to work 40 hours per week.
Click to expand...
We make it clear that overtime will be required. If you don't want to work it then don't take the job.

Padraigb said:
Working heroic hours for the benefit of an employer is a mug's game.
Click to expand...
I agree, the employee should be paid for their overtime. If this happens then both parties benefit.
 
BeanPole said:
This is not exploitation: merely giving people the freedom to work as many hours as they choose. It is Europe at its worst when some distant Eurocrat decides the maximum number of hours anyone should work.

Big brother at its worst
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. The working time act takes away the basic right of an individual to work as they choose.
 
Is it a max of 48 hours per week ??
I know a person who often works Saturday and Sunday overtime (voluntarily) - 39 hrs Ord + 16 hrs o/t = 55 hours.
Is the employer breaking employment laws ? Or is it averaged over the year ?
 
dave28 said:
Is it a max of 48 hours per week ??
I know a person who often works Saturday and Sunday overtime (voluntarily) - 39 hrs Ord + 16 hrs o/t = 55 hours.
Is the employer breaking employment laws ? Or is it averaged over the year ?
Click to expand...

AFAIK it's averaged over a 17 week period.
 
And what about someone regularily coming to work with little/no sleep - a hazard to themselves and others don't you thing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top