Working Time Regulations

RE: Working Time Regulations

Hannah Wynne Richards — Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:07:32 GMT

Simple Raise fees

Wynne

RE: Working Time Regulations

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:39:41 GMT

Excellent! So in fact the question should almost be 'how can we change the business model of the veterinary practice to ensure staff are safe, rested, and fit to work?"

RE: Working Time Regulations

Clive Ansell — Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:32:32 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]

[quote user="Gareth C."]

keeping this on veterinary matters not lorries...

[/quote]

Ok, but what about a medical mistake due to exhaustion? Isn't that bad too?

[/quote]

Maybe the road haulage industry (or aviation for that matter) would be a good model to follow?

They have for years adhered strictly to the WTR and Drivers' hours regs, which are rigorously enforced by authorities, and still manage to successfully run 24/7/365 businesses whilst ensuring staff get legally required rest periods.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:02:38 GMT

[quote user="Gareth C."]

keeping this on veterinary matters not lorries...

[/quote]

Ok, but what about a medical mistake due to exhaustion? Isn't that bad too?

RE: Working Time Regulations

Francisco Gomez — Sat, 24 Sep 2016 12:05:19 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

Which social class is that?

[/quote]

I admit I'm generalising - but, in many populated areas of the country, you do find 5-6 veterinary practices in about 1-2 mile radius with just 1 or 2 vets.

In my area for instance, we had to supply veterinary assistance to clients to our 1/4 mile down the road V4P because they didn't have a vet 2 weeks ago, and one of the OOH that covers our area didn't have vets either around the same time, rendering impossible (and possibly breaking the law) for some practices in Derbyshire to have access to them, unless they were informed and covering them themselves.

I'm deliberately making a conection with WTRs and corporate businesses here - The social class of those who own the largest share of these corporates are the beneficiaries of non WTRs - They don't see the patient or the workers, therefore they only (possibley care and) have to comply with the minimal requirements to ensure that their income is legal - however - in our trade, being 'legal' is not usually sufficient (in my opinion), you do have to make moral decisions to help patients and workers.

Would not it be better if instead of opening 5 practices in the same area to cover as much population as possible and be ultra-competitive, to open less of them, but a bigger one that is fully staffed and can attend better patient needs?

In my opinion, and I accept I might be wrong, getting rid of WTRs is very similar to getting rid of the 24h obligation to see patients - it is done to make some people earn extra money and have no bearing on patient welfare. I'm pretty sure that many (if not all) large vet corporate businesses would have the non WTRs in their contract for their vets and they would welcome getting rid of 24h requirements too if they didn't find it financially attractive (paying a vet, but not seeing enough patients) and was legal to do so.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Hannah Wynne Richards — Sat, 24 Sep 2016 08:06:34 GMT

Which social class is that?

Does it include the minmum wage assistant at the corner shop, whose pension provider has invested in CVS?

Wynne

RE: Working Time Regulations

Francisco Gomez — Fri, 23 Sep 2016 21:26:34 GMT

[quote user="Gareth C."]

or as said before if employed vets refuse to sign then staffing levels will have to go up and wages will go even further down.

[/quote]

with the amount of available vets, dont you think what will happen is that less 'disfunctional 1-vet' practices will be opened by corporates? My understanding is that although I think WTRs could b more flexible, getting rid of them benefits only one social class. Everyone else is left at disadvantage, including patients.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Gareth C. — Fri, 23 Sep 2016 18:33:34 GMT

keeping this on veterinary matters not lorries...

I think one of the main problems was the consecetive 11 hours rest. not only is it impossible to spell but can mean if you were called out for half an hour at midnight you could then refuse to come in to work until 11:30am the next day. That's my understanding. or as said before if employed vets refuse to sign then staffing levels will have to go up and wages will go even further down.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:08:14 GMT

Don't know much about regulations, but i've seen the carnage that occurs when a lorry driver falls asleep at the wheel. I prefer to be alive and annoyed rather than dead!

RE: Working Time Regulations

Francisco Gomez — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:29:45 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]Thank goodness it's the European working time directive, so (hopefully) it's one of those annoying things we'll soon get shot of[/quote]

For example: The drivers’ hours rules state that your first break must be at least 15 minutes and the second break taken before or at the end of the four and half hour driving period must be at least 30 minutes. The WTD states drivers must have a 30-minute break before or at the end of a six-hour working period.

[/quote]

Not only agree with Clive, but also disagree with Wynne.

Brexit or no brexit, WTRs are a good thing - not just to avoid exploitation of workers, but to protect our patients. I don't know how busy might be other people's practices, but in many of them, allowing yourself working while tired could have terrible consequences to your patients, same as if you drive tired while on the road.

Thankfully I have the benefit of a boss that have recognised overworking by giving me time off elsewhere when overbooked/excessively busy - which had been most of the last 12 months, but I hear other colleagues in the profession aren't that lucky.

As Thomas said, I don't see how can't be implemented in a day practice - and when they're no longer dependent on EU regs, perhaps they could be made more flexible if it is currently unworkable in 24/7 businesses.

RE: Working Time Regulations

rhmrcvs — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 21:31:42 GMT

It does , on call , whether on work premises or at home is not classed as working time if one is allowed to sleep.

Different to eg working the night shift on a factory production line.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Clive Ansell — Wed, 07 Sep 2016 13:21:17 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]Thank goodness it's the European working time directive, so (hopefully) it's one of those annoying things we'll soon get shot of[/quote]

If you think the WTD is annoying or complicated try working in the haulage industry. I worked mainly as a driver, but also briefly in management, where we had to adhere to EU Drivers' hours regulations in addition to the WTD; we had to comply with both sets of legislation at the same time, and although both are EU regs, they don't always compliment each other and in fact sometimes contradict each other.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Clive Ansell — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 17:15:35 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]This doesn't alter the fact that we have chosen a profession which does not work 9-5 with guaranteed weekends off. We have chosen a caring profession and have to realise we have to go the extra mile. Indeed the unpredictability of it is one of its attractions in terms of job satisfaction.[/quote]

Yes, but there is a world of difference between going the extra mile, missing the occasional lunch break or a late finish once in a while; and working back to back over booked surgeries and overbooked op lists day on day on day - it is a sad fact that even within this "profession" there are employers and practice owners that are exploitative and take advantage, from which protection is needed.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 17:14:52 GMT

It makes it virtually impossible for large animal/equine practices to economically provide a 24/7 service, not unless the assistants sign out, the owner/partners do all the ooh work, or they don't employ assistants. In the latter case, new grads will never find posts in la/equine practices!

Wynne

Thank goodness it's the European working time directive, so (hopefully) it's one of those annoying things we'll soon get shot of

RE: Working Time Regulations

Michael Woodhouse — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 17:12:29 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Dennison"]And being at home but on call doesn't count as 'rest'.[/quote]

It does.

It doesn't count as rest if you have to be on site - even if sleeping.

I sleep just as soundly on call, but I know many people don't. Otherwise it would be impractical to cover OOH in most practices

RE: Working Time Regulations

Anthony Dennison — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 17:06:51 GMT

[quote user="Thomas Johnson"]Eleven consecutive hours rest in any 24hr period.[/quote]

And being at home but on call doesn't count as 'rest'.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Martin Atkinson — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 16:16:02 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]I cannot understand how others see the WTD as a bad thing? it is there to protect workers' from having to work excessive hours and to ensure they get adequate rest periods and holidays - which surely has to be a good thing[/quote]True and the WTD as plagiarised from Thomas's post: "An average of no more than 48hrs working a week (averaged over 17 weeks). Paid annual leave of 5.6 weeks a year (including bank holidays). Eleven consecutive hours rest in any 24hr period. A twenty minute rest break if the working day is more than 6 hours. One day off a week"; are hardly onerous but even with those there is a lot of room for exploitation. To some extent it is also for the protection of individuals from themselves voluntarily working excessive hours to get overtime.

This doesn't alter the fact that we have chosen a profession which does not work 9-5 with guaranteed weekends off. We have chosen a caring profession and have to realise we have to go the extra mile. Indeed the unpredictability of it is one of its attractions in terms of job satisfaction.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Clive Ansell — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 15:59:43 GMT

[quote user="Hilary Benyon"]Has anyone had to sign an opt out agreement form? We are now being asked to do this, and feel quite threatened by this. I do not fully understand the implications, and feel as though I am being forced into signing.[/quote]

You're under no obligation whatsoever to sign.

The legal default is that the WTD applies, and YOU can choose to opt out of the regulations if you wish, but you don't have to. You cannot be discriminated against if you don't either.

Also; if you opt out, or are already opted out, you can opt back in again at anytime without having to give a reason and giving reasonable notice.

I cannot understand how others see the WTD as a bad thing? it is there to protect workers' from having to work excessive hours and to ensure they get adequate rest periods and holidays - which surely has to be a good thing in a profession with such a high incidence of work related stress, and stress related illness. I've lost count of number of colleagues who say they never get a proper lunch break, never finish on time, and are stressed as a result.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Thomas Johnson — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 15:39:34 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]You shouldn't feel threatened by being asked to sign an opt out to the working time directive. As other have said the regs are pretty much incompatible with running a vet practice, even during office hours, more so during emergengy hours.[/quote]

If you are doing your own out of hours or working for an out of hours provider then I agree that it is very difficult to comply with the Working Time Directive, but if you're not then I can't see why it is a problem.

An average of no more than 48hrs working a week (averaged over 17 weeks). Paid annual leave of 5.6 weeks a year (including bank holidays). Eleven consecutive hours rest in any 24hr period. A twenty minute rest break if the working day is more than 6 hours. One day off a week.

And the regulations allow for compensatory rest, so if your rest period (between or within shifts) is interrupted you can defer it to later that day or the following day.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Martin Atkinson — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 10:34:26 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]IMHO an employer may be a reasonable one or an unreasonable one irrespective of whether you are required to opt out. If you are happy with your job in other ways then go for it[/quote]Agreed.

Hilary, you can have a happy, fulfilling career with an employer who goes the extra mile him/herself and feel you are sharing the workload fairly even if you are doing long antisocial hours. Equally a miserable one with a corporate with set shifts or a boss who expects everyone to work while he sits with his feet up. If you think you are being treated unfairly/exploited you can vote with your feet. The employer will find it harder to replace you than for you to find another job.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Niall Taylor — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 09:31:35 GMT

Welcome to the forum Hilary

You shouldn't feel threatened by being asked to sign an opt out to the working time directive. As other have said the regs are pretty much incompatible with running a vet practice, even during office hours, more so during emergengy hours.

The nature of our work means we can't have people downing tools in the middle of a calving or a difficult consultation because they have a scheduled break. I'm exaggerating ofcourse, but the principle holds; the regs are supposedly "flexible" but the calculations to make sure everyone gets their alloted time off at the correct point while still managing to run a cost effective vet practice are impossible, no matter what the management consultants claim!

IMHO an employer may be a reasonable one or an unreasonable one irrespective of whether you are required to opt out. If you are happy with your job in other ways then go for it

Cheers,

Niall

RE: Working Time Regulations

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 09:15:55 GMT

Hear hear

Wynne

RE: Working Time Regulations

Martin Atkinson — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 09:03:55 GMT

It may be law but I think its all rather sad, a bit like the junior doctor's dispute. We have the privilege of being members of a wonderful, respected, caring profession which heaps rewards upon the dedicated. Having to go above and beyond the average is part of the deal, its not a 9-5 job and anyone who enters the profession should have realised that. There is a difference between being expected to work some antisocial hours and exploitation so I guess that is what its all about but I'm so glad I don't employ any vets permanently.

RE: Working Time Regulations

Iain Richards — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 07:56:55 GMT

Hilary, be prepared for ill-informed opinions from all quarters....

As far as I am aware it is only voluntary, you cannot be forced to sign an opt-out, nor can you be discriminated against (by lower pay). If you are a BVA member, ring the legal helpline to get accurate information. The area is complex depending on the definition of on-call as work. There is an argument that a vet at home with a pager is only working when they answer the call.

However, If you are recently qualified, I advise putting up with the OOH and learning from it and the cases you encounter. A 1 in 4 is reasonable, a 1 in 3 is tolerable for a while. Less than this is not great!

RE: Working Time Regulations

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 07:45:58 GMT

David I couldn't have put it better

Wynne