Go back
48 hour week!

48 hour week!

Debates

Vote Up
Vote Down

So Europe are looking to close the loop hole that allows UK employees to work more than 48 hours per week.

Will this help family life, reduce the problems of family breakdown and improve the work like balance?

or Does is smack of nanny state? Who has the right to tell me how many hours I can work?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Next thing you know, there'll be a ban on smoking.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by invigorate
Who has the right to tell me how many hours I can work?
Your employer, I spose.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Pullhard
Your employer, I spose.
My chefs work 48 hours per week (4days @ 12hours) some work on their days off, I cannot legally stop them. Yet if they are too tired they do not perform to the same level they would had they rested on their lesuire rime.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by invigorate
My chefs work 48 hours per week (4days @ 12hours) some work on their days off, I cannot legally stop them. Yet if they are too tired they do not perform to the same level they would had they rested on their lesuire rime.
I don't no anything about employment contracts in the UK, but in NZ, it would be hard to find an employee who had a contract that allowed them to work as many hours as they like. Most people have to beg for overtime.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by invigorate
My chefs work 48 hours per week (4days @ 12hours) some work on their days off, I cannot legally stop them. Yet if they are too tired they do not perform to the same level they would had they rested on their lesuire rime.
Sorry - you can't legally stop them?
Why can't you stop them?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Pullhard
Your employer, I spose.
And the law - its reasonable for there to be limits on how many hours people are expected to work.
Its not just about the safety of the person working excessive hours - its for everyone's safety. A knackered worker will make mistakes.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Only in anti-social system would greater productivity equal greater unemployment and longer hours for the employed. A sane system would guarantee work for everyone but require fewer hours from each employee. Full employment with a 32 hour week, for example.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by rwingett
Only in anti-social system would greater productivity equal greater unemployment and longer hours for the employed. A sane system would guarantee work for everyone but require fewer hours from each employee. Full employment with a 32 hour week, for example.
That smacks of a nanny state. Guaranteed work?? I guarantee that unemployment is never a permanent situation for the able bodies in the US.

What doesn't make sense is paying overtime after 32 or even 40 hours a week. That's more nanny state-ism.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Coletti
That smacks of a nanny state. Guaranteed work?? I guarantee that unemployment is never a permanent situation for the able bodies in the US.

What doesn't make sense is paying overtime after 32 or even 40 hours a week. That's more nanny state-ism.
Nanny statism? What are you jabbering on about? Or are you just being a professional contrarian here?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Coletti
I guarantee that unemployment is never a permanent situation for the able bodies in the US.
What about the not able bodies?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Coletti
That smacks of a nanny state. Guaranteed work?? I guarantee that unemployment is never a permanent situation for the able bodies in the US.

What doesn't make sense is paying overtime after 32 or even 40 hours a week. That's more nanny state-ism.
What are able bodies in the US? Those who have emplyoment perhaps?

Vote Up
Vote Down


i think the legislation will be useful in the sorts of jobs where employees don't really have the OPTION of working fewer than 60+hours. eg lots of city-type jobs. at the moment employees get 'asked' whether they'd like to sign the EU Directive opt-out, but this is a total joke as EVERYONE concerned knows that if anyone actually did opt out their employer would find a(nother) reason to get rid of them. no-one signs it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by rwingett
Only in anti-social system would greater productivity equal greater unemployment and longer hours for the employed. A sane system would guarantee work for everyone but require fewer hours from each employee. Full employment with a 32 hour week, for example.
There is a linear graph that shows wealth is correlated to production.

If we as a civilization are truly TIRED of progressing, then let's all just stop producing. That will kill the comsumption real quick. Or let's think of a way to make people not consume anything out of the norm in those extra 8 hours they set about doing nothing each week. What? What was that you say? Oh? They are not going to just set about? They are about doing stuff? Consuming? Consuming what?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by rwingett
Nanny statism? What are you jabbering on about? Or are you just being a professional contrarian here?
Could I get paid for being contrary?!?!

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.