Boris1971:
Obviously it’s not right to work 18hr day in the example above but none of the usual Gurus and not explaining why it is or not legal in ref to the rules, C mon !!
Thats easy = a minimum reduced rest (if available) must be taken within 24 hours ending the last rest period so 18+9=27 which is deffo more than 24
Boris1971:
Winseer:
POA should not be used to extend your working week.There are some who think that 9 hours driving, 5 hours on loading, 1 hour break, and 3 hours POA in the same shift is “OK”.
The 60 hour limit should be about the total length of all the shifts done that week. This daft idea about “not getting paid for breaks” when you are legally obliged to take them - makes victims of the unwary all the time alas.
What does the driver who’s just worked the shift I’ve depicted in line two above say when they kill some kid whilst returning to base with the nodding dog one friday morning?
So Winseer even though your example in line two is legal and with adequate daily rests either side you, would you carry out that shift as a now and then occurrence?
I used to find myself doing 60 hour weeks all the time on Palletwork via the agencies, but I detested it, despite being paid by the hour for it.
I hope to avoid 60 hour weeks outright in the future as full time now, but I did find myself doing a 60 hour week over the Christmas period with my new employer.
If the average working week is supposed to be 48 hours over a reference period - then I consider it an abuse to say that POA and “unpaid breaks” don’t count towards those hours. My previous example of 9 hours driving, 5 hours loading, 1 hour break, and 3 hours POA would have a driver booking that 3 hours POA as “break” and trying to palm it off as a “split daily rest”. Of course it is in fact an 18 hour shift, and totally bent in my book! 
This is what I got told to do once returning from Lichfield, and running out of hours on the M40 (I pulled up at Cherwell valley MSA)
I promptly took 9 hours off parked there - because no one would come out to get me. Of course everyone was ■■■■■■ off about it - but what I did was all I could do under the circumstances. I would have made it back in time had it not been for a serious accident near the A46 turnoff, leaving me to take another three hours to get from there to Cherwell valley from the closed motorway.
The client did not want to see me again - but at least the agency paid up for the 15 hours, 5 hours, and night out that I booked for that shift in the end. (no hour deduction, as I did this shift self-employed)
On a GOOD day, you can do this run in 12 hours a shift of course. That’s still a 60 hour week monday-friday though, and I can’t work out how anyone can legally do this week-in, week-out as a full time job’s hours. 
I think we drivers need to man-up and resist being PLANNED for shifts over 12 hours in length. If you are planned for 15 hours like at Tescos, Palletline, or F&W (in my experience) then it only takes a serious delay en-route to completely ruin your entire week, plans for the week, and remaining legal for the week - IF you insist on doing the rest of the job to keep the firm happy.
If it can’t be done - we need to stay legal, and not worry about who gets ■■■■■■ off about it.
Napoleon is reputed to ask of his men seeking promotion… NOT “Is he good?” but rather "Is he Lucky?"
I’ve been at a number of client firms via different agencies that take the attitude “Why is this guy THAT unlucky that our full timer can do this job inside 60 hours every week, but never runs out of time? How come there’s an M40 closure only when He’s doing the job? - we need to avoid this driver in future…”
If one wants to argue the toss about “lucky” - then you could say a similar argument like:
“Our regular driver runs red lights, does 56 down 40 roads (back then) takes a 15m break whilst doing his curtains, and takes 30 minutes on a BP fuel island when he can - every day without incident”
F…k that!
I don’t feel lucky enough to do the above without getting pulled by VOSA - let alone being a danger to myself and others by having the nodding dog driving the tail end of yet another 15 hour shift in the morning rush hour around heathrow airport…
This is what’s wrong with the industry, with why HGV drivers have acquired this reputation of “killing so many of the public”, and why in turn, the public hate us so much… 
Corner Cutting when you make yourself more unsafe in a vain attempt to become more legal - is as bad as deliberately going out ■■■■■■ as far as I’m concerned. 
I think the french have done it the right way…they signed up to it, they now have a nice 48 hour week, no stressed out drivers, jobs planned the right way…the english however didnt sign up…its drivers too afraid to join a union or demonstrate against it…as said…change jobs if you can, when being interviewed for the new one, make sure you tell the interviewer you are not going to work above 60 hours max, which is how it should be…our government are so clever in writing the rules…and omitted some of the words…they should have said that the total working week should include, driving,loading and unloading, and let companies charge more for their services to cover any extra costs…then sit back and see what happens.
We’re supposed to have lost our opt-out of the 48 hour limit on drivers shift aggregate - at least based on that average over the reference period.
It’s cramming in all the extra hours that “don’t count” that cause us bother though. I dunno why it’s not plain enough?! If we all insisted on keeping to the 48 hour average - you could do the occasional 60 hour week for sure - BUT… If you did 60 hours “planned” one week, and then overran to 60 hours again (planned 48 this time) - it would soon unravel.
Duties need to have “slippage” built into them, so that you say, plan a 12 hour duty, which then allows up to 3 hours for delays in exceptional circumstances.
In practice, you might end up doing 3x12 and 1x15 hours, assuming you are on a 4 on 4 off shift pattern.
If a yard keeps planning drivers for 15 hours straight out of the gate though? - Not only is there no room for “delays” - but you can only go below 11 hours daily rest 3 times per week, usually equating to 3x15 hour shifts MAX.
That means that if you do 13.5hrs monday, 14hrs tuesday and 15 hours wednesday - there is no way I’m even going to turn up to Thursday knowing that they fully intend me to do another 12-15 hour shift on that day, and friday too, with all the traffic problems which tend to prevail on a friday evening in particular.
What you cannot do is go out to a yard an hour out from base with 3 hours left on your job, get stuck for 2 hours on the way there, and then think you can POA your way into enough hours to get back home again…
If you’re 14.5 hrs into your shift (measured from “start time” and NOT “how much driving and other work have I done today?”) - then you’re clearly not going to make it home when it’s a one hour trip in this example. You call the yard, and get them to pick you up. If they refuse, you do as I did. Overnight and book it! I don’t give a toss if they wanted the truck back for first thing in the morning or whatever… They should have thought of that before sending me out with time margins already so tight. I’m just getting on with the job I’m told to do - it’s upto them to carry the can if it all goes wrong.
Fortunately, most yards these days take some care NOT to give “long runs” or “runs expected to be delayed” to drivers who’ve already gone over 13 hours 3 times that week…
I’ve been given a bollocking before, and sent home because I turned up for a shift friday night I was told was going to be a straight 9 hour duty - only to be told it’s going to be a 14 hour when I got there… “No can do” say I, “I’ve already used up all three of my overshifts this week”… Got sent home. The agency paid me, but I understand the client witheld payment, which is obviously a pretty crappy way for a client to treat both agency and their driver - when once again, it’s “insisting on being safe and legal” that’s up in the air here…
The entire practice of yards trying to cram in as many hours as they can get a driver to do - stinks. That’s NOT what hours 13-15 of a shift are there for. They should be for “slippage only” - ie the max planned shift at any yard at any time is actually 13 hours… 
ROG:
the original idea of the WTD was to limit total shift time to 48 hours but the UK vetoed it which is why we now have it as working time only so does not include poa or breaksFrom what I can make out the UK Govt was afraid that wages would need to go up a lot and more drivers would be needed to cover the silly hours many drivers did and do now making hauliers unhappy and putting up inflation
Short memories perhaps. Not just the government. Before I left HGV driving in 2003/4 I remember trucknet news full of articles as to why the WTD was bad for drivers. Plenty of quotes from worried drivers stating their hourly pay will remain the same but they won’t be able to get the hours in. Same on Trucknet (before I lost my old user details and had to re join in 05!), lots of moaning from drivers about the ramifications of being limited to a pure 48 hour week. I remember some saying they wanted an opt out. It wasn’t just the government. It a different tone now it’s happened, everyone hates the use of POA and breaks not counting 
I don’t agree with using POA and breaks not counting. It should’ve been 48 flat. Before I left the job properly I was well up for a 48 flat week with no variation. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.
Winseer:
My previous example of 9 hours driving, 5 hours loading, 1 hour break, and 3 hours POA would have a driver booking that 3 hours POA as “break” and trying to palm it off as a “split daily rest”. Of course it is in fact an 18 hour shift, and totally bent in my book!
It’s dodgy in any book because in either case it doesn’t fit the definition of ‘daily rest’.
Freight Dog:
ROG:
the original idea of the WTD was to limit total shift time to 48 hours but the UK vetoed it which is why we now have it as working time only so does not include poa or breaksFrom what I can make out the UK Govt was afraid that wages would need to go up a lot and more drivers would be needed to cover the silly hours many drivers did and do now making hauliers unhappy and putting up inflation
Short memories perhaps. Not just the government. Before I left HGV driving in 2003/4 I remember trucknet news full of articles as to why the WTD was bad for drivers. Plenty of quotes from worried drivers stating their hourly pay will remain the same but they won’t be able to get the hours in. Same on Trucknet (before I lost my old user details and had to re join in 05!), lots of moaning from drivers about the ramifications of being limited to a pure 48 hour week. I remember some saying they wanted an opt out. It wasn’t just the government. It a different tone now it’s happened, everyone hates the use of POA and breaks not counting
I don’t agree with using POA and breaks not counting. It should’ve been 48 flat. Before I left the job properly I was well up for a 48 flat week with no variation. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.
To be fair the industry doesn’t have the required productivety and cost breaks in the form of LHV’s and use of red diesel and speed regime to get anywhere close to making a maximum 48 hour week work.Realistically 12 hours minimum daily rest and 60 hours per week max is about as good as it could probably get.While even if 48 hours per week max was on the table it would probably only realistically work on a 4 days on 4 off shift pattern basis for example.
The problem then being we’re obviously actually dealing with the issue of the 9 hour minimum daily rest being seen as a ‘hurdle’ by some. 
As for the hours v wage issue those ex pats calling for a change from mileage based to hourly based pay across the pond should be careful what they wish for.
Carryfast:
1/ To be fair the industry doesn’t have the required productivety and cost breaks in the form of LHV’s and use of red diesel and speed regime to get anywhere close to making a maximum 48 hour week work.2/Realistically 12 hours minimum daily rest and 60 hours per week max is about as good as it could probably get.
3/While even if 48 hours per week max was on the table it would probably only realistically work on a 4 days on 4 off shift pattern basis for example.
:
I see what you’re saying and I often used to counter my own arguments on this with myself whilst bimbling along. But it does beg the question. Why? Hope you don’t mind but I’ve broken your points into 3 to explain my wild theory
1/ Why is this? Because the industry is geared that a “Durham and back” or a single leg to Edinbrugh, takes in duty terms more than 9 hours. The example set, the rest by commercial competitiveness without legal recourse or back up have to follow.
2 For the reasons above. But is it? I find no logistical reasons why this is the case. Only commerce, political, and habit within the working populous.
3/Again, for reasons above. (Not much point me typing #3 sorry)
The thing is, for some things in life, man’s circadian rhythm, health and social needs just do not fit. I change that. For some things in life, they just are not physically changeable to fit mans circadian rhythms, health and social needs. For example - air travel. Until the scientists pull their fingers out, we’re just going to be stuck with a trans Pacific crossing taking 12-14 hours actual flight time min. That equates to approx 15 hours duty or in all realness nearer 18-19. Surgeon. An operation goes wrong and can last 8-9 hours. The duty can run 18-24 hours plus. You can’t help these things. You can just try to avoid it. You can’t pull an airliner into a lay by and you can’t pull a surgeon from a bleeding heart.
Now haulage. We’ve become so used to this idea that we feel we’re robbing someone if we drive from Bedford to Edinburgh and stop after 8-9 hours duty and have 12 hours off. Why? It’s because of cultural reasons, historical industry practice and most of all like you say, the government not facilitating the rules that make this a truly level playing field so that we all start from the same hymn sheet. Why does a driver feel wrong if he does a short Rdc and back, realises it’s “only” 8.5 hours at work? Does the librarian think the same? Does the security guard sitting in a hut listening to the radio think the same?
No. There’s no trans Pacific Ocean crossing in road haulage in the UK, it may feel odd that you have actually done a full day by just doing a short 2.5 hours drive, tip then back. But if you’ve done 8-9 hours duty. Well. That’s still being, at work. They pay you, you work. It’s work, being at duty. I do 18-20 hour duties sometimes, but by ■■■■ I don’t do it because I “understand” it’s what they need to do. The authorities have let my industry down, and we have as a collective workforce. The same with the docs.
The problem with road haulage is it’s ALWAYS had long hours, even in your log book days. So it never got used to a normal days length of work by truly justifiable standards. And by justifiable I mean as to be impossible by shear logistics as to go against the scientific wisdom of this age.
Freight Dog:
1/ To be fair the industry doesn’t have the required productivety and cost breaks in the form of LHV’s and use of red diesel and speed regime to get anywhere close to making a maximum 48 hour week work.2/Realistically 12 hours minimum daily rest and 60 hours per week max is about as good as it could probably get.
3/While even if 48 hours per week max was on the table it would probably only realistically work on a 4 days on 4 off shift pattern basis for example.
:
I see what you’re saying and I often used to counter my own arguments on this with myself whilst bimbling along. But it does beg the question. Why? Hope you don’t mind but I’ve broken your points into 3 to explain my wild theory
1/ Why is this? Because the industry is geared that a “Durham and back” or a single leg to Edinbrugh, takes in duty terms more than 9 hours. The example set, the rest by commercial competitiveness without legal recourse or back up have to follow.
2 For the reasons above. But is it? I find no logistical reasons why this is the case. Only commerce, political, and habit within the working populous.
3/Again, for reasons above. (Not much point me typing #3 sorry)
The problem with road haulage is it’s ALWAYS had long hours, even in your log book days. So it never got used to a normal days length of work by truly justifiable standards. And by justifiable I mean as to be impossible by shear logistics as to go against the scientific wisdom of this age.
[/quote]
I’d guess that (1) at least is the combination of relatively lower speeds and/or the often counterproductive idea of hub system or RDC transhipment operations as opposed to direct link trunking for example.Among other issues which seem to be causing far too much time being wasted not going anywhere.On that note some of the,if not the,lowest hours I ever worked was doing distance direct depot to depot trunking before limiters and job and finish.In which at worse two return runs from Feltham to Bristol still usually meant less than a 12 hour total shift.With just one run usually being an easy 6 hour shift.Which is why I referred to at least the idea of LHV’s and direct trunks being an obvious answer to the issue of reducing shift time in many cases. 
Interesting re the lower speeds comparison. Due to extended legal hours we now can fly longer, overflying possible places to land and change crews. Years before, fuelling and duty requirements (usually Union driven ) resulted in many changes. Funnily the industry enjoyed unparalleled wealth during this period. Someone got greedy. Then they all needed to get greedy to keep up. Guess who copped it. It wasn’t Juan Trippe.
This is where commerce, greed and acceptance has marched in and where our regulators and us as a workforce have failed. However there still are flights that are beyond reasonable grounds not possible to achieve in less than a 14 hour day, hence we always will be shackled by such goal post benchmarks until technology sorts it out. Someone has to do it sort of thing, unless we go back to ships for trans Pacific (not a bad idea)
With haulage if the duty limit was say 9 hours and a driver set off to Manchester from Kent and hit 10 hours duty due loading at base, by today’s standards it would be seen as laughable by the Christmas voting turkeys to stop as with “a 13” it would be do able. But by common scientific and social understanding outside of haulage it wouldn’t be seen anywhere like as a good idea to do this day in day out.
Even with no hub, if the driver had to stop and take 12 hours rest in suitable accommodation, perhaps a 30 pound a night drivers ibis budget that would inevitably spring up to season the regulated industry wide trade, then it would be seen as normal if that’s the way it just was. This normal would be passed along the price point to the consumer. Hand forced, perhaps direct trunk routes within the specified time frame would be saught, with stage posts along the way.
This wacky idea, is only not-normal because there would be inflation due the man in the street unable to pay the higher price point. But primarily because that man’s own wages, in his or her sector are also abused and squeezed to the benefit of ensuring the toothpaste reaches the top of the commerce tube and his buying power would stop or require an increase in earnings.
The way the UK haulage industry functions and the working standards lorry drivers in the late half of the last century have had nothing to do with genuine logistical reasons. It’s financial and the structure and diabolically inefficient methods developed as a result as a result of un regulated penny chasing. This happened with the railways in their infancy and it was only public outcry after accidents that regulation stifled the explosive greed. Even then they cocked it up.
It’s a ■■■■ tiny Island and driving is a land born practice with no scientific reason not to stop along the way. It’s hard to justify 60 hour weekly duties being absolutely necessary without actually, truly asking why. Depressingly, the answer leads to something that seems impossible to change.
We have among many different flights that start in the Far East, cross the ocean and end up in the US. Take particular one that ends up in New York a day later. It stops 3/5ths of the way for fuel and a crew change. It’s the same flight and you could bet your money if the regulations allowed the crew would take it all the way.