ROG:
Can anyone explain in simple terms cos i’m thick why this is legal or not please ?
SENARIO
Full weekly rest used for previous week
Work mon, tue, wed
Off thu - reduced weekly rest of 36 hours
work fri, sat
off sun - reduced weekly rest of 30 hours
work mon to sat
Full weekly rest of 45 hours
Can the reduced weekly rest for that week be the 36 hours and the second of 30 hours be used as payback for the first ?
If yes - why ?
If no - why ?
Yes the 36 hours can be used as a reduced weekly rest for that week and would require a payback of 9 hours compensation.
No the 30 hours can not be used as compensation for the 9 hours owed from the previous reduced weekly rest of 36 hours.
Reason:
After the 36 hour rest period you’ve worked Friday and Saturday and you want to work the following week from Monday to Saturday, from Friday to the Saturday of the following week is 9 days therefore you need a regular weekly rest or a reduced weekly rest to break up the 9 day period (six 24 hour periods rule).
The 30 hour rest period is a reduced weekly rest period used exclusively for the purpose of starting a new set of six 24 hour periods, and as 24 + 9 = 33 hours you don’t have enough rest to call it a reduced weekly rest and 9 hours compensation.
Another option would be to use the 30 hour rest as the reduced weekly rest period but then you would have more compensation to pay back so the 36 hours it is, and 9 hours left to pay back.
Mike-C:
Hey there’s nothing stopping a 24 hour rest to be counted as a daily rest either, just to confuse you more !!!
You can call it whatever you want Mike, but what you can not call it is both (a reduced weekly rest) and (a daily rest + compensation for a previous reduced weekly rest), it can be one or the other but not both
Yeah thats exactly as i understand it too. In ROG’s example of a 24 hour off every other day any of them can be either but not both, but one thing is for sure you wouldn’t have to make up multiple reduced rests like he was suggesting.
After a good nights kip I have woken up with a new perspective and the penny finally dropped as to what tachograph is saying.
I realise that a DAILY rest MAY be extended to MAKE a WEEKLY rest.
Keeping the DAILY rest and then adding payback time to it is one OPTION
Choosing the other option of making it into a WEEKLY rest then limits any payback time to what is left after using 24 hours for the weekly rest
REST is any period where the driver can dispose of their time freely and that includes the rest used as payback
If the option to use the second rest period is for daily rest plus payback then the option to use it as a weekly rest is no longer there and cannot then be used as the start of a new 6 day (144 hour) period
I should have thought that if my original take on using one period for BOTH was true then the same could be said for a full 45 weekly rest being used for a daily plus payback from a previous reduced weekly rest at the same time which would not make sense
It does often take me some time for the penny to drop but now it has on this subject.
I thank tachograph for putting up with me and apologise again to coffeeholic for using his quotes in the wrong context
ROG:
and apologise again to coffeeholic for using his quotes in the wrong context
I’ve asked you before, but of course you ignore as usual anyone’s wishes, and I am asking you for the last time, please DO NOT take my answers from one thread and quote them in another. The answer on one thread may not fit the question asked on another, as proved by this thread, and is more often than not going to be the case as you usually do not grasp what a thread is about. Do it again and I will get you put on pre-mod so the quotes can be removed before your post hits the board.
ROG:
and apologise again to coffeeholic for using his quotes in the wrong context [/size]
I’ve asked you before, but of course you ignore as usual anyone’s wishes, and I am asking you for the last time, please DO NOT take my answers from one thread and quote them in another. The answer on one thread may not fit the question asked on another, as proved by this thread, and is more often than not going to be the case as you usually do not grasp what a thread is about. Do it again and I will get you put on pre-mod so the quotes can be removed before your post hits the board.
I can assure you that at the time I thought I was doing it correctly and that the one was related to the other - it was not a deliberate act in order to give a false impression but a geuine error of misjudgement APOLOGIES AGAIN
Is the taking of a quote from one post and using it in another post against site rules
ROG:
I can assure you that at the time I thought I was doing it correctly and that the one was related to the other - it was not a deliberate act in order to give a false impression but a geuine error of misjudgement
Which it invairiably is with you which is why I have asked you not to do it with my posts.
ROG:
Is the taking of a quote from one post and using it in another post against site rules
I knew you would come back with this as it is your usual excuse for ignoring peoples wishes, you have asked the same question of other mods recently when they have PM’d you about various things. It is nothing to do with the site rules, it is about common decency and respecting someone’s wishes, something you seem to have as much trouble grasping as you do the simplest of regulations.
Incidentally it is not against the site rules for me to walk up to you the street and smack you in the mouth but I’m guessing you wouldn’t want me to and an apology afterwards wouldn’t make it right.
Rog:
Is the taking of a quote from one post and using it in another post against site rules
If the person doing has repeatedly made errors by doing so, leading to incorrect information being given out as fact and attributable to the original poster, , if the person repeatedly doing had been requested on multiple occassions not to make huge amounts of additional work for the volunteer team by continuing to do so, and ignored that request, then pre-moderation is a reasonable action to apply, so that persons posts can be easily checked.
Its not about rule breaches, pre-moderation is not a sanction but an administration tool to assist the volunteer team to allocate their limited time to the fullest
I do believe that the new road sign might have done the trick. 
