I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT I COULD TAKE A 24 BREAK ONE WEEK THEN A 66 THE FOLLOWING BUT INFORMED BY MY TRANSPORT MANAGER I CAN TAKE A 24 THEN A 27 
THEN A 45 AND FINALLY A 88 TO CATCH UP. 
NEVER HEARD THESE BREAKS BEFORE 
. AS I DO A LOT OF SPAIN DO NOT WANT PROBLEMS OVER THE WATER 
MAYBE A CHANGE OF EMPLOYMENT.
icky:
I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT I COULD TAKE A 24 BREAK ONE WEEK THEN A 66 (edited) THE FOLLOWING BUT INFORMED BY MY TRANSPORT MANAGER I CAN TAKE A 24 THEN A 27
In any two consecutive weeks you should have either two full 45 hour weekly rests or one full weekly rest and one reduced weekly rest of no less than 24 hours, in other words you should have at least one full 45 hour weekly rest every other week.
The compensation for a reduced weekly rest period, should be paid back en-block by adding it onto any rest period of at least nine hours, by the end of the third week following the week in which the reduced rest was taken.
Your TM doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Page 18 Drivers Hours and Tachograph Rules
Could you turn off the caps on you keyboard please, it’s quite hard on the eyes trying to read a post in all capitals, it’s also considered as shouting 
I’m getting a bit confused now.
Where does the 69 come from? 45 regular weekly rest period + 21 compensation (for the reduction to 24) = 66?
Is the 69 a back to back 45 reg + 24 reduced providing 144hrs work before and after the period isn’t exceeded?
You can reduce to 24 (21 comp) / 27 (18 comp) then take a 45 and then take 45+21+18 = 84, but it has to be aligned to the fixed weeks in such a way as they comply with the rules. (example at the top of P19)
So I guess you could take (wk1) 45 / (wk2) 24 / (wk2) 24 / (wk3) 45 / (wk4) 87 / providing it is aligned with the fixed weeks correctly?
Sorry that was my mistake, it is of course 66 hours 
Well yes you can have a 24 - 27 and a 45 if two of the rest periods are in the same week.
sounds like your boss has got bits of his head missing 
tachograph:
Sorry that was my mistake, it is of course 66 hours
macplaxton:
You can reduce to 24 (21 comp) / 27 (18 comp) then take a 45 and then take 45+21+18 = 84, but it has to be aligned to the fixed weeks in such a way as they comply with the rules.
As both of the reduced weekly rest periods fell in the same fixed week you do not need to compensate for both of them, only for one of them as the other would only be there to avoid working more than 6x24 hour periods without a weekly rest period. In the example you are using from page 19 of the Drivers’ Hours Rules there are two rest periods in week 2 to prevent the driver clocking up 10 shifts between weekly rest periods. The regulations only require you to have one weekly rest period in a fixed week and that is the one which requires compensation. Having two weekly rest periods in a fixed week does not mean you have to compensate for them both. In the scenario below no compensation is required as in each week a regular weekly rest period has been taken.
Week 1
Regular Weekly Rest Period, at least 45 hours.
Week 2
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, between 24 and 45 hours
Regular Weekly Rest Period, at least 45 hours
Week 3
Regular Weekly Rest Period, at least 45 hours
Week 4
Regular Weekly Rest Period, at least 45 hours
macplaxton:
So I guess you could take (wk1) 45 / (wk2) 24 / (wk2) 24 / (wk3) 45 / (wk4) 87 / providing it is aligned with the fixed weeks correctly?
You could leave the compensation for the reduced weekly rest in the above example until before the end of week 5 it you wanted, the end of the third week following the reduction. No problem with taking it any time before then of course, and week 4 is as good as any, but regardless of when you take it you would not require 87 hours, 66 hours would be enough to keep things legal. no need to compensate for both reduced rest periods…
Cheers Coffee!
So back to the icky’s question: the TM is possibly talking out of his trumpet, but this would depend on when the rest periods were taken in relation to the fixed week.
So modifying your example:
Week 1
Regular Weekly Rest Period, 45 hours.
Week 2
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, 24 hours.
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, 27 hours.
Week 3
Regular Weekly Rest Period, 45 hours.
Week 4
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, 24 hours. (needing comp by end of week 7)
Week 5
Regular Weekly Rest Period, 45 hours + compensation (taking my pick of the shortest payback that week of 18 = 63)
Would that work
 :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:tachograph:
Sorry that was my mistake, it is of course 66 hours
I was going to give you a call, Rog!
macplaxton:
Cheers Coffee!So back to the icky’s question: the TM is possibly talking out of his trumpet,
Impossible to say for sure from the information given so possibly is as far as we can go in condemning the TM.
macplaxton:
but this would depend on when the rest periods were taken in relation to the fixed week.
Exactly, and as that information is missing we cannot be sure he doesn’t know what he is talking about or whether he is, or is not, a trumpet. Although, we do know from the information given he is wrong on the 88 hours to catch up thing, but as the driver wins a nice long break out of that error we could let it slide. 
macplaxton:
So modifying your example:Week 1
Regular Weekly Rest Period, 45 hours.
Week 2
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, 24 hours.
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, 27 hours.
Week 3
Regular Weekly Rest Period, 45 hours.
Week 4
Reduced Weekly Rest Period, 24 hours. (needing comp by end of week 7)
Week 5
Regular Weekly Rest Period, 45 hours + compensation (taking my pick of the shortest payback that week of 18 = 63)
Would that work
Lets look at it.
At least one regular and one reduced weekly rest period in any two consecutive weeks? Check
Compensation required paid back within the required time? Check
Works for me, carry on driver.
ROG:
 :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:tachograph:
Sorry that was my mistake, it is of course 66 hours
Only just seen this as I’ve had no computer working for a week 