tacho always goes on break when on a bay, usually having my lunch, watching YouTube or having a nap. None of which I would class as ‘other work’. Also just because they’ve finished tipping doesn’t mean you necessarily need to rush to get your keys / paperwork etc. Let your break finish then go and get sorted. If your likely to be moved on and only have 5 minutes left its sometimes worth disappearing off to the toilet or coffee machine…
A bit more tricky when unloading in a yard with a curtain sider, but again usually get into position, open up curtains fully then stick it on break whilst they’re loading / unloading and I’m sat in cab waiting, then back onto other work when its time to move curtains / strap up etc.
PA22:
tacho always goes on break when on a bay, usually having my lunch, watching YouTube or having a nap. None of which I would class as ‘other work’.
A bit more tricky when unloading in a yard with a curtain sider, but again usually get into position, open up curtains fully then stick it on break whilst they’re loading / unloading and I’m sat in cab waiting, then back onto other work when its time to move curtains / strap up etc.
It all depends on your frame of mind, what your job is,.and how you are paid.
If you are an owner driver, or on job and knock where the sooner you get done the sooner you get home on a salary then yeh that is fine.
Thing is when you are tipping you are entitled to have the tacho on other work and be paid for unloading, irrespective somebody else doing it, and if a side tip you are maybe going to supervise it say.
If you are paid by the hour you are getting paid less for the day if you have tacho on break. (This is assuming you do not have a break later in the day to make up)
Saying that if you work for a good firm who is good with you , maybe you don’t mind that type of concession,.I’ve been there myself,.I’ve also been an owner driver,.so I do get it with both examples.
On other hand if you work for a crappy firm who thinks nothing about you and treats you all with contempt, why make any concessions at all to save them money and do yourself out of 45mins pay?..when you could be getting paid rather than having tacho on break and not getting paid.
It’s yet another ‘reap whatever they sow’ situation in my book,.with a bit of ‘street wisdom’ thrown in.
Winseer:
[
“Taking breaks on bays” is still pretty much “Not allowed”, at least “Officially”…
Can you point me to that particular piece of legislation? Many thanks
What I’m saying here is that “Laws of the actual Land” - don’t get enforced even as “Company Rules”, leading to different rulesets everywhere you go…
Meanwhile, “Company Rules” get pushed upon hapless drivers at many a turn “as if they WERE laws of the Land” - but of course are not.
In other words, if a Manager states to you that you cannot (for example) go down this motorway slip road, because it is “against the law” when it is actually just against some in-house “off route” rule - then they are clearly lying to you about what is “Law” and what is “Company Rule”…
A top example of that would be “It is against the law to smoke in this vehicle” - which I’ve yet to see enforced, anywhere at any time, either as Company Rule (when you’d get disciplined for doing this…) or as “Law of the Land” when you get reported to the police (!!) for doing it… Neither happens, meaning the whole thing is likely just a tripwire to give acting managers yet another lame excuse getting rid of people they don’t like, rather than people who go around actually breaking laws in the workplace… Another example would be “Not using the designated walkways is a site-ban offence”, or even “You must use our money laundering system to purchase stuff from counters/vending machines here, and you donate that money to us in the event we later decide to cancel your card with money on it”… Clear legalized theft there, with no upside whatsoever for “following said rules” at any time - is there?
“Unwritten Rules” are the bane of the worker, everywhere - and the only kind of rules the Left seems to be interested in enforcing both at local and national level of government. “A Guideline” when they ‘offend’, “Riged and a sackable offence” when WE do.
Meanwhile, a more progressive company at this point - would simply circumvent ALL critique by simply paying people for their breaks so they CAN dictate when and where drivers can take them…
If you’re being paid for your break time, you can’t then moan if you are not 100% “free to dispose of your time” that way, - can you?
We all know that if its known your going to be on a bay for more than 45 its either POA or break depends on how you wish to work your day.
The question being asked is Freely dispose of your time. For me if its a genuine 45 and not just keep you OK I go and do what I want to do ie go for a stroll around the town,breaks dont need to be taken in the cab,as for Daily Rest when the tachos out lock up and then you can do what you want and go where you want.
If you are in a waiting room or in the truck (what EVER seat ) getting tipped on a bay your at work ,for the purpose of law you can put it on break ,rest or POA but this is only used to keep within law ,for the drivers own good he…or she should be quite free to take a rest when free to take A REST ,it should not be used to extend the day or rob the driver of their lawful right to take a rest ie being told to fit a break in on the bay then go to so and so and get another load
fuse:
If you are in a waiting room or in the truck (what EVER seat ) getting tipped on a bay your at work ,for the purpose of law you can put it on break ,rest or POA but this is only used to keep within law ,for the drivers own good he…or she should be quite free to take a rest when free to take A REST ,it should not be used to extend the day or rob the driver of their lawful right to take a rest ie being told to fit a break in on the bay then go to so and so and get another load
Exactly this.
This is what I’ve been trying to say, but you’ve put it far more concisely than I could.
Winseer:
[
“Taking breaks on bays” is still pretty much “Not allowed”, at least “Officially”…
Can you point me to that particular piece of legislation? Many thanks
What I’m saying here is that “Laws of the actual Land” - don’t get enforced even as “Company Rules”, leading to different rulesets everywhere you go…
Meanwhile, “Company Rules” get pushed upon hapless drivers at many a turn “as if they WERE laws of the Land” - but of course are not.
In other words, if a Manager states to you that you cannot (for example) go down this motorway slip road, because it is “against the law” when it is actually just against some in-house “off route” rule - then they are clearly lying to you about what is “Law” and what is “Company Rule”…
A top example of that would be “It is against the law to smoke in this vehicle” - which I’ve yet to see enforced, anywhere at any time, either as Company Rule (when you’d get disciplined for doing this…) or as “Law of the Land” when you get reported to the police (!!) for doing it… Neither happens, meaning the whole thing is likely just a tripwire to give acting managers yet another lame excuse getting rid of people they don’t like, rather than people who go around actually breaking laws in the workplace… Another example would be “Not using the designated walkways is a site-ban offence”, or even “You must use our money laundering system to purchase stuff from counters/vending machines here, and you donate that money to us in the event we later decide to cancel your card with money on it”… Clear legalized theft there, with no upside whatsoever for “following said rules” at any time - is there?
“Unwritten Rules” are the bane of the worker, everywhere - and the only kind of rules the Left seems to be interested in enforcing both at local and national level of government. “A Guideline” when they ‘offend’, “Riged and a sackable offence” when WE do.
Meanwhile, a more progressive company at this point - would simply circumvent ALL critique by simply paying people for their breaks so they CAN dictate when and where drivers can take them…
If you’re being paid for your break time, you can’t then moan if you are not 100% “free to dispose of your time” that way, - can you?
Here you go Winster, smoking in vehicles written down
I remember the ‘debate’ in here, about ‘smoking in the work place’, when this law came in. EU law by the way.
It is the UK interpretation of ‘enclosed work space’ which means it applies to a truck cab. Other EU countries didn’t interprate it that way, only the UK.
It isn’t generally enforced by the police, but if you’re pulled for something else and happen to be smoking, they’ll add that to the list.
Usually it’s enforced by council employed personel. Traffic wardens for example.
A mate of mine got a fine for smoking in the cab, he was killing time in Doncaster as he was too early for Tesco and was parked on that road with the container place (.and prostitutes) on it. It was a council bod who fined him for it.
Unless your employer has an agreement with HMRC you need to provide proof. You can’t for example get the tax free allowance for a meal without proof of an actual expense.
The mob I work for (and they are a very big mob) have been having discussions at a fairly high level with Hmrc and are insisting we provide a receipt for a meal for each nite out to keep the nite out allowance which is the £26 odd agreed figure tax free and are asking for sample dates for compliance. They won’t take your weekly shopping bill but odly enough they will accept a picture of your meal which must consist of food and a drink as proof. So the tax free nite out is on hmrs’s radar and even odder they have no interest in justifying the daily meal allowance we get
A previous lot I worked for papped it a bit when the who proof thing starred being whispered about so they increased the payment and made it taxable, so we paid deductions on it but ultimately on the bottom line we weren’t worse off.
Getting back to the original post I was winding my trailer legs up the other day and wondered if anyone had ever been fined an increasing amount of cash for each revolution of the handles on those occasions where they weren’t lifted fully
Unless your employer has an agreement with HMRC you need to provide proof. You can’t for example get the tax free allowance for a meal without proof of an actual expense.
The mob I work for (and they are a very big mob) have been having discussions at a fairly high level with Hmrc and are insisting we provide a receipt for a meal for each nite out to keep the nite out allowance which is the £26 odd agreed figure tax free and are asking for sample dates for compliance. They won’t take your weekly shopping bill but odly enough they will accept a picture of your meal which must consist of food and a drink as proof. So the tax free nite out is on hmrs’s radar and even odder they have no interest in justifying the daily meal allowance we get
Ffs …I’ve heard it all now.
So can the pic be used instead of a receipt, or is it to be used as a back up supplement to a receipt?..obviously because they don’t believe or trust you?
As for the shopping bill.refusal that is also ■■■■ ridiculous…what about if you cook your own meal in the cab, do you not get anything?
One for the Union if you have one.
robroy:
As for the shopping bill.refusal that is also [zb] ridiculous…what about if you cook your own meal in the cab, do you not get anything?
I would guess that HMRC’s argument here would be that the subsistance allowance is the defray the extra costs of being away from home, and you would have eaten that food anyway even if you were at home.
robroy:
As for the shopping bill.refusal that is also [zb] ridiculous…what about if you cook your own meal in the cab, do you not get anything?
I would guess that HMRC’s argument here would be that the subsistance allowance is the defray the extra costs of being away from home, and you would have eaten that food anyway even if you were at home.
Ok so the answer to the firm on that would be, YOU sort it, or pay me a suitable alternative, or find another tramper.
But we all know that nobody would back you up, and there is always somebody who will do something unfair and unjust willingly…in fact there would be a queue.
robroy:
As for the shopping bill.refusal that is also [zb] ridiculous…what about if you cook your own meal in the cab, do you not get anything?
I would guess that HMRC’s argument here would be that the subsistance allowance is the defray the extra costs of being away from home, and you would have eaten that food anyway even if you were at home.
No, you would in this case have bought “meals for one” for the lorry fridge ( I can see that for many they would not be big enough) and not family sized meals or ingredients for use at home, so there has been extra expense. Perhaps we ought to be investigating HMRC canteen meal subsidies? Perhaps also a little scrutiny upon the exact choice made monetarily from the menu when MPs put in their expenses claims?
robroy:
As for the shopping bill.refusal that is also [zb] ridiculous…what about if you cook your own meal in the cab, do you not get anything?
I would guess that HMRC’s argument here would be that the subsistance allowance is the defray the extra costs of being away from home, and you would have eaten that food anyway even if you were at home.
Ok so the answer to the firm on that would be, YOU sort it, or pay me a suitable alternative, or find another tramper.
But we all know that nobody would back you up, and there is always somebody who will do something unfair and unjust willingly…in fact there would be a queue.
I don’t make these rules but that is my interpretation of HMRC’s probable position. For many reasons, including but not limited to the decline in value of the night-out allowance due to it being frozen back in 2009 or whenever it was, I just don’t do nights out any more.
robroy:
As for the shopping bill.refusal that is also [zb] ridiculous…what about if you cook your own meal in the cab, do you not get anything?
I would guess that HMRC’s argument here would be that the subsistance allowance is the defray the extra costs of being away from home, and you would have eaten that food anyway even if you were at home.
Ok so the answer to the firm on that would be, YOU sort it, or pay me a suitable alternative, or find another tramper.
But we all know that nobody would back you up, and there is always somebody who will do something unfair and unjust willingly…in fact there would be a queue.
I don’t make these rules but that is my interpretation of HMRC’s probable position. For many reasons, including but not limited to the decline in value of the night-out allowance due to it being frozen back in 2009 or whenever it was, I just don’t do nights out any more.
Yep…
When the wage was 100 quid a week I got £9 which is obviously 9%.
Going by those figures it should be £54 a night out the 9 quid was designed to cover digs and a meal, even now you would not get that for £54 today, unless it was some doss hole.
Maybe the dayman b/s is right after all …we maybe are unpaid (or poorly paid) security guards after all.
I wonder as somebody else touched on, what MP’s night away expenses are.
robroy:
Going by those figures it should be £54 a night out the 9 quid was designed to cover digs and a meal, even now you would not get that for £54 today, unless it was some doss hole.
Maybe the dayman b/s is right after all …we maybe are unpaid (or poorly paid) security guards after all.
I wonder as somebody else touched on, what MP’s night away expenses are.
I’m asleep, it would take a bomb going off near by to wake me up (or a bursting bladder ).
So as a security guard, I’d be useless
‘Expenses’ are not a tax free allowance and receipts are supposed to be submitted.
I recently did a trip to Switzerland, in a day cabbed vehicle. I submitted receipts for the three hotel nights and received that money back. Those were expenses.
I also received the tax free night out allowance
Parking costs are also an additional expense. Submit the receipts and you should get it back.
There are (or there used to be) 2 rates for the tax free night out allowance.
One rate for sleeper cabs, for the inconvenience and extra expense of eating away from home.
A second, higher rate for day cabs, to cover digs, inconvenience, and eating away from home.
I don’t know if that’s still the case.
The whole of the tax free allowance is for the driver. Parking charges, like fuel, tolls, etc, are a legitimate expense to the business.
…I’ve heard it all now.