Following on from the “If you drive a ten, you need 11 off” laugh, I’ve just come across two new (to me) snippets of “wisdom” . . . . . . . .
Apparently, if you sit for three hours on “bed symbol” and claim that as part of a slipt daily rest, you can’t use that period as a break meaning that if you’d driven 4:20 to get there, sat for 3:05 on bed symbol, you then only have 10 minutes of driving time available before you need to take a break - yeah right
To be fair, the worst thing that would happen if you accepted/believed that, is that you’ve taken more break than required and/or possibly you wouldn’t get home that day or make it to your preferred stopping place. No real harm done there then
But on a more semi-serious note . . . . . . Apparently - and I must stress, according to some ‘Driver Trainers’ - the new (2009) Vosa Guide book says you can have two reduced weekly rest periods in a row
I’ve just downloaded the PDF this morning, and I think I’ve found the misunderstanding caused by them not looking at the thing properly/fully.
The concern I have is that if drivers accept/believe what the trainers are telling them, then the company is effectively A) condoning illegal running — and B) actually putting the drivers at risk of prosecution
dambuster:
But on a more semi-serious note . . . . . . Apparently - and I must stress, according to some ‘Driver Trainers’ - the new (2009) Vosa Guide book says you can have two reduced weekly rest periods in a row
You can, I recently had four in a row quite legally.
Started work Sunday AM after a full weekly rest
========================== Week 1
Reduced rest Tuesday AM/Wednesday AM
Reduced rest Friday PM/Sunday AM
========================== Week 2
Reduced rest Tuesday AM/Wednesday AM
Reduced Friday PM/Saturday PM
Did one shift.
Started full weekly rest Sunday AM
========================== Week 3
Week 1 has a full weekly rest, Week 2 a reduced and Week 3 a full, so the any two weeks must have at least one full and one reduced rest requirement was met.
Agreed. You can have as many reduced weekly rests in a row as you can mathematically fit into a week.
The problem is that the “trainers” don’t finish off with the qualifier that “in any two consecutive (fixed) weeks you must still have had at least one full weekly rest”
In fact, it’s worse than that.
I know of one trainer that believes - and spouts this tripe - that if you repay the reduced hours within the week following - or maybe by Mon or Tues (normal Mon-Fri working pattern) then the reduced weekly rest is cancelled because you’ve repaid the time quickly enough
eg - Finish work at 10am Saturday, restart at 6am Monday (44 hours weekly rest) Take 10 or 11 0r 12 (depending on his understanding of attach to 9 ) you’ve repaid the reduced hours (correct) and therefore effectively cancelled" the reduction and can have another reduced weekly rest on the coming weekend.
dambuster:
Agreed. You can have as many reduced weekly rests in a row as you can mathematically fit into a fortnight.
Fixed that for you.
dambuster:
I know of one trainer that believes - and spouts this tripe - that if you repay the reduced hours within the week following - or maybe by Mon or Tues (normal Mon-Fri working pattern) then the reduced weekly rest is cancelled because you’ve repaid the time quickly enough
eg - Finish work at 10am Saturday, restart at 6am Monday (44 hours weekly rest) Take 10 or 11 0r 12 (depending on his understanding of attach to 9 ) you’ve repaid the reduced hours (correct) and therefore effectively cancelled" the reduction and can have another reduced weekly rest on the coming weekend.
He’s not so much a trumpet as the whole brass section. I have heard that one before on a few occasions.
I forgot to say in my first reply regarding the 3 hours not being break, that trainer is out of date with his knowledge. Prior to 11th April 2007 that was the case but from the rule changes which came into force then the 3 hour rest also counts as a break from driving and re-sets the driving clock.
dambuster:
Agreed. You can have as many reduced weekly rests in a row as you can mathematically fit into a week.
The problem is that the “trainers” don’t finish off with the qualifier that “in any two consecutive (fixed) weeks you must still have had at least one full weekly rest”
In fact, it’s worse than that.
I know of one trainer that believes - and spouts this tripe - that if you repay the reduced hours within the week following - or maybe by Mon or Tues (normal Mon-Fri working pattern) then the reduced weekly rest is cancelled because you’ve repaid the time quickly enough
eg - Finish work at 10am Saturday, restart at 6am Monday (44 hours weekly rest) Take 10 or 11 0r 12 (depending on his understanding of attach to 9 ) you’ve repaid the reduced hours (correct) and therefore effectively cancelled" the reduction and can have another reduced weekly rest on the coming weekend.
Coffeeholic:
I forgot to say in my first reply regarding the 3 hours not being break, that trainer is out of date with his knowledge. Prior to 11th April 2007 that was the case but from the rule changes which came into force then the 3 hour rest also counts as a break from driving and re-sets the driving clock.
I don’t remember that
I’d always done the 1+3 or 2+2 or even 4, then assumed I had a clean sheet for a 4 1/2 drive
Coffeeholic:
I forgot to say in my first reply regarding the 3 hours not being break, that trainer is out of date with his knowledge. Prior to 11th April 2007 that was the case but from the rule changes which came into force then the 3 hour rest also counts as a break from driving and re-sets the driving clock.
I don’t remember that
I’d always done the 1+3 or 2+2 or even 4, then assumed I had a clean sheet for a 4 1/2 drive
A lot of people fell foul of that one and made the same assumption you did. Prior to April '07 rest was rest and break was break but now the 3 hours can be both.
meaning that if you’d driven 4:20 to get there, sat for 3:05 on bed symbol, you then only have 10 minutes of driving time available before you need to take a break 
