After reading three pages concerning this discussion, I found that I needed to go back to to Page 1 before I found the most pertinent comment, which is,
Coffeeholic:
Don’t worry about it, no one polices it anyway and even if they do start to there are no penalties at first, it will be education as to where you are going wrong rather than fines or such…
As I have stated before, these Regulations are “Social Legislation”. They are ‘objectives’ albeit with, eventually, penalties. They are standards, imposed by the E.U. which the Industry should ‘strive to achieve’. rather than boundaries that are ‘set in stone’.
Working Time Regulations have been in place in the Health service since…certainly the early 90’s, possibly the late 80’s, although one member whose O/H, works as a nurse, disputed that when I first mentioned it. Perhaps that is simply due to the ‘light-handed’ approach to enforcement that they were simply not aware of the requirements.
Similarly, within the Police Service, equivalent constraints were imposed in the mid 90’s. Eleven hours between shifts. Maximum number of hours to be worked in any given week, and, for many years, some Chief Constables simply chose to ignore it.
Thinking back to the London bombings. Does anyone even assume that ‘managers’ at the time, whether in the NHS, or in any other Service vital to dealing with the incident, would have questioned, or ‘worried’ as to how many hours a particular individual had previously worked within the current week.
And then we had the revelations following the conviction of the ‘copycat’ bombers, and that because of the need to interrogate computers, and the time constraints of detention, people were literally sleeping on office floors. Perhaps I may have missed it but, I’ve not noticed anyone calling for the relevant Government body to launch an investigation as to whether any E.U. Directives were breached.
VOSA have performance targets to be met under E.U. Directives, which relate to Drivers Hours and Opps Licence Regs. Working Time Regs have been ‘dropped in their lap’ as an additional encumbrance. Basically, I would suggest, if they can see a viable recording procedure in place, then they won’t be arsed to look much further. On the basis that it is not within their remit as ‘a box to be ticked’ under their E.U. obligations.