BBC article…
If we’re going to have our hourage restricted, then we’ll surely need higher hourly rates like RM pay - to make up for “less hours being available”, in particular among agency (mobile) workers…?
Discuss…
Winseer:
BBC article…
More than 900,000 over-50s work nights, TUC says - BBC NewsIf we’re going to have our hourage restricted, then we’ll surely need higher hourly rates like RM pay - to make up for “less hours being available”, in particular among agency (mobile) workers…?
Discuss…
Get rid of all agency employment, only employ direct, gets rid of illegals, and allows for better pay and conditions by full time staff, win win situation.
biggriffin:
Get rid of all agency employment, only employ direct, gets rid of illegals, and allows for better pay and conditions by full time staff, win win situation.
[/quote]
Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that tho, does? If you (company) are paying your workers better rates for less hours, there’s only a couple of outcomes; higher consumer prices, less workforce, and/or more zero hours contracts.
With direct employment, companies would almost be obliged to hire more staff that needed, to cover holidays and sickness etc. This is in part where the zero hours contracts have proven good for them, but offer employees no security or regular income.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Winseer:
BBC article…
More than 900,000 over-50s work nights, TUC says - BBC NewsIf we’re going to have our hourage restricted, then we’ll surely need higher hourly rates like RM pay - to make up for “less hours being available”, in particular among agency (mobile) workers…?
Discuss…
Not sure about nursing or security, but drivers are already protected by legislation from being overworked during a night shift. But when were given the option, we opt out of it.
Spinonit:
Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that tho, does? If you (company) are paying your workers better rates for less hours, there’s only a couple of outcomes; higher consumer prices, less workforce, and/or more zero hours contracts.
I don’t see why higher consumer prices is a problem. It isn’t the responsibility of workers on low wages to subsidise the low-cost purchases of rich consumers, and because the cost of production consists not just of wages but also capital and various forms of rent and unearned income, an increase in wages never causes an equal rise in consumer prices.
To give you an obvious example, doubling the wages of bricklayers does not make houses cost twice as much, because a significant part (perhaps the majority) of the cost of a house is the land whose price is determined by the law (and the existence of rent controls which favour the interests of workers above landowners), not by the cost of production (since plain land is not produced by workers anyway, it is a part of the resources of the natural world).
Indeed, with rented homes, the actual cost of production may have been small and repaid long ago, and the current rents are entirely those attributable to claims for unearned income by landlords and mortgage lenders.
Winseer:
BBC article…
More than 900,000 over-50s work nights, TUC says - BBC NewsIf we’re going to have our hourage restricted, then we’ll surely need higher hourly rates like RM pay - to make up for “less hours being available”, in particular among agency (mobile) workers…?
Discuss…
What do RM pay?
Worked With RM (Royal Mail I presume) a few months ago usually paying just shy of £17 an hour even on the puddle jumpers…
biggriffin:
Get rid of all agency employment, only employ direct, gets rid of illegals, and allows for better pay and conditions by full time staff, win win situation.
But I wouldn’t want to be directly employed. And many of the firms I get sent to by the agency only need drivers on an “as and when” basis.
It’s a total red herring because even working from 8 pm to 4 am or 9 pm to 5 am will still be enough for the issue to be all about your body clock and sleeping properly during the day.Not the difference between an 8 hour shift v 10-12 hours for example.
While the best way to sort the wage v hours v health issue on night work would be to maintain the length of the shifts.But rotate the job on like a month on nights then two weeks off followed by a month on days etc etc rota with no loss of pay on a yearly basis.Thereby allowing the body clock to regularly reset to days from nights with a gradual changeover in the workers’ own time between.Ironically a shift to more agency and less permanent work obviously being more conducive to that type of rota.
this is a joke…switching shifts nearly killed me,days or nights i could manage but switching between the two is a no no…get used to one then switch to another i cant cope with…im a night man,i do it by choice…ive worked a lot more years on nights than days.
Carryfast:
It’s a total red herring because even working from 8 pm to 4 am or 9 pm to 5 am will still be enough for the issue to be all about your body clock and sleeping properly during the day.Not the difference between an 8 hour shift v 10-12 hours for example.While the best way to sort the wage v hours v health issue on night work would be to maintain the length of the shifts.But rotate the job on like a month on nights then two weeks off followed by a month on days etc etc rota with no loss of pay on a yearly basis.Thereby allowing the body clock to regularly reset to days from nights with a gradual changeover in the workers’ own time between.Ironically a shift to more agency and less permanent work obviously being more conducive to that type of rota.
The solution to night work has always been to do the work during the day.
There are a small minority of workers for whom night work has never been too much of a problem (especially if the pay is higher and the atmosphere more relaxed), and broadly speaking it has never been a problem to get teenagers to work evenings into the early hours, and old men to do very early mornings, and there are some tasks that can’t avoid being done at night.
But the vast majority of work that is done at night currently is not done at night because it has to be, but simply because the bosses aren’t faced with paying swingeing rates of pay for it.
It’s the same with long hours - it is rarely necessary, the bosses just sweat workers because they aren’t paying double time after 8 hours.
biggriffin:
Winseer:
BBC article…
More than 900,000 over-50s work nights, TUC says - BBC NewsIf we’re going to have our hourage restricted, then we’ll surely need higher hourly rates like RM pay - to make up for “less hours being available”, in particular among agency (mobile) workers…?
Discuss…
Get rid of all agency employment, only employ direct, gets rid of illegals, and allows for better pay and conditions by full time staff, win win situation.
In a de-regulated jobs market, we might indeed one day GET this panacea of which you describe. Trouble is, I don’t believe for a minute that there will be a massive number of new full time contracts put on the market - to replace all those agency drivers that would get “laid off” by any further political hostility towards Zero Hours Contracts… THAT in turn would mean a massive “race to the bottom” where drivers suddenly with no ZHC work available - get offered minimum wages for 55 hour week -type jobs… “Because the Employer can now get away with such”…
“Less full time jobs available” - tends to push up agency rates already IF the work happens to be “seasonal” in nature.
I know they’ve kept me in work when I would otherwise had been suddenly unemployed and perhaps by some reckoning “unemployable”…
Agency work - means you get work based on one’s abililties and effort rather than one’s ability to fit in socially, regardless of qualifications/experience.
Thus, in full-time employment, you could have a job for life despite 9 points on your licence - or be shown the door for backtalking the boss - even with a CLEAN licence.
…Or “given the job” if you vote Labour, and “sacked on the slightest pretence” if you don’t…
Can anyone give a suggestion as to which employers would offer contracts better for drivers, should ZHC suddenly be abolished?
Perhaps those that don’t have a Union? - Or the exact opposite?
With Christmas season approaching, and possibly Brexit too - the strategy plan put out by different yards - will be interesting to watch closely this year, I suspect…
RM pay £19.48 via Manpower,
Supermarkets - anywhere between £10 and £16ph
Couriers - £14-15ph
Palletliners - £12-15ph
Anyone else got some updates for this list?
These are "normal monday-friday shifts across early doors, PM starts, and outright “Nights”.
I dunno what rate Pertemps are paying these days, even for RM work.
You have to do an unpaid asssessment to get in at RM, whereas at Supermarkets you get an assessment/induction that then goes onto a full shift if you pass, and the whole lot gets paid together at the prevailing rate.
I don’t recall EVER being asked to “do an assessment” at Courier/Palletliner yards. 
Incidentally, I’d still opt for Night Work - even if it paid the same rate as days… I’ve always hated getting up in the morning, and I’m always half asleep around elevenses, regardless of what time I got up, or how much sleep I’ve had. 
My preferred shifts - have me tucked up in bed by “elevenses” of course. 
Thus, I could argue I’m not in it for the “Money” - but rather than full lifestyle that goes with driving on quieter roads, less pressure to hurry about through heavy traffic, and of course the anti-social aspect as well. I’m a loner!!
If the push to drive down night rates continues… (Time and a third to Time and a quarter to Time +barely 10% these days…) then should Day and Night rates ever become equal - then a LOT of drivers are going to opt for day shift work, crowding it out, whilst the night shift driver who sticks with it - will be able to write their own ticket… Here’s hoping! 
Nite Owl:
Winseer:
BBC article…
More than 900,000 over-50s work nights, TUC says - BBC NewsIf we’re going to have our hourage restricted, then we’ll surely need higher hourly rates like RM pay - to make up for “less hours being available”, in particular among agency (mobile) workers…?
Discuss…
Not sure about nursing or security, but drivers are already protected by legislation from being overworked during a night shift. But when were given the option, we opt out of it.
“overworked” to me - is when you’re salaried, and then asked to work more than 10 hours…
If you’re agency on a high hourly rate - you don’t want to be told EVER that “Sorry bud, you can’t do this shift because it’s over 10 hours”…
RM have told their own staff that “only 48 hours work per week” and if the working week there at the time was 36.25 hours - then you only get 11hrs 45 overtime MAXIMUM per week.
Thus, if a 12-hour duty needs covering? - A full timer cannot pick up that overtime! - It HAS to go out to agency!!!
Rjan:
Carryfast:
It’s a total red herring because even working from 8 pm to 4 am or 9 pm to 5 am will still be enough for the issue to be all about your body clock and sleeping properly during the day.Not the difference between an 8 hour shift v 10-12 hours for example.While the best way to sort the wage v hours v health issue on night work would be to maintain the length of the shifts.But rotate the job on like a month on nights then two weeks off followed by a month on days etc etc rota with no loss of pay on a yearly basis.Thereby allowing the body clock to regularly reset to days from nights with a gradual changeover in the workers’ own time between.Ironically a shift to more agency and less permanent work obviously being more conducive to that type of rota.
The solution to night work has always been to do the work during the day.
There are a small minority of workers for whom night work has never been too much of a problem (especially if the pay is higher and the atmosphere more relaxed), and broadly speaking it has never been a problem to get teenagers to work evenings into the early hours, and old men to do very early mornings, and there are some tasks that can’t avoid being done at night.
But the vast majority of work that is done at night currently is not done at night because it has to be, but simply because the bosses aren’t faced with paying swingeing rates of pay for it.
It’s the same with long hours - it is rarely necessary, the bosses just sweat workers because they aren’t paying double time after 8 hours.
Having worked 15 years of permanent night trunking you really haven’t got a clue of the logistics involved.Let me guess you’re quite happy for your train driver mates to carry on working nights while crippling the road transport industry by applying all the usual double standards.As I said there is nothing wrong with night work just so long as you sleep properly during the day and you’re not switching from day shifts to night shifts in a way which dangerously affects the body clock.
The only problem then being quality of life issues in that time off is ruined because you can’t change your body clock from nights to days and back over a short period.In which case the example I gave fixes that in looking after the interests of both the industry and its workforce as usual in the form of a proper rota.Possibly even improved by doubling all those periods I gave to two months nights one month off,two months days etc etc.But what is certain is that the industry can’t possibly remain viable without plenty of night trunking type operations.Just as the rail transport and air transport operations involve massive amounts of essential night time movements.
biggriffin:
Get rid of all agency employment, only employ direct, gets rid of illegals, and allows for better pay and conditions by full time staff, win win situation.
Actually the exact opposite happens because the company ends up being forced to employ enough drivers to meet peak demand not only for that period of peak demand but all year round however they’d not have enough work for them much of the year. Because they don’t have agency they can take on when busy and get rid of when it is quiet their wage bill for the months of the year they’re not busy would now much higher. That means they’ve less money to offer full timers. Because they’ve too many drivers for too little work then all drivers will be on basic hours only outside peak periods.
Agency allows companies to minimise their wage bills by having staff they can get rid of when demand is low, ultimately leading to more profit from which to increase pay and conditions for permanent staff.
As for getting rid of agencies, I don’t want to. I absolutely love working on agency being able to decide when to take time off as and when I please. I could decide Monday I’m not working Tuesday, I send a text saying I’m not available and I get Tuesday off without any argument or discussion. Can you? Most employers want at least 2 weeks notice and once you’ve used your annual leave they need a damned good reason to give you that time off.
Winseer:
RM pay £19.48 via Manpower,
Supermarkets - anywhere between £10 and £16ph
Couriers - £14-15ph
Palletliners - £12-15phAnyone else got some updates for this list?
£16ph
£20ph after 48
Start before 0500 to qualify.
There seems to be some consensus that it is changing shift, rather than “graveyard start times” that causes damage to health.
I feel sorry for those people who are 14:00-02:00 one week, and then 02:00-14:00 the next - for a salary at that.
We already have some “right” to not have our shift time altered by more than “two hours, either side” - but that doesn’t seem to apply to shift changes with a 48 hour gap.
What I’d like to know however is WHY is it deemed “Necessary” to have such health-buggering shift changes as part of one’s contract - when you would be better off having one person doing permanent say, 02:00-14:00 four-on-four-off with the other side doing exactly the opposite shift? That way, there’s the same number of jobs created, thus costing the firm “no extra” - but everyone knows what they are doing weeks and months and the ENTIRE YEAR in advance, to facilitate holiday and family event bookings etc…
“Overtime” - would always be “extra shifts” rather than “finishing one shift later”, which would probably sit better with employers reluctant to dish out such contracts in case “staff hang it out for more overtime”.
There’s still going to be a limit on overtime - over the 17 or 26 week reference period in any case - so what’s all the reluctance really about??
Winseer:
In a de-regulated jobs market, we might indeed one day GET this panacea of which you describe. Trouble is, I don’t believe for a minute that there will be a massive number of new full time contracts put on the market - to replace all those agency drivers that would get “laid off” by any further political hostility towards Zero Hours Contracts… THAT in turn would mean a massive “race to the bottom” where drivers suddenly with no ZHC work available - get offered minimum wages for 55 hour week -type jobs… “Because the Employer can now get away with such”…
“Less full time jobs available” - tends to push up agency rates already IF the work happens to be “seasonal” in nature.I know they’ve kept me in work when I would otherwise had been suddenly unemployed and perhaps by some reckoning “unemployable”…
Agency work - means you get work based on one’s abililties and effort rather than one’s ability to fit in socially, regardless of qualifications/experience.
100% with this.
I actually knew a driver (full time employed) who was with me on my first 2 days of training who had 9 pts on his license.