I have been informed today that it is against the law for employers to pay for breaks taken, as in your 45 mins a day, or in easy terms, to be paid for every hour worked in a day.
Is this true and is it written in law?
This isn’t something I heard in an RDC waiting room, it was from management.
weeto:
I have been informed today that it is against the law for employers to pay for breaks taken, as in your 45 mins a day, or in easy terms, to be paid for every hour worked in a day.
Is this true and is it written in law?
This isn’t something I heard in an RDC waiting room, it was from management.
It can’t be against the law as this is contractual and a civil agreement so it does not come under criminal law or statutory civil law. What counts is your contract with your employer. Which is why you should be aware of what you are signing when you go to a new employer especially agencies.
alder:
weeto:
I have been informed today that it is against the law for employers to pay for breaks taken, as in your 45 mins a day, or in easy terms, to be paid for every hour worked in a day.
Is this true and is it written in law?
This isn’t something I heard in an RDC waiting room, it was from management.It can’t be against the law as this is contractual and a civil agreement so it does not come under criminal law or statutory civil law. What counts is your contract with your employer. Which is why you should be aware of what you are signing when you go to a new employer especially agencies.
This isn’t a new employer, been there for quite a while, originaly was paid straight through, but has now been stopped without warning, 45 mins will now be deducted on every shift.
From your recent posts Weeto I’d say that this sounds like the thin end of the wedge tbh. Is the Co in financial difficulties and they’re scrabbling around desperately trying to reduce overheads? Or are they attempting to ■■■■ the drivers off enough so that they voluntarily leave, thus leaving the way open to employ fresh, lower paid drivers?
One thing is for certain; something has changed at your place and once you get to the bottom of that you’ll get a better handle on the situation.
weeto:
alder:
weeto:
I have been informed today that it is against the law for employers to pay for breaks taken, as in your 45 mins a day, or in easy terms, to be paid for every hour worked in a day.
Is this true and is it written in law?
This isn’t something I heard in an RDC waiting room, it was from management.It can’t be against the law as this is contractual and a civil agreement so it does not come under criminal law or statutory civil law. What counts is your contract with your employer. Which is why you should be aware of what you are signing when you go to a new employer especially agencies.
This isn’t a new employer, been there for quite a while, originaly was paid straight through, but has now been stopped without warning, 45 mins will now be deducted on every shift.
So the question is was it written in your contract and if so they should have got you to sign a new contract. Corporates change these circumstances by getting you to re-apply for your job 
So if they have suddenly changed the contract without your signature/agreement to the new rules then you might be able to claim for the missing hours.
the maoster:
From your recent posts Weeto I’d say that this sounds like the thin end of the wedge tbh. Is the Co in financial difficulties and they’re scrabbling around desperately trying to reduce overheads? Or are they attempting to ■■■■ the drivers off enough so that they voluntarily leave, thus leaving the way open to employ fresh, lower paid drivers?One thing is for certain; something has changed at your place and once you get to the bottom of that you’ll get a better handle on the situation.
There has been a change of ownership since the beginning of this month, not 100% sure yet, but I don’t think TUPE is involved because the original company is still running.
I don’t think its a case of trying to get rid of the original staff because they are taking on new drivers here on the same hourly rates,.
You know what BS stands for and someone’s talking it.
Ask them to show you where it’s written in law and as sure as I’m a God (be it a life like version of Buda) they can’t show you it. 
nick2008:
You know what BS stands for and someone’s talking it.
Ask them to show you where it’s written in law and as sure as I’m a God (be it a life like version of Buda) they can’t show you it.
After telling them that that is a first for me hearing that, I have asked for them to do just that and informed them I don’t agree to the reduction in my wages, currently taking legal advice before proceeding any further with it.
weeto:
alder:
weeto:
I have been informed today that it is against the law for employers to pay for breaks taken, as in your 45 mins a day, or in easy terms, to be paid for every hour worked in a day.
Is this true and is it written in law?
This isn’t something I heard in an RDC waiting room, it was from management.It can’t be against the law as this is contractual and a civil agreement so it does not come under criminal law or statutory civil law. What counts is your contract with your employer. Which is why you should be aware of what you are signing when you go to a new employer especially agencies.
This isn’t a new employer, been there for quite a while, originaly was paid straight through, but has now been stopped without warning, 45 mins will now be deducted on every shift.
Simple answer,don`t do anything in your break time,like getting your delivery notes ready or cleaning the inside of your windows,
You know the "silly things"that drivers do whilst taking that break required by law,add that time on to the end of the day instead
Be aware that if they send you on a max 10 hour driving run they will deduct 1.5 hours which is quite a chunk when you have put in 15 hour spreadover 
alder:
Be aware that if they send you on a max 10 hour driving run they will deduct 1.5 hours which is quite a chunk when you have put in 15 hour spreadover
That’s not likely to happen as I don’t do any more than 5 hours a day driving over a 10-12 hour shift.
There is no such law. Whoever it was is talking ■■■■■■■■.
If they are changing your contractual terms then they must consult with you. If you agree - fine, new contract issued and job done. If you disagree then ultimately they will have to either dismiss you - but they need reason for that and have to follow correct procedures (so don’t give them reason) - or make you redundant with all appropriate notice periods and payments, and then re-employ you on the new contract terms.
The above is the only way an employer can force a change in terms of employment on existing employees. Been there and done that … in my experience most employees accept the changes when facts and reasons are explained during consultation. i.e - We save this money or go bust. So it’s no pay for breaks or ultimately no job, which do you prefer. Sounds harsh but if it is a case of a potential failing company then it needs to be saved to keep all employed.
On the other hand if it is new owners just flexing their power - stand your ground and get them to do it properly. If by chance I am wrong and there is a law as they say - they will gladly show you this in writing.
shep532:
There is no such law. Whoever it was is talking [zb].If they are changing your contractual terms then they must consult with you. If you agree - fine, new contract issued and job done. If you disagree then ultimately they will have to either dismiss you - but they need reason for that and have to follow correct procedures (so don’t give them reason) - or make you redundant with all appropriate notice periods and payments, and then re-employ you on the new contract terms.
The above is the only way an employer can force a change in terms of employment on existing employees. Been there and done that … in my experience most employees accept the changes when facts and reasons are explained during consultation. i.e - We save this money or go bust. So it’s no pay for breaks or ultimately no job, which do you prefer. Sounds harsh but if it is a case of a potential failing company then it needs to be saved to keep all employed.
On the other hand if it is new owners just flexing their power - stand your ground and get them to do it properly. If by chance I am wrong and there is a law as they say - they will gladly show you this in writing.
I think it is a case of flexing their power and enforcing change without consultation or notifying, from talking to the other staff they seem to be under the impression that it will be 90 days after the buyout that the change will take place, there are going to be quite a few ■■■■■■ off staff members when they find out on pay day!!
I have been in contact with acas this morning re the law on paid breaks, they have said under the normal WTD it states that breaks can be paid or unpaid but didn’t know if it is the same for drivers, but was pretty sure it would be, I could do with a copy of that if it is to accompany the grievence letter.
It’s just this kind of situation that illustrates what low regard we seem to be held in. As said, if that’s how they want to play it, either mooch about with your thumb up your arse for 45, or grab a beauty sleep!
As for it being law, all I can say is there are a fair few companies choosing to illegally pay more than they have to. 
If it happened to me I would immediately start looking at least 250.hours a year unpaid - poke it
I do agency work for a company where, as long as you can get your break in legally while tipping, and it can be done at a fair few of their customers, they will pay straight through.
Ken.
If it was illegal then those on salary would have a big problem !
On your timesheet “start” 15 mins early an “finish” 30 mins later, everyones happy they deduct their 45 you get paid your break.
the maoster:
From your recent posts Weeto I’d say that this sounds like the thin end of the wedge tbh. Is the Co in financial difficulties and they’re scrabbling around desperately trying to reduce overheads? Or are they attempting to ■■■■ the drivers off enough so that they voluntarily leave, thus leaving the way open to employ fresh, lower paid drivers?One thing is for certain; something has changed at your place and once you get to the bottom of that you’ll get a better handle on the situation.
I agree with the above, 45 minutes suddenly taken out your wages I’m guessing is at least £40 a week or £160 a month times that by how many drivers are working there,
I work for a well known supermarket and we are paid our breaks hence why it’s frowned upon if we have more than 50 mins.
I enquired about another job and asked about the t&c’s. He told me they didn’t pay for breaks any more because it’s RHA advice not to as it’s not good practice to encourage the use of break when poa should be used. Whilst I can accept the premise of using break instead of poa is valid, he must have thought I’d come over on the last banana boat to take his bs in - they don’t pay breaks for one reason only - TO CUT YOUR WAGES.
So in summary he was offering £9 hour and unpaid breaks to drive class 1. Needless to say I didn’t go and work for him.