Weekly rest payback

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 19:01

delboytwo:
so your saying that the back to back rest he had before he came back to work in week 4 is counted as week 4 rest

Correct, which is what Tachograph has been saying since the third post on the thread.

delboytwo:
and therefore no rest required for week 4

Rest is required for week 4 and he took it before he started work that week.

delboytwo:
the rest he took at the end of week 4 is counted as rest for week 5 is this what you are saying

No. As I said several times already the rest at the end of Week 4 also counts in Week 4 but because it is his second rest period in that week it requires no compensation. The regulations only require one rest period per week and once you have satisfied that requirement any other rest periods in the same week are not subject to the same rules on compensation.

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 19:16

ROG:
Looking at the answer by coffeeholic I can see where I’ve made the error -
Week 3: Hols - so full weekly rest counted for week 4
Week 4: - reduced weekly rest counted for week 4 - that’s two for the same week so no compo accrued - GOT IT - the reduced is ignored as it is not needed.

It is needed but only to prevent the driver from working more than 144 hours between weekly rest periods, it serves no other purpose.

delboytwo · 15 September 2009 19:21

i still think i am right it week 7 i do not think you can use the back to back rest thing coming back after an holiday.

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 19:32

delboytwo:
i still think i am right it week 7 i do not think you can use the back to back rest thing coming back after an holiday.

Based on what? What has a holiday got to do with it? It is all about the amount of hours rest between work not what the driver was doing during that time. To get a period of at least 69 hours implies there is some time off, or holiday, from regular duties involved.

a rest period of at least 69 hours in total may be counted as two back-to-back weekly rests (e.g. a 45-hour weekly rest followed by 24 hours), provided that the driver does not exceed 144 hours’ work either before or after the rest period in question.

Where does the 211 hours the OP had between his shifts not fit with that? They put a lower limit of 69 hours but there is no upper limit.

delboytwo · 15 September 2009 19:36

so basing on your answer about him taken a back to back rest how do you know that he as not all ready done this and in fact the end of week 2 rest is actually week 3 rest but because he on holiday and he comes back on week 4 it a new week 1 and therefore the rest would have to be paid back by the end of week 4 which is week 7 in is post you do not know what week is rest is on you do not know which week he is counting is rest you all are presuming

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 19:54

delboytwo:
so basing on your answer about him taken a back to back rest how do you know that he as not all ready done this

We can only answer questions based on the information given and can only answer starting at the point the OP chooses to provide information on.

delboytwo:
and in fact the end of week 2 rest is actually week 3 rest

Week 3 doesn’t require a rest period because he didn’t work under EU regulations because he was on holiday. So, it is either the only rest period for Week 2 or a second rest period for Week 2 and it doesn’t change the answer.

delboytwo:
but because he on holiday and he comes back on week 4 it a new week 1

Doesn’t change anything, the second of the back to back rest periods can count for this week regardless of what you call it.

delboytwo:
and therefore the rest would have to be paid back by the end of week 4 which is week 7

The rest period starting on the Saturday of that week, whether it is week 4 or a new week 1, would still be the second rest of that week and would still not require compensating for.

delboytwo:
in is post you do not know what week is rest is on you do not know which week he is counting is rest you all are presuming

We do know what week we can count the second back to back rest period for because Week 3 requires no rest period, therefore regardless of what has gone on before we can count it for the week following his holiday.

delboytwo · 15 September 2009 20:06

let,s look at it

lest say i am on holiday and come back to work on Monday at 6am which in this case we will say is week 4 i have had my rest for that week but i must still take a rest by the 144 hour mark and that rest would not be classed as a reduced rest is say i finished on sat a 9 am and i start work on Sunday at say at 9 am its just to for fill the 144 hour rule so i then work till sat 9 am have my 45 hour weekly rest and then back at work at 6am there will be no rest owed for week 4 in week 7 as the 21 hours that where owed are not required to be paid back as i have already had i rest that week

is this what your on about

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 20:09

delboytwo:
let,s look at it

lest say i am on holiday and come back to work on Monday at 6am which in this case we will say is week 4 i have had my rest for that week but i must still take a rest by the 144 hour mark and that rest would not be classed as a reduced rest is say i finished on sat a 9 am and i start work on Sunday at say at 9 am its just to for fill the 144 hour rule so i then work till sat 9 am have my 45 hour weekly rest and then back at work at 6am there will be on rest owed for week 4 in week 8 as the 21 hours that where owed are not required to be paid back as i have already had i rest that week

is this what your on about

Exactly that!!! Which is indeed the situation of the OP.

delboytwo:
there will be on rest owed for week 4 in week 8

I presume you mean no rest and week 7.

delboytwo · 15 September 2009 20:22

OK i now understand in fact i was not wrong nor right in my answer, but was wrong because i did not consider the holiday i got i wrong and i will say

sorry to Tachograph and also to you Coffeeholic

you both know more than me with the regards the regs but the only way i learn is by trying to understand the way I go wrong it looks right to me if you don’t count the holiday.

i was wondering why you never told me where i was going wrong Coffeeholic as you know me so well
if you told me that i would have stopped posting ages ago

you only learn about some thing by getting it wrong and finding out were you went wrong

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 20:32

delboytwo:
sorry to Tachograph and also to you Coffeeholic

So I’m not 100% wrong then?

delboytwo:
i was wondering why you never told me where i was going wrong Coffeeholic as you know me so well

Eh? May I suggest you actually read my replies because from my very first post on this thread, near the bottom of page one, I explained where you were wrong. I gave the answer and a full explanation, then repeated it several times in subsequent posts.

delboytwo:
if you told me that i would have stopped posting ages ago

Yeah right.

delboytwo · 15 September 2009 20:57

Coffeeholic:
So I’m not 100% wrong then?

no you are

i still say its week 7 and i have asked geebee45 to get his opinion

just cos some ones on holiday does not mean that vosa take that as a back to back rest other wise there would be something in there book and it would say that the compensation would have to be paid back by the end of the 4th week following the week in question, not as it says now the 3rd week following the week in question we all interpret the regs that fit are thinking and i wait to see if there a definitive answer

coffeeholic · 15 September 2009 21:23

delboytwo:

Coffeeholic:
So I’m not 100% wrong then?

no you are

i still say its week 7 and i have asked geebee45 to get his opinion

just cos some ones on holiday does not mean that vosa take that as a back to back rest

Why wouldn’t they, it is more than 69 hours so there is no reason for them not to.

delboytwo:
other wise there would be something in there book

There is something in their book, it says a period of at least 69 hours can be counted as two back to back rest periods. It does not say you cannot use this option when on holiday, it doesn’t mention holidays at all and if it was relevant it would. The fact there is no mention of holidays shows they make no difference.

delboytwo:
and it would say that the compensation would have to be paid back by the end of the 4th week following the week in question, not as it says now the 3rd week following the week in question

What has that got to do with whether they count a period as two back to back rest and why would having back to back rest alter when compensation must be made by from the third week following to the forth?

tachograph · 16 September 2009 00:18

Coffeeholic:
If it is attached to week 5 it still doesn’t require compensating because there will be another rest period at the end of week 5.

I overlooked that

Thanks for clearing that up

tachograph · 16 September 2009 00:23

delboytwo:
Hi coffeeholic

look at this bit

tachograph:
An actual working week starts at the end of a weekly rest period, and finishes when another
weekly rest period is commenced

That’s a classic for taking something out of context Del

What I actually said was :

tachograph:
Pages 18 and 19 of the guide you keep referring to

Note: An actual working week starts at the end of a weekly rest period, and finishes when another
weekly rest period is commenced, which may mean weekly rest is taken in the middle of a fixed
(Monday to Sunday) week. This is perfectly acceptable — the working week is not required to be
aligned with the ‘fixed’ week contained in the rules, provided all the relevant limits are complied with.

A weekly rest period that falls in two weeks may be counted in either week but not in both. However, a rest period of at least 69 hours in total may be counted as two back-to-back weekly rests (e.g. a 45-hour weekly rest followed by 24 hours), provided that the driver does not exceed 144 hours’ work either before or after the rest period in question.

delboytwo:
were in the regs does it say you can take a back to back rest in 561/2006 regs as i have being told so many times not to take the gv262 as the regs its just a guide

It doesn’t say in EC 561/2006 that you can have back to back weekly rest periods but it does say what a weekly rest period is.

(h) ‘weekly rest period’ means the weekly period during
which a driver may freely dispose of his time and covers
a ‘regular weekly rest period’ and a ‘reduced weekly rest
period’:

– ‘regular weekly rest period’ means any period of rest
of at least 45 hours,

– ‘reduced weekly rest period’ means any period of
rest of less than 45 hours, which may, subject to the
conditions laid down in Article 8(6), be shortened
to a minimum of 24 consecutive hours;

Any period of rest of at least 45 hours means that if you had say 90 hours off from Saturday to Tuesday you would have had two rest periods of at least 45 hours each, one for the week finishing Sunday 24:00 and one for the week starting at 00:00 Monday

You seem to have accepted that you can have back to back weekly rest periods but don’t seem to see that a holiday is the same as a rest period ie “any uninterrupted period during which a driver may freely dispose of his time”.

delboytwo · 16 September 2009 08:50

hi i got an answer from geebee45 and this was it

geebee45:
Hi Del,

In a way you’re asking the wrong person because I don’t subscribe to the theory of an uninterrupted weekly rest (say 69 hours) being able to be called ‘back to back rest’ and counted in both the week it commenced and the week it ended.

I started reading the original post and sadly lost the plot before getting to the end of page two.

In my opinion the key phrases concerning weekly rest are;

‘rest’ means any uninterrupted period during which a
driver may freely dispose of his time (from Article 4(f) 561/2006)

A weekly rest period that falls in two weeks may be
counted in either week, but not in both. (from Article 8.9, 561/2006)

So, if you have 168 hours off (a whole week) the rest may be counted in either the week it starts in or the week it ends in, but not both. If you wanted to count the rest in both weeks, interrupt it by doing 5 minutes work at some point in the time off.

Having said that I don’t agree with ‘back to back’ weekly rests the key question is would I report for summons a person that had done one? The short answer is; no. Policy has decided that ‘back to back’ weekly rests exist, therefore no prosecution action would be supported that went against this policy. Secondly, I would have great (personal) difficulty standing in the witness box of a court trying to say that a driver was insufficiently rested after having had 168 hours away from driving / work.

Hope this helps, but it probably doesn’t. Please feel free to copy this into the forum if you wish.

Regards
geebee45

delboytwo · 16 September 2009 09:34

right last night i had a look at the regs and have found something in there and i think it may be relevant when considering back to back rest

we will say that the driver start work every week on Monday 6am and finishes on Saturday at 9 am

week 1 45 rest

week 2 45 hour

week 3 hols

week 4 43 hours rest he finishes at 11 am Saturday

week 5 45 hours rest

week 6 45 hours rest

week 7 45h +2h from week 4

week 8 45 hours rest

and why do you say have a look at it and then consider this bit

In any two consecutive ‘fixed’ weeks a driver must take at least:

two regular weekly rests; or

one regular weekly rest and one reduced weekly rest.

‘a week’ means the period of time between 00.00 on
Monday and 24.00 on Sunday;

so in week 1 45 off so in week 2 he as to have a 45 or 24 but he as a 45 so working on the quote in those two weeks he add 90 off so complied with the above quote

week 3 on holiday and have a lot of rest
week 4 comes back to work and therefore as complied with the quote

week 4 he as retuned to work he as decided to take the back to back option which can only be 45 hours rest
and stars work at 6 am and the finishes on Saturday at 11am only takes 43 hours rest

week 5 end of as 45 hours rest

so week 4 and week 5 his total rest was 88 hours

so the driver does owe 2 hours compensation for week 4 or it could be week 5 depending on which week he counts his rest in for those two consecutive weeks

so my findings are that he still owes the 2 hours rest and would have to pay them back by week 7 or week 8 depending on which week he counts his rest in for those two consecutive weeks

tachograph · 16 September 2009 10:31

Del the driver in your example started week 4 with a full weekly rest and has a full weekly rest in week 5, the second weekly rest which was reduced was there only to avoid going over six x 24 hour periods without a weekly rest, regardless of weather the reduced weekly rest was counted for week 4 or 5 it doesn’t need compensating for as both weeks 4 and 5 contain full 45 hour weekly rest periods.

The only way the reduced weekly rest in your example would need compensating for would be if for some reason the driver wanted to count the 45 hour weekly rest in week 5 as rest for week 6.

rog · 16 September 2009 10:44

If no-one minds then I’ll have a go at explaining in a ROG way

Del, you are counting all the rests as being FORWARD - the end of the holiday (week 3) being the rest for week 4 etc but you forgot they can also be counted as BACKWARD (but not both forward and backward)

If you start with FORWARDS and then change to BACKWARDS there is bound to be one week that has both a FORWARD and a BACKWARD in it - in this case the driver chooses week 4.
As there are now 2 weekly rests in week 4 but only one is required to comply with the weekly rest requirements.
The spare one which the driver chooses to be the 43 hour one (but could be a 24 hour one) must be there to stop the driver going over the 6 X 24 hour (144 hour) period

delboytwo · 16 September 2009 11:13

tachograph:
Del the driver in your example started week 4 with a full weekly rest and has a full weekly rest in week 5, the second weekly rest which was reduced was there only to avoid going over six x 24 hour periods without a weekly rest, regardless of weather the reduced weekly rest was counted for week 4 or 5 it doesn’t need compensating for as both weeks 4 and 5 contain full 45 hour weekly rest periods.

The only way the reduced weekly rest in your example would need compensating for would be if for some reason the driver wanted to count the 45 hour weekly rest in week 5 as rest for week 6.

if he as done a back to back rest and used that rest in week 4 the rest at the end of week 4 of 43 hours is week 5 rest as you can not use the rests in two weeks you have to make a choice so the driver as only had 88 hours rest from mon day till 14 days later at 2400 on sun as that is the two consecutive fixed weeks weeks

start of week 4 rest in that week so far 6 hours (as he is taking a back to back) rest.

on Saturday driver takes rest of 43 hours then starts work at 6 am Monday he as used this rest as week 5 rest as he as all ready had a rest in week 4

the rest of 45 at the end of week 5 is for week six as it would have to be and he already had the rest in week 5

the amount of rest he can use for week 5 is only 39 hour so

6+43+39=88 hours rest in the two fixed consecutive weeks from coming back of his holiday

its like you have to make sure that in the two fixed weeks you have a rest of as least 69 hours or 90 hours if you have less that 90 hours its a reduced rest in the two fixed week period so compensation as to be paid back

we have to make sure we comply with the rolling two-weekly requirements for weekly rest and compensation

also

if the rest of 43 hours is not going to be counted as a rest and therefore discarded as a rest and and the end of week 5 he takes 45 off

the total rest in that two week fixed rest would be

6+39 =45 hour for a two week that from Mon till 14 days Sunday

that why the 43 hour rest as to be counted and use as a rest to make the rest meet the requirements

as you know you can not count a rest in the same week so the 43 hour in week 4 is week 5 and week 5 rest is week 6

coffeeholic · 16 September 2009 12:41

delboytwo:
if he as done a back to back rest and used that rest in week 4 the rest at the end of week 4 of 43 hours is week 5 rest as you can not use the rests in two weeks you have to make a choice

You cannot use the same rest in two weeks but in this case they are different rest periods. The second of the back to back rest periods is used as a full rest for week 4 and the rest at the end of week 4 is, as has been explained many times in this thread, only there to prevent the driver exceeding 6x24-hour periods, or 144 hours, without a rest. There is also a rest period at the end of week 5, which counts for week 5, so the rest at the end of week 4 into week 5 doesn’t require compensating regardless of whether it is counted as week 4 or 5 because in either case it is an extra rest period.

delboytwo:
so the driver as only had 88 hours rest from mon day till 14 days later at 2400 on sun as that is the two consecutive fixed weeks weeks

Now you are making up regulations. Nowhere does it say you must have 90 hours, or any amount of hours in a fixed week or fortnight, a rest period only has to begin or end in a week to be able to count toward it.

delboytwo:
start of week 4 rest in that week so far 6 hours (as he is taking a back to back) rest.

|You don’t just count the bit after midnight Sunday, you count the whole rest period, which in this case is more than 45 hours.

delboytwo:
on Saturday driver takes rest of 43 hours then starts work at 6 am Monday he as used this rest as week 5 rest as he as all ready had a rest in week 4

No, it can be a second rest for week 4 but again it doesn’t matter which week it is attached to as it will be an extra rest for either week 4 or 5 and will therefore require no compensation.

delboytwo:
the rest of 45 at the end of week 5 is for week six as it would have to be and he already had the rest in week 5

It doesn’t have to count for week 6, again you can have more than one weekly rest in a week.

delboytwo:
the amount of rest he can use for week 5 is only 39 hour so

Where the hell you getting that from? A rest period is from when it starts to when it finishes, even when the start and finish are in different weeks which is the norm for all drivers who work Monday to Friday or Saturday.

delboytwo:
6+43+39=88 hours rest in the two fixed consecutive weeks from coming back of his holiday

Which is totally irrelevant as there is not a requirement to have a set amount of rest, in terms of hours, contained within two fixed weeks

delboytwo:
its like you have to make sure that in the two fixed weeks you have a rest of as least 69 hours or 90 hours

No you don’t, you only have to have a rest period attached to each of those weeks. You could resume work at 00:05 on a Monday after full weekly rest, Work until 00:05 Sunday and commence weekly rest (counting for the week just worked). Resume at 21:05 Tuesday and work until 23:59 Sunday when you again commence a full weekly rest ( counting for the week just worked.) Two fixed weeks containing just 45 hours and 6 minutes rest, all legal and no compensation required as no reduced rests taken. Extreme example but it shows that you statement that you must have 69 or 90 hours in the two fixed weeks is nonsense.

delboytwo:
if you have less that 90 hours its a reduced rest in the two fixed week period so compensation as to be paid back

Not necessarily, see above.

delboytwo:
we have to make sure we comply with the rolling two-weekly requirements for weekly rest and compensation

We do, and that requirement is simply that any two weeks must have either two regular or one regular and one reduced counting toward them. That’s all, nothing to do with the amount of hours. Once you meet that stipulation any extra rest periods are surplus to requirements and require no compensation.

delboytwo:
if the rest of 43 hours is not going to be counted as a rest and therefore discarded as a rest and and the end of week 5 he takes 45 off

the total rest in that two week fixed rest would be

6+39 =45 hour for a two week that from Mon till 14 days Sunday

There is no requirement to have an set amount of hours rest contained within the two fixed weeks.

delboytwo:
that why the 43 hour rest as to be counted and use as a rest to make the rest meet the requirements

Once again the 43 hour rest at the end of week 4 is counted as a rest but is purely there to avoid the driver working too long between weekly rest periods and as week 4 and 5 both have other rest periods attached to them it requires no compensation as it is an extra rest period regardless of which week it is attached to.

You asked in an earlier post for it to be pointed out to you where you are going wrong in order for you to learn from your mistakes so here goes.

There is no requirement to ensure any two week period contains 90 or any other amount of hours.
You are confusing counting the same rest period for two different weeks, which is not allowed, with having two different rest periods in the same week and them both counting toward the same week, which is allowed.