When must I begin 45 hours rest

ASK THE EXPERTS SAFETY, LAW AND WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE FORUM (INTE
1

I want to check when I must begin a 45 hour rest period based on my recent working hours which have been as follows…

On Monday 10th May I started work at 04.30 after a rest period of 45 hours plus.

I then worked 6 days (all within the required WTD / driving hours) and finished at 18.30 on Saturday 15th May. This was followed by a reduced rest period of 40.5 hours. The 3.5 hours owed were paid back attached to a rest period of 11 hours (i.e 15.5 hours in total) commencing on Monday 17 May at 19.15.

Assuming I finish at 18:30 on Saturday 22 May and take a reduced weekly rest of 40.5 hours again. I must then take a full 45 hours rest the following weekend i.e Saturday 29th May (paying back the reduced hours from the weekend of 22 May on block, which you can assume will happen during the week attached to a 11 hour rest period).

The question is, am I right in thinking that I must commence a full 45 hour rest period (assuming the previous shortfall has been paid back in the week) no later than 07.30 on Saturday 29 May in order that it is completed by 04.30 on Monday 31 May, OR, can I commence that rest period later than 07.30 Sat 29 May as long as it begins before 04.30 on 31 May.

Hope this makes sense and any clarification is appreciated.

2

When you finish this week, Saturday the 22nd, you will require a full weekly rest period. You cannot have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods and you had a reduced for the week 10th May - 16th May so for the fixed week ending 23rd May you must have a full rest period, which must begin before the end of the 23rd. You have to begin a weekly rest period earlier than that however, no later than 144 hours from when you commenced work on Monday the 17th, which was by my calculation 11:00 so you must begin your rest no later than 11:00 Sunday.

You could take a reduced rest earlier in the week and then work until later on the Sunday but that would not remove the requirement to begin a full rest by latest 23:59 Sunday 23rd.

The fact you have already compensated for the reduction makes no difference to the requirement to take a full rest this week.
Couple of points. You can make compensation by attaching it to any rest period of at least 9 hours, it doesn’t have to be an 11 hour daily rest. When a weekly rest period is completed by, it makes no difference to the regulations so saying a rest must be completed by 04:30 on whatever date is irrelevant. It is all about when a rest period starts, not ends, which is important.

3

Thanks for your input, however, as I understand it from Vosa’s Rules on Drivers Hours and Tachographs booklet, you can have 2 reduced weekly rests taken consecutively. To quote “this complies with the rules because at least one weekly rest period have been taken in two consecutive fixed weeks”

their example…

Week 1 45 hours rest, work the week,
Week 2 24 hours rest, work the week
Week 3 27 hours rest followed by 45 hours rest at the end of that week.

Applying this to my situation if I start the reference period at 07.30 on Sat 8th May, this was a 45 hour rest period to 04.30 Monday 10th May. I worked the week, finished 18.30 on the following saturday 15th May, had 40.5 hours rest then worked the week again finishing at 18.30 the following saturday 22 May (4.5 hours shortfall paid back on Monday 17 May attached to a daily rest period). My intention is to start again on Monday 24 May at 13.00 which would mean reducing again to 42.5 hours. This should be within the rules as long as I take a full 45 hours at the end of the coming week (the 2.5 hours shortfall will be made up attached to a daily rest in the coming week).

The end of the week being 144 hours after I start work on Monday 23 May at 13.00. Therefore 45 hours rest must commence by 13.00 on Sunday 30th May

Does this make sense or am I missing something :question:

4

You can have two consecutive reduced weekly rest periods as long as they’re in the same week.

AS long as the regular weekly rest period up-to 04:30 10th May was connected to the week starting 10th may and the regular weekly rest period starting on Sunday 30th May is used for the week starting 24th May then as far as I can see you would be legal and only one of the reduced weekly rest periods would need to be compensated for.

But in order for this to be legal the weekly rest periods would need to be able to be used for the weeks I’ve described above, from the information given only you know if that’s possible.

5

tachograph:
You can have two consecutive reduced weekly rest periods as long as they’re in the same week.

Not quite true. You can have two, or more, consecutive reduced weekly rest periods and they can be in different weeks.

Week 1 - reduced weekly rest
Week 2 - reduced weekly rest during the week followed by regular weekly rest started by 23:59 Sunday latest.

6

I tried to insert a table below to better describe what I’m trying to explain but it won’t have it. From what you’ve said and after further reading I believe this to be legal and I think you agree Tachograph as the rest periods are being used for the weeks you describe in your post. Thanks for you help guys.

7

I think you may be getting confused by using terms such as ‘start the reference period.’ There isn’t a reference period as such for weekly rests. There is the fixed week, 00:00 Monday - 24:00 Sunday and the 144 hour maximum period between ending one weekly rest and beginning another.

MAT:
Applying this to my situation if I start the reference period at 07.30 on Sat 8th May, this was a 45 hour rest period to 04.30 Monday 10th May.

But what week was that rest period for? It reads to me that it is for week ending the 9th May so a regular rest period for that week.

MAT:
I worked the week, finished 18.30 on the following saturday 15th May, had 40.5 hours rest

That is a reduced rest for week ending the 16th May.

MAT:
then worked the week again finishing at 18.30 the following saturday 22 May (4.5 hours shortfall paid back on Monday 17 May attached to a daily rest period). My intention is to start again on Monday 24 May at 13.00 which would mean reducing again to 42.5 hours

Which will be a reduced rest for week ending the 23rd May

MAT:
This should be within the rules as long as I take a full 45 hours at the end of the coming week

I’m afraid not. You have two consecutive fixed weeks with only reduced rest periods and that is not allowed.

W/E 9th May - Regular Rest Period
W/E 16th May - Reduced Rest Period
W/E 23rd May - Reduced Rest Period

Based on the information given you must have a regular weekly rest period for week ending the 23rd May or you will not have met the requirement for any two consecutive weeks to have a minimum of one regular and one reduced weekly rest period.

I say based on the information given as we have no knowledge of your rest period prior to the ones detailed and that could make a difference. If you had another rest period in the week ending 9th of May before commencing the rest at 07:30 on the 8th then that rest, the one which began on the 8th, could be used for the following week and would allow a reduced in week ending the 23rd.

8

MAT:
I tried to insert a table below to better describe what I’m trying to explain but it won’t have it. From what you’ve said and after further reading I believe this to be legal

When was your last rest period before the one which started on the 8th? That is the key here. If that began in week ending the 2nd May the chances are it will have to be used for that week and means what you are proposing will not be legal.

As I said, based purely on the information given so far taking a reduced rest this week will not be legal. This week, 00:00 17th May to 24:00 23rd May, must have a regular weekly rest attached to it.

9

I thought you guys were the experts!

Coffeeholic , on one hand you reckon you can’t have 2 reduced consecutive weekly rest periods and then on the other, you agree that you can. Look at VOSA’s Rules on Drivers Hours and Tachographs and you will see that it is quite permissable to have 2 reduced weekly rest periods consecutively. In the example I gave, I had a weekly rest of 45 hours, then worked a full week and took a reduced weekly rest, then, worked a week and took another reduced weekly rest the following week. At the the end of the the following week i.e the 3rd week, I will take a full weekly rest period having compensated for any reduction previously. For clarity, either side of the 3 week period I’m referring to I will have taken a normal weekly rest period. In other words, 45 hours. So the 45 hour rest periods are not being counted twice.

I’ve looked at this very carefully today and I know that I’m within the law but what concerns me is that you are giving inaccurate advice. Let me spell it out as it is…

On Monday 10 May I started work at 04.30 having completed a weekly rest of 45 hours plus. For the purposes of this example, you can assume that this rest period applies to week commencing Monday 10th, as , the previous week was taken care of from a rest period of 45 hours + in its own right. So, having worked untill 18.30 on Sat 15 May, I then took another weekly rest period of 40.5 hours, which of course is reduced. The shortfall on the rest period was compensated on Monday 17th May when it was attached to an 11 hour rest period. I then worked another week and this weekend, i.e sat 22 / sun 23 may I have taken another weekly rest period which is reduced 42.5 hours as I start work again on Monday 24 May at 13.00. Next weekend, I will take a full 45 hours along with any shortfall compensated for.

Please can you explain to me why you think this is not legal?

10

MAT:
On Monday 10 May I started work at 04.30 having completed a weekly rest of 45 hours plus. For the purposes of this example, you can assume that this rest period applies to week commencing Monday 10th, as , the previous week was taken care of from a rest period of 45 hours + in its own right. So, having worked untill 18.30 on Sat 15 May, I then took another weekly rest period of 40.5 hours, which of course is reduced. The shortfall on the rest period was compensated on Monday 17th May when it was attached to an 11 hour rest period. I then worked another week and this weekend, i.e sat 22 / sun 23 may I have taken another weekly rest period which is reduced 42.5 hours as I start work again on Monday 24 May at 13.00. Next weekend, I will take a full 45 hours along with any shortfall compensated for.

Please can you explain to me why you think this is not legal?

Looks legal to me.

11

MAT:
I thought you guys were the experts!

Coffeeholic , on one hand you reckon you can’t have 2 reduced consecutive weekly rest periods and then on the other, you agree that you can.

I have never said you cannot have consecutive reduced weekly rest periods, please point out where I said that as I have never said that either on this site or elsewhere. I am forever correcting people on here who insist you cannot.

Prior to commencing the full weekly rest period I started yesterday at 10:30 I had taken 4 reduced weekly rest periods in a row. Week ending the 9th May I had a full rest period from Tuesday morning until Thursday afternoon, well over 45 hours then the first of my 4 reduced rest periods from Saturday evening until Sunday evening, 25 hours. Week ending 16th May I had a weekly rest from Tuesday until Thursday of just less than 40 hours, reduced rest number 2, and another from Saturday evening until Sunday evening of about 26 hours, reduced rest number 3. I then had reduced rest number 4 from Tuesday morning until Wednesday morning, 28 hours and then started the full rest I require for this week at 10:30 on Saturday the 22nd May.

Four reduced weekly rest periods in a row but the crucial point being that W/E 9th May had a regular rest period, W/E 16th May had a reduced rest period and W/E 23rd May has a full rest period so no two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods. Of the 4 reduced rest periods only one requires compensation and that can be either of the two in week ending the 16th May and I will make it the nearly 40 hour one as it will be easier to compensate just the 5 and a bit hours rather than 19 hours for the other one.

I said, and this is the point you are missing, that you cannot have two consecutive weeks with ONLY reduced rest periods. The minimum requirement for two consecutive weeks is one full and one reduced, that’s the minimum and you can of course have more which is how it is possible to have two, or more, consecutive reduced weekly rest periods

MAT:
Look at VOSA’s Rules on Drivers Hours and Tachographs and you will see that it is quite permissable to have 2 reduced weekly rest periods consecutively.

Indeed it is and I have never said otherwise and if you had read one of my earlier posts on this thread you would see I said so.

Coffeeholic on Sun May 23, 2010 11:34 am:
You can have two, or more, consecutive reduced weekly rest periods and they can be in different weeks.

Week 1 - reduced weekly rest
Week 2 - reduced weekly rest during the week followed by regular weekly rest started by 23:59 Sunday latest.

MAT:
In the example I gave, I had a weekly rest of 45 hours, then worked a full week and took a reduced weekly rest, then, worked a week and took another reduced weekly rest the following week. At the the end of the the following week i.e the 3rd week, I will take a full weekly rest period having compensated for any reduction previously.

I can only give answers based on the information given and based on this information that is not legal as you have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods. The first and second weeks only have reduced rest periods as that information given does not say when your rest period prior to the one at the start of the first week was. Whether you have compensated or not is irrelevant to your original question and you have a couple of weeks before any compensation is actually due anyway.

MAT:
I’ve looked at this very carefully today and I know that I’m within the law but what concerns me is that you are giving inaccurate advice.

At no point have I given inaccurate advice. I said -

Coffeeholic:
Based on the information given you must have a regular weekly rest period for week ending the 23rd May or you will not have met the requirement for any two consecutive weeks to have a minimum of one regular and one reduced weekly rest period.

I say based on the information given as we have no knowledge of your rest period prior to the ones detailed and that could make a difference. If you had another rest period in the week ending 9th of May before commencing the rest at 07:30 on the 8th then that rest, the one which began on the 8th, could be used for the following week and would allow a reduced in week ending the 23rd.

I gave an accurate answer, the bit in blue, as far as I could using the information supplied, and as all your other rest periods fall at the end of the week and count for the week they began in it wasn’t to much of a leap to assume the same about the rest that ended on the 10th May. I also gave an alternative answer, the bit in red, in case you had taken an additional rest period you had not mentioned.

MAT:
Let me spell it out as it is…

On Monday 10 May I started work at 04.30 having completed a weekly rest of 45 hours plus. For the purposes of this example, you can assume that this rest period applies to week commencing Monday 10th, as , the previous week was taken care of from a rest period of 45 hours + in its own right.

Which was the assumption I made in the bit in red above. But as you had not mentioned this rest period it was only an assumption and I had to give my first answer based on the information you did supply, and I did so correctly as I had no knowledge of this extra rest period. Just giving answers based on assumptions could lead to giving false information. I prefer to answer just based on the facts as supplied and then suggest where the answer might differ if there is some additional information.

When you say “The previous week was taken care of from a rest period of 45 hours + in its own right”, which week do you mean? Week ending the 9th or the 2nd?.

MAT:
So, having worked untill 18.30 on Sat 15 May, I then took another weekly rest period of 40.5 hours, which of course is reduced. The shortfall on the rest period was compensated on Monday 17th May when it was attached to an 11 hour rest period.

This rest period did not require compensation as it’s sole purpose was to prevent you exceeding 144 hours without a weekly rest period. You already have a rest period for this week which was the full one which ended on the 10th May. That met the legal requirement for this week so any other rest periods in that week do not require compensation.

MAT:
I then worked another week and this weekend, i.e sat 22 / sun 23 may I have taken another weekly rest period which is reduced 42.5 hours as I start work again on Monday 24 May at 13.00. Next weekend, I will take a full 45 hours along with any shortfall compensated for.

That’s fine, although you don’t have to compensate for that reduction until before the end of week ending 13th June.

MAT:
Please can you explain to me why you think this is not legal?

I explained it in previous posts why I thought it wasn’t legal and that was because although you can certainly have consecutive reduced weekly rest periods you cannot have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods. And from the information you initially gave that was the situation you were in. All your rest periods are taken at the end of a week sometime over Saturday to Monday and count toward the week ending on the Sunday so to assume the rest that ended on the 10th was the same and applied to week ending the 9th was not too much of a leap. Now you have supplied the additional information that you had already taken a weekly rest period during week ending the 9th May that changes things.

Assuming you have now supplied all the relevant information and the new rest period you mentioned is for week ending 9th May and not for week ending 2nd May then yes you are legal to take a reduced rest this week, followed by a full next week.

So, I gave you one answer taking into account the rest periods you detailed in your first post, and that answer was accurate based on that first post. I also gave you a different alternative answer if you had an extra rest period available for week ending the 9th May, which was also accurate and in fact turned out to be the correct option when you supplied the extra information. So I gave an accurate answer without even having all the details. :wink: :stuck_out_tongue:

To sum up and to check one of the two options I gave you was the correct answer, the alternative answer if an extra rest period had been taken, your weekly rest periods are -

Weekly rest period not detailed which is for W/E 2nd May.
Full weekly rest period, times not detailed, which can be counted for W/E 9th May.
Full weekly rest period, ending at 04:30 10th May and counting for W/E 16th May.
Reduced weekly rest, 40.5 hours from 18:30 Saturday 15th May. Only purpose to prevent working more than 144 hours without a weekly rest. Does not require compensation.
Reduced weekly rest, 42.5 hours, and counting for W/E 23rd May. Compensation required before end of W/E 13th June.
Full weekly rest commencing no later than 13:00 on Sunday 30th May and counting for W/E 30th May.

Is that correct?

Just to make sure you and I are now on the same page and to insure there is no inaccurate information being posted what where the dates and times of the two weekly rest periods prior to the full rest period which ended on the 10th May. The one which applies to W/E the 2nd May and the extra one you initially didn’t mention which is for W/E 9th May

12

Coffeeholic:
You cannot have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods

This is the comment I was referring to as posted in an earlier reply, which went on to suggest that I must have a full 45 hours rest period starting Saturday 22 May. This is not the case as I think you have indicated in your last reply.

The rest periods I have referred to, whether full or reduced, apply to the weeks they’re in. The week running up to Saturday 8th May had a 45 hour plus rest period at the beginning of it as did the one previous to that (I had a rest period in excess of 45 hours over Sat 1, Sun 2 and Mon 3 May), so, for clarity…

Week 1

Rest period of 45 hours plus on Saturday / Sunday 8/9 May. I then worked untill 18.30 on Saturday 15th May

Week 2

Rest period, reduced to 40.5 hours from Sat 15th May, I then started work on Monday and worked untill 18.30 on Saturday 22nd May.

Week 3

Rest Period, reduced to 42.5 hours from Saturday 22 May, I then start work today and will work the week finishing on Friday 28th May when I will have the weekend off. In other words commence a full rest period of 45 hours plus.
So, over the 3 week period I have / will take 1 full rest followed by 2 reduced (in consecutive weeks) followed by 1 full . This is perfectly legal however my original question was when must I start the 45 hours rest which I now assume must be 144 hours after the end of my last weekly rest which would be 13.00 hours Sunday.

13

MAT:

Coffeeholic:
You cannot have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods

This is the comment I was referring to as posted in an earlier reply,

That comment is 100% correct. In any two consecutive weeks there must be at least one full weekly rest period.

MAT:
which went on to suggest that I must have a full 45 hours rest period starting Saturday 22 May. This is not the case as I think you have indicated in your last reply.

It was the case based on the original information you supplied. The further information you replied may have altered that.

MAT:
The rest periods I have referred to, whether full or reduced, apply to the weeks they’re in.

When you say weeks they are in do you mean the week they begin in or the week they end in? For the vast majority of drivers the weekly rest period usually counts for the week it begins in rather than the one it ends in.

MAT:
The week running up to Saturday 8th May had a 45 hour plus rest period at the beginning of it as did the one previous to that (I had a rest period in excess of 45 hours over Sat 1, Sun 2 and Mon 3 May), so, for clarity…

Week 1

Rest period of 45 hours plus on Saturday / Sunday 8/9 May. I then worked untill 18.30 on Saturday 15th May

Week 2

Rest period, reduced to 40.5 hours from Sat 15th May, I then started work on Monday and worked untill 18.30 on Saturday 22nd May.

Week 3

Rest Period, reduced to 42.5 hours from Saturday 22 May, I then start work today and will work the week finishing on Friday 28th May when I will have the weekend off. In other words commence a full rest period of 45 hours plus.
So, over the 3 week period I have / will take 1 full rest followed by 2 reduced (in consecutive weeks) followed by 1 full . This is perfectly legal

Again, based only on that information this is not perfectly legal. The bit in red is not legal if they are the only rest periods you can attach to those weeks. One of those weeks requires a full rest period, any two consecutive weeks must have at least one full rest period.

You are contradicting the information you are giving.

MAT:
The week running up to Saturday 8th May had a 45 hour plus rest period at the beginning of it as did the one previous to that

Based on that you are saying -
W/E 2nd Full weekly rest
W/E 9th Full weekly rest
W/E 16th Reduced weekly rest
W/E 23rd Reduced weekly rest
W/E 30th Full weekly rest

Can you see where that would not be legal? Two consecutive weeks ending the 16th and the 23rd with only reduced weekly rest periods which does not comply with this requirement in the regulations.

Article 8
6. In any two consecutive weeks a driver shall take at least:
– two regular weekly rest periods, or
– one regular weekly rest period and one reduced weekly
rest period of at least 24 hours.

However this may be your get out card which allows you to take a reduced for week ending the 23rd.

MAT:
(I had a rest period in excess of 45 hours over Sat 1, Sun 2 and Mon 3 May)

If that rest came to at least 69 hours it can be counted as two back to back rest periods, one for week ending the 2nd and one for week ending the 9th. This means the full rest at the end of week ending the 9th can be counted for week ending the 16th and will allow you to take a reduced for week ending the 23rd. That is the only way this will work and make it legal for you to take a reduced rest ending today.

I just have a feeing you have not quite grasped the weekly rest requirements and are getting confused by the fact you are allowed two, or more, consecutive reduced weekly rest periods but are not allowed two consecutive weeks with only reduced weekly rest periods.

The VOSA example you quoted earlier shows you can have two reduced rest periods in a row but it does not show you can have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods and I am concerned you have misread that.

Unless that long rest over the bank holiday weekend was at least 69 hours if you take a reduced rest ending today you will not have taken sufficient weekly rest and could face problems as a result.

MAT:
however my original question was when must I start the 45 hours rest which I now assume must be 144 hours after the end of my last weekly rest which would be 13.00 hours Sunday.

Yep, it is always no later than 144 hours from the end of your previous weekly rest.

14

MAT:

Coffeeholic:
You cannot have two consecutive weeks with only reduced rest periods

This is the comment I was referring to as posted in an earlier reply, which went on to suggest that I must have a full 45 hours rest period starting Saturday 22 May. This is not the case as I think you have indicated in your last reply.

MAT the above quote is correct, in any two consecutive weeks you must have at least one regular 45 hour weekly rest period.

In your original post you made no mention of another weekly rest period in the week up-to 9th May which is why I emphasised that the weekly rest on Saturday/Sunday 8th/9th must be able to be attached to the week starting on the 10th May in order for you work pattern to be legal.

I can’t speak for Coffeeholic but it seems to me that he made a reasonable assumption that those two days weekly rest were for the week ending 9th May.
Anyone here can only give information based on the information given in the question and in the original question there was no mention of another weekly rest before 8th/9th May that was attached to that week.

15

tachograph:
I can’t speak for Coffeeholic but it seems to me that he made a reasonable assumption that those two days weekly rest were for the week ending 9th May.

That’s exactly what I did and based on that I believe I gave an accurate answer as to the weekly rest requirement for week ending the 23rd.

I still have a nagging doubt whether Mat has grasped the weekly rest requirements correctly and I think there is a good chance, unless his rest over the bank holiday weekend was at least 69 hours, that he is going to commit an offence when he begins work today. If he doesn’t commit an offence then I think it will be more by luck that the bank holiday weekend rest was long enough rather than his understanding of the regulations.

16

MAT:
I thought you guys were the experts!

Coffeeholic , on one hand you reckon you can’t have 2 reduced consecutive weekly rest periods and then on the other, you agree that you can.

MAT:
I’ve looked at this very carefully today and I know that I’m within the law but what concerns me is that you are giving inaccurate advice.

I find these comments slightly distasteful bearing in mind how much time and effort Neil puts into his well thought out replies, often injecting a little humour into the proceedings when Roger gets his Vosa guides mixed up.

Having read this and almost every other thread on these forums I have discovered that Coffeeholic and others are just the same, not experts, gurus or of royal descent, just simple lorry drivers like you and I.

These same forums would be a joke without intelligent input from the contributors who spend time and effort carefully reading and answering posts.

I have seen drivers arguing the toss with Dieseldave about ADR and then disappear up the hole they crept out of when he shows them by chapter and verse that the regulations are set in stone.

The only suggestion I could offer is to ditch the VOSA guides and read the actual legislation that affects all member states of the EU and offers the advantage of Domestic & AETR regulations too.

17

First of all, it’s not my intention to have a pop and I am genuinely grateful of the input and comments from Coffeeholic, Tachograph and everyone else. However, this is becoming very confusing, especially as I do not work regular shift patterns.

I’m looking at VOSA’s Rules on Driver hours and Tachographs right now (Revised 2009 GV262-02) and an example of how a drivers duties might be organised in compliance with the rules (page 19). It shows the following…

Week 1

Weekly rest 45 hours followed 144 hours to the next rest period.

Week 2

Reduced rest 24 hours followed by 144 hours to the next rest period of 27 hours.

Week 3

144 hours to the end of week 3 and a 45 hour rest period.

Is this not what I’m doing in my example as you quoted below or are we saying that the booklet is wrong…

W/E 2nd Full weekly rest (I didn’t work over this bank holiday weekend)
W/E 9th Full weekly rest (I’m attaching this rest period to w/c Monday 10th May)
W/E 16th Reduced weekly rest -why is this a problem given that the previous week has a full 45 hour rest period i.e 8 and 9 May
W/E 23rd Reduced weekly rest - why is this a problem as long a the end of this week I have a full 45 hours rest
W/E 30th Full weekly rest

As I see it I’m attaching a reduced rest period to a two week period that has a full rest period to it and then another reduced rest period to a two week period that also has a full rest attached to it.

18

MAT:
First of all, it’s not my intention to have a pop and I am genuinely grateful of the input and comments from Coffeeholic, Tachograph and everyone else. However, this is becoming very confusing, especially as I do not work regular shift patterns.

The reason it is confusing you is a simple one. You are not grasping exactly what is meant by the term ‘any two consecutive weeks’. Irregular shift patterns do not make a difference to the weekly rest requirements.

MAT:
I’m looking at VOSA’s Rules on Driver hours and Tachographs right now (Revised 2009 GV262-02) and an example of how a drivers duties might be organised in compliance with the rules (page 19). It shows the following…

Week 1

Weekly rest 45 hours followed 144 hours to the next rest period.

Week 2

Reduced rest 24 hours followed by 144 hours to the next rest period of 27 hours.

Week 3

144 hours to the end of week 3 and a 45 hour rest period.

Is this not what I’m doing in my example as you quoted below or are we saying that the booklet is wrong…

The booklet is correct but I am saying you are not doing this.

VOSA booklet example

Week 1 - Full rest
Week 2 - Reduced rest followed by another reduced rest to avoid exceeding 144 hours between weekly rest periods
Week 3 - Full rest period.

In any two consecutive weeks above there is at least one full rest period. The two week period of weeks 1 & 2 have a full rest period as does the two week period of weeks 2 & 3

Now we get to why what you are doing is different

MAT:
W/E 2nd Full weekly rest (I didn’t work over this bank holiday weekend)
W/E 9th Full weekly rest (I’m attaching this rest period to w/c Monday 10th May)

You can only do that if the previous weeks rest period was over 69 hours or you had two weekly rest periods in w/e 2nd May. You need a rest period for w/e 9th May and it will have to be this rest period unless you meet the criteria I just mentioned. You have said full rest for w/e 2nd and your next rest you are using for w/e 16th, where is the rest for w/e the 9th then? It requires one.

MAT:
W/E 16th Reduced weekly rest -why is this a problem given that the previous week has a full 45 hour rest period i.e 8 and 9 May

You have just said you are using that rest period for this week, not last, so last week does not have appear to have a full rest period but this does. You cannot use it for both. Either way a reduced rest period is fine this week.

MAT:
W/E 23rd Reduced weekly rest - why is this a problem as long a the end of this week I have a full 45 hours rest

It is a problem because if you cannot use the rest over the 8th an 9th for w/e the 16th you will have two consecutive weeks, w/e the 16th and w/e the 23rd with only reduced rest periods. that is not allowed and is not altered by the fact you are planning on taking a full rest at the end of this we, w/e 30th May.

MAT:
W/E 30th Full weekly rest

As I see it I’m attaching a reduced rest period to a two week period that has a full rest period to it and then another reduced rest period to a two week period that also has a full rest attached to it.

Now that is conformation of where you are going wrong, and it is exactly what I thought was confusing you. You are attaching one reduced rest to the two week period of weeks 1 & 2 ( w/e 9th and 16th) and another to the two week period of weeks 3 & 4 (w/e 23rd and 30th). But, and it’s a big but, weeks 2 & 3 are also a two week period and require at least one full weekly rest period but they only have reduced rest periods. It’s any two consecutive weeks, not two weeks then the next two weeks.

The only way you can legally do what you want is if that rest period over the bank holiday week end was at least 69 hours (and it is likely it was if you did no work for the three days), or you had an extra rest during the week which ended with the bank holiday weekend.

19

Ok, I think I get it, the point of confusion for me is the definition of 2 consecutive weeks which you have clarified

As it happens the rest period over the bank holiday was in excess of 69 hours so, as you quite rightly point out, this is more luck than judgement that I remain compliant.

Thankyou for your input, it is much appreciated.

20

MAT:
Ok, I think I get it, the point of confusion for me is the definition of 2 consecutive weeks which you have clarified

As it happens the rest period over the bank holiday was in excess of 69 hours so, as you quite rightly point out, this is more luck than judgement that I remain compliant.

Thankyou for your input, it is much appreciated.

Bingo, we got there in the end and at least you are going to be legal. Just remember, if you look at ANY two consecutive weeks you must see at least one weekly rest period of at least 45 hours and that should keep you right.

Don’t be concerned I was inside your head and knew your thought process, it only counts as mild stalking. :stuck_out_tongue: :wink:

So, no more concerns I was posting inaccurate information then? :wink: :stuck_out_tongue:

BTW, luckily you got it before we reached page two of the thread or you would have been in line for the ROG Memorial Trumpet Award. :wink: :stuck_out_tongue: