F-reds:
Oh and FYIAt my place if you were “on duty” for 15,15,15,13,13,13 you would be paid for 84 hours. 44 of which would be at an enhanced overtime rate. Plenty of it around. Might even be available for the advert too if you can grease a pole the right way
Same here. Sometimes I think we must be the same firm 
lolipop:
AndrewG:
And what sort of cowboy ins company are they using to not insure re driving convictions especially for trivial IN10’s…
And…cunningly worded to entrap the unwary…tossersA Company that is prepared to keep the idiots of this world, who think fines for DD etc etc are trivial, off the road
If you read my post i never mentioned DD i mentioned a trivial IN10 which has no relation to driving standards…
It’s no secret RM meant Royal Mail. I wasn’t a driver when I started there. I was there a year before I even got a car licence.
Rules, Laws, and “Is Winseer right or wrong about anything”.
If something is “The Law” but you think it’s an arse - then you have the choice of “Disobeying it” (probably going to get you into trouble) “following it to the letter” (meaning that it won’t then need to change into something better) OR you can CALL it straight out as “An Arse” and make arguments as to how existing laws can be improved/repealed/doubled down upon in due course.
I’m a bit dismayed that when I try and make an argument about anything that should be affecting ALL of us as drivers - I just get shouted down by so many all the time.
“If you don’t push for something - you’ll never get it” applies in all forms of lawmaking today.
Clearly not enough drivers are “active” over issues like “Why do we have to work more hours than office staff”? or “Why can’t we get huge Christmas bonuses like White Collar workers do” or even “Why do we have to engage in working practices that are harmful to both us and the general public”?
What do we say when “another one gone” on here? - RIP?
Maybe we should start looking at the “circumstances that lead upto this fatality” perhaps?
There’s a whole barrel full of “issues connected to Professional Driver Well-Being” right there.
It’s a shame if no one is interested. I can’t make anybody BE interested for sure. I lack the Charisma, Power, and Influence to do it - for sure.
What we all need to be doing - is pushing for a working week that is a MAXIMUM of 48 hours “at work”… The public would be safer, the driver would have less accidents, and the workforce would get more chance to actually spend with their families. This “Austerity deaths must continue so the rich can stay at the top, and the average worker can just quit if they don’t like it” attitude needs to stop.
Suppressing pay whilst hiking hours - kills people. It kills the public. It rarely kills the wealthy though. The laws are made by the wealthy rather than the people.
Most people might not give a ■■■■ if the wealthy can indirectly pick them off day-by-day - but I passionately want this to stop, and “Fair Play” upheld and experienced by all instead.
Now back to topic - POA is hated as OP has stated. Why not push for it to be scrapped across the board, so that all jobs in future have to be based on actual hours spent at work?
That means PAID BREAKS.
That means FULL PAY.
That means LESS DEATHS
…and let good old-fashioned “Supply and Demand” dictate the correct wages for a line of work best suited to 4x12 hour shifts per week.
There might be “fear” that wages will be pushed down - but I suggest that any attempt to do so would result in “more unfilled vacancies” - providing of course, we can stop this “filling the gap with six points ok people, halfway house people, and unfettered immigration”. - Another topic entirely.
I’d like to think people on here, even and especially those who “don’t like me much” - might push the politics here, at very least.
Winseer, I call you, or shout you down because you repeatedly get basic stuff wrong and even when pointed out, you still pedal the same nonsense. You even blatantly lied In this post when it’s all there to be seen.
If you want to make a change, you need to know what you’re on about, you repeatedly display you don’t, won’t accept you’ve got stuff wrong, go off on bonkers tangents to deflect arguments against you
You need credibility, for me you have non. If you genuinely want to make a change you need to read up on the subject and cut out the constant blindly twisting stuff to suite your agenda and cut out the bull ■■■■.
Winseer:
It’s no secret RM meant Royal Mail. I wasn’t a driver when I started there. I was there a year before I even got a car licence.Rules, Laws, and “Is Winseer right or wrong about anything”.
If something is “The Law” but you think it’s an arse - then you have the choice of “Disobeying it” (probably going to get you into trouble) “following it to the letter” (meaning that it won’t then need to change into something better) OR you can CALL it straight out as “An Arse” and make arguments as to how existing laws can be improved/repealed/doubled down upon in due course.
I’m a bit dismayed that when I try and make an argument about anything that should be affecting ALL of us as drivers - I just get shouted down by so many all the time.
“If you don’t push for something - you’ll never get it” applies in all forms of lawmaking today.Clearly not enough drivers are “active” over issues like “Why do we have to work more hours than office staff”? or “Why can’t we get huge Christmas bonuses like White Collar workers do” or even “Why do we have to engage in working practices that are harmful to both us and the general public”?
What do we say when “another one gone” on here? - RIP?
Maybe we should start looking at the “circumstances that lead upto this fatality” perhaps?
There’s a whole barrel full of “issues connected to Professional Driver Well-Being” right there.
It’s a shame if no one is interested. I can’t make anybody BE interested for sure. I lack the Charisma, Power, and Influence to do it - for sure.What we all need to be doing - is pushing for a working week that is a MAXIMUM of 48 hours “at work”… The public would be safer, the driver would have less accidents, and the workforce would get more chance to actually spend with their families. This “Austerity deaths must continue so the rich can stay at the top, and the average worker can just quit if they don’t like it” attitude needs to stop.
Suppressing pay whilst hiking hours - kills people. It kills the public. It rarely kills the wealthy though. The laws are made by the wealthy rather than the people.
Most people might not give a ■■■■ if the wealthy can indirectly pick them off day-by-day - but I passionately want this to stop, and “Fair Play” upheld and experienced by all instead.Now back to topic - POA is hated as OP has stated. Why not push for it to be scrapped across the board, so that all jobs in future have to be based on actual hours spent at work?
That means PAID BREAKS.
That means FULL PAY.
That means LESS DEATHS
…and let good old-fashioned “Supply and Demand” dictate the correct wages for a line of work best suited to 4x12 hour shifts per week.
There might be “fear” that wages will be pushed down - but I suggest that any attempt to do so would result in “more unfilled vacancies” - providing of course, we can stop this “filling the gap with six points ok people, halfway house people, and unfettered immigration”. - Another topic entirely.I’d like to think people on here, even and especially those who “don’t like me much” - might push the politics here, at very least.
The problem is that many people (myself included) actually WANT to max their hours out. I do between 55 and 60 hours per week, paid POA of course. Others at my place want the shorter runs and just get their basic pay. Each to their own. Nothing at all makes me right and them wrong, or vice versa. I’m thinking of the old saying about pleasing all the people all the time, you’ll never keep everyone happy. The POA was imo a compromise attempt to do this.
Signed up with an agency a while back and they gave me some times sheets (I’ve yet to get any work through them though) and it had an example time sheet of how to fill it out. Bearing in mind this is hourly paid work, it emphasises making the most of using POA and it says something along the lines of ‘It’s in the interests of the driver to use POA as much as possible to keep down their working hours’. Pay is worked out by taking off breaks and any POA.
albion:
F-reds:
Oh and FYIAt my place if you were “on duty” for 15,15,15,13,13,13 you would be paid for 84 hours. 44 of which would be at an enhanced overtime rate. Plenty of it around. Might even be available for the advert too if you can grease a pole the right way
Same here. Sometimes I think we must be the same firm
I see you have an arm in Stevenage just up the road from us too!
F-reds:
albion:
F-reds:
Oh and FYIAt my place if you were “on duty” for 15,15,15,13,13,13 you would be paid for 84 hours. 44 of which would be at an enhanced overtime rate. Plenty of it around. Might even be available for the advert too if you can grease a pole the right way
Same here. Sometimes I think we must be the same firm
I see you have an arm in Stevenage just up the road from us too!
That’s what I was thinking!
I don’t use POA at all. We get paid straight through so no point in using it when I got just stick it on break and have done with it.
When this came about I used to always call it the silly WTD and the silly POA.What was wrong in just base all the hours on the tacho just one set EASY. Their is no such thing as POA if their is availability then your at work and should be paid as at work all this stuff is dreamed up by a person at a desk within easy reach of a toilet,canteen, starts work at 8.30 hour for dinner then away at 4.30 
I suppose another way of looking at it is this:
We could all work 60 hour weeks for £600 a week or create one new 48 hours per week salaried full time job for every four 60 hour ones out there now (same work, just distributed differently) - which would employ 25% more drivers. If there isn’t a shortage of drivers - then lets take up the “slack” in the workforce available then!
If drivers are to be salaried, then let’s have it so that any working of hours 49-60 in any one week is an “emergency measure” rather than “Planned that way from the outset.”
I used to work 60 hour weeks all the time on agency - where you are paid by the hour to encourage maxing out your hours. I’ve seen it from both sides then.
For salaried workers though - it’s high time we had a proper wage for a proper working week, rather than sub-standard wages caused by a glut of overseas drivers and lower entry standards (“six points ok”) who get paid a lower hourly rate that encourages them to “push the boat out” when they shouldn’t really have to.
Not everyone copes as well with the “nodding dog” when they’ve done 50 hours by Thursday as others do. I’ve been able to handle it OK, but if I didn’t stand on my soapbox here with regards to “trying to make things better for all drivers” - I’d be accused of taking an “I’m alright Jack” attitude - and still wouldn’t get any peace.
albion:
F-reds:
albion:
F-reds:
Oh and FYIAt my place if you were “on duty” for 15,15,15,13,13,13 you would be paid for 84 hours. 44 of which would be at an enhanced overtime rate. Plenty of it around. Might even be available for the advert too if you can grease a pole the right way
Same here. Sometimes I think we must be the same firm
I see you have an arm in Stevenage just up the road from us too!
That’s what I was thinking!
If you’re on agency, and pumping it for 84 hours pay - at least don’t settle for a crappy hourly rate… “£7.00 enhanced to £10.50 after 8 hours” still isn’t much cop really. I’m advocating for getting as basic - for one we used to have to work overtime to get. It doesn’t have to be 4x12 - it could be 6x8 if you like. It’s only my own preference to “prefer commuting to work for less, but longer shifts each day” after all.
I wonder how many of the posters on this topic wanted the 15 hour day when it was first spoke about.I am meaning when they wanted more money and were happy to do it then.Also the 60hour week will put you on your 48 hour working time the joys of it.
I blame the older drivers for not having a backbone when they were younger its all a big circle but are now happy to blame the younger drivers for crap wages.
fuse:
When this came about I used to always call it the silly WTD and the silly POA.What was wrong in just base all the hours on the tacho just one set EASY. Their is no such thing as POA if their is availability then your at work and should be paid as at work all this stuff is dreamed up by a person at a desk within easy reach of a toilet,canteen, starts work at 8.30 hour for dinner then away at 4.30
once the 48 / 60 hour came in and it was decided breaks didn’t count, they needed a way that if driver was paid off the tacho and all recorded breaks were deducted, then they weren’t penalised over a drive who was paid breaks or just had 45 knocked off. a driver who wanted to, could keep their working time hours down whilst still getting paid. so they needed the extra mode
i actually think the way they did it was quite clever in a way, the whole know in advance thing is completely unenforceable and unprovable, but it gives the individual drivers choice. a good chunk of driving jobs involve a bit of sitting about. someone who didn’t want the long hours could say i’d no idea how long i’d be waiting so kept it on other work whether they were told or not, running down their wtd hours. but someone who wanted to maximise their earnings could put it on poa and just say someone said x amount or they always have to wait that long.
(i know they could put it on break legally anyway)
one of the things winseer always used to spout was firms that didn’t pay you when on poa, eventually he did admit he didn’t know of any despite making out it was pretty much the norm, so the agency example above is the 1st i’ve ever heard of it
Winseer:
I suppose another way of looking at it is this:We could all work 60 hour weeks for £600 a week or create one new 48 hours per week salaried full time job for every four 60 hour ones out there now (same work, just distributed differently) - which would employ 25% more drivers. If there isn’t a shortage of drivers - then lets take up the “slack” in the workforce available then!
[/attachment]
exactly what i’ve said in the past
Winseer:
albion:
[quote=“F-reds”Oh and FYI
At my place if you were “on duty” for 15,15,15,13,13,13 you would be paid for 84 hours. 44 of which would be at an enhanced overtime rate. Plenty of it around. Might even be available for the advert too if you can grease a pole the right way
Same here. Sometimes I think we must be the same firm
If you’re on agency, and pumping it for 84 hours pay - at least don’t settle for a crappy hourly rate… “£7.00 enhanced to £10.50 after 8 hours” still isn’t much cop really. I’m advocating for getting as basic - for one we used to have to work overtime to get. It doesn’t have to be 4x12 - it could be 6x8 if you like. It’s only my own preference to “prefer commuting to work for less, but longer shifts each day” after all.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Over £12.00 an hour, overtime after 8 hours, double Sunday’s, same bank holiday + day in lieu, paid through breaks, paid all POA bar ferry journeys over 6 hours when it goes to half, ie on a boat for 24, you get 8 hours standard and four hours overtime.
Problem with Euro work, the trip is the trip as far as hours go. If it was limited to 48 hours, some weeks you’d be spending ‘weekends’ in a foreign layby. When I did Euro, I wanted to be back home not hanging around, though I realise some people like it.
Winseer:
I suppose another way of looking at it is this:We could all work 60 hour weeks for £600 a week or create one new 48 hours per week salaried full time job for every four 60 hour ones out there now (same work, just distributed differently) - which would employ 25% more drivers. If there isn’t a shortage of drivers - then lets take up the “slack” in the workforce available then!
You’ve not made it clear, do we all lose £120 a week or do our employers have to pull an extra 25% in wages out of their arses?
Eeerr Winseer old chum, we are employed paye, and our basic is plenty better than what you postulated, as is the overtime
I’ve got a much better idea.
Why doesn’t everyone work out what they need to live. Then work out how much they think their time is worth. Then work out how precious their time outside of work is. Lastly have a look for employment that fits those 3 necessities…
On the basis that “all truck drivers” do not have the same 3 requirements for those necessities, you cannot then make “all truck drivers” have the same outlook! Its just not possible. That’s before we discuss the fact that trucking can take so many different forms, and skillsets, that you can’t encompass everyone. Its harder than not possible.
The ONLY thing that we share universally as drivers in this country, is that we sit down at the wheel of something deemed to be an HGV. That’s it…
Colin_scottish:
I wonder how many of the posters on this topic wanted the 15 hour day when it was first spoke about.I am meaning when they wanted more money and were happy to do it then.Also the 60hour week will put you on your 48 hour working time the joys of it.
I blame the older drivers for not having a backbone when they were younger its all a big circle but are now happy to blame the younger drivers for crap wages.
Yeh you got that right. I remember trying to raise some common sense arguments in Union meetings years ago, like “We should take the £1500 lump sum offered for going from weekly to monthly pay, which we’re told will save the firm 6% of it’s admin costs”. The union moved to block it, got a vote mandate to support that (I voted against it of course, voted to “take the £1500”) and guess what? “We” the Union voting majority (not “my” majority) didn’t get paid the £1500 with immediate effect, but the “move to monthly pay” was shoehorned in ANYWAY.
People thought I was daft when I suggested that management would “impose it upon us if there was some savings to be had” - but as usual, I just considered to be “waffling on talking ■■■■■■■■” (Yep, story of my life there!) because if enough people believe in the wrong answer peddled by the mainstream rabble - then a few quiet voices don’t get heeded - no matter how “correct” they might have been proven to be.
The “Way Forward” deal was another one that gave a huge one-off pay rise to the basic pay - but cut overtime rates from the former double time at weekends down to 1.65, and midweek overtime down from 1.45 down to 1.15. Night premium on overtime (an extra time and a third between 19:00 and 06:00) was abolished entirely. The vote was passed because it was done on a “office college vote” system where A small rural office with 11 out of 20 staff voting “Yes” would count as “One Office Vote FOR”. 2454 out of 2550 staff at Nine Elms voting NO would count as “One Office vote AGAINST”. Thus, the rural offices that hardly ever got (or wanted) overtime (the huge downside in the deal) - got to turn over the massive offices who were overwhelmingly against bringing in the Way Forward deal. There was also “Mark Time” imposed on the overtime rates so they couldn’t keep up in the years to come as well. The way the wages had fallen behind by 2010 was a major part of the reasons for me “cutting and running” the moment the opportunity presented itself of course…
When London Offices closed down - the payments went just to those offices closing down as well. This meant that “Medium sized provincial offices” got well-and-truly SHAFTED by what turned out to be the “Minority” of the workforce, who couldn’t spare a thought to “how much their fellow docket king members” would lose out “just to get that one-off big pay rise on the basic” which favoured the early morning van driving staff of rural offices the most. So much for CWU Members sticking together then. 
Things got even worse when the WTD came in, and RM enforced it rigidly so no one could ever have more than 11.45 hours overtime in a week. This mean that all 12 hour+ shifts got passed straight to agency of course. There was even a larger-than-normal 90 minute unpaid meal break deduction for shifts of 12+ hours in length, which encouraged any new “Re-Signs” (duty patterns) to include at least one shift of that length each week, exposing more drivers to possible “nodding dog” issues than ever before.
Anyone who worked at my old office (SEDC) that had the misfortune to pick up the “Hastings Duty” which was near 14 bloody hours long - will know what I’m talking about. Shifts of that length finishing in the morning rush hour - are the pits! They even put C2 runs on a lower pay rate than Artic drivers (used to be the same pay for both) FFS how easily the firm got around the minority of the workforce - to sell the rest of us all down the river. 
F-reds:
Eeerr Winseer old chum, we are employed paye, and our basic is plenty better than what you postulated, as is the overtimeI’ve got a much better idea.
Why doesn’t everyone work out what they need to live. Then work out how much they think their time is worth. Then work out how precious their time outside of work is. Lastly have a look for employment that fits those 3 necessities…
If only we could be told a “Rate for Comparison” with all driving jobs… No more “Dressing it up to make it look better than what it is”. There’s just too much dishonesty and lack of clarity in “Job Adverts” these days. Not even all “Job Adverts” are even for actual “Jobs” FFS. Plenty split a full timer on holiday a single week “into five shifts at agency” which by their reckoning “means they have 5 jobs this week alone”. FFS You couldn’t make this crap up - but it’s all standard fayre nowadays eh?
On the basis that “all truck drivers” do not have the same 3 requirements for those necessities, you cannot then make “all truck drivers” have the same outlook! Its just not possible. That’s before we discuss the fact that trucking can take so many different forms, and skillsets, that you can’t encompass everyone. Its harder than not possible.
The ONLY thing that we share universally as drivers in this country, is that we sit down at the wheel of something deemed to be an HGV. That’s it…
