Walking from the front gate to work. Should it be paid?

[Deactivated] on 14/03/2014 - 22:53
Last edited 16/03/2014 - 13:37

I have some what of a random question that I've been thinking about for some time. When I get to work, from the front gate it's about a 10 minute walk to my work shop. My employer expects us to be at the work site on time and not to leave until exactly on the hour at the end of a shift.

Basically each day I am not getting paid for 20 minutes for the walk it takes from the front gate (which is part of the work site) to work. There is no place to park closer.

Are employers entitled to do this? I think time on should start from when you enter the front gate and time off when you leave the front gate.

Update:

Thanks for all the responses. From what I have read a good percentage of people seem to think it's not worth complaining about or that it shouldn't be paid while there is also support from my point of view. Things that have really stuck out from what I have read is that the walk is on site and as such I do have to abide by their rules. I am at risk of being hurt or injured by walking on site, more so than being in public really. Forklifts, cranes, cars and the such it is pretty full on and you have to be alert.

As someone else mentioned most of us do waste a lot of time at work. My boss is pretty relaxed and to complain about the walk would more than likely mean that he takes something away from us, whether it's not being able to use a phone at work, or having to work harder even! At the end of the day it's only 10 minutes each way and until something drastic was to happen at work against us the employees then it's probably not a great idea to complain. However that being said if the walk was more in the 20 minute each way and above range I would definitely have complained long ago!

Also to all the people who say they regularly work over time for free and 20 minutes a day is nothing… well that's your choice. You're either not good enough to do your job in the allotted time or your boss is asking to much of you. However at the end of the day you're willing to put up with it and that's your choice. If everyone stood up to their boss then they would have to pay for over time. But there is always brown nosers willing to work over time for free.

Education & Work

Comments

  • anna10 on 15/03/2014 - 10:16

    I can just see workplaces all over the country employing people to work out the average or general or something walking time of all employees from the 'front door' to the start of work. Sounds like a fun job. ;)

    I think there are some exceptions where there is danger or extremes eg mining sites. But, the mining sector is not average and employs very few people.

  • epicaricacy on 15/03/2014 - 10:21
    +3

    Your title seems to confuse some people into thinking you were talking about your house front gate.

    I agree with you. You have no choice, you are arriving at your workplace at x o'clock, the clock-on should be at the entrance.

  • cloudy on 15/03/2014 - 10:21
    +3

    I think the op is correct, the walking in the work site counts as work time. In saying that, if a employee is counting those minutes and feeling ripped off about it, it sounds like u have a greater problem of being dissatisfied at work. If that 10 min exercise you are getting is something worth complaining about, ur job isn't obviously doing it for you, so leave and find something else.

    I'll give u rediculous example, (coz I'm watching f1 right now)
    I'm a car driver, I'm paid to complete 52 laps of Albert park, I accept the role, the boss says the race starts at 2pm, I say ok, I'll get to Albert park at 2pm, he says no u need to get here earlier to make sure ur on the track, but you say, I'm at the park already, it's technically the work place, but the start line just happens to be 1km away, so pay me more!

    It just sounds trivial really.

    • [Deactivated] on 15/03/2014 - 10:51
      +1

      That's a terrible example to compare it to really. A racing car driver isn't a 9 to 5 kind of job and you would expect to have to get to races early and you would be paid a salary + Bonus etc etc.

      I am paid an hourly wage, no bonus. It's not 10 minutes of exercise when you enter the front gate at work and have to walk another 10 minutes in the middle of winter freezing your butt off.

      • [Deactivated] on 15/03/2014 - 14:56
        +6

        You live in Brisbane? WInter? Toughen up mate this is Straya … omg 20 degrees too cold.. compensationssss please

        • [Deactivated] on 15/03/2014 - 14:58
          +3

          FYI in the coldest month is July for Brisbane. average high is 21.8. Some would say first world problems others would whine like a little Julia Gillard.

      • cloudy on 15/03/2014 - 22:02

        It is a terrible example, but ur reality is EVERYONES reality, but I don't know many people that complain about it, so in spite of my f1 inspired example, my point is still pretty clear.

  • rentonc on 15/03/2014 - 10:28
    +1

    Recently toured an old gold mine in Bendigo and back in the day they were paid for only their work time, so time in the elevator was NOT paid. If the elevator broke down it was a few hours of ladder climbing and this was also NOT paid. Oh and you had to supply your own lighting too!

  • CSR on 15/03/2014 - 10:34

    Sorry I'm with the employer on this one.
    It sounds like if you could park right near where you actually start work but it took you 10mins to drive there from the gate you wouldn't be questioning it.

  • p1 ama on 15/03/2014 - 10:37
    +10

    Seriously, if you're complaining about walking 10 mins there and back every day, then it sounds like you really hate your job and you should find a new one.

    On top of that, what you're proposing is pretty ridiculous. You are paid to be there and do work for a certain amount of hours. How long it takes you to get there and get home is pretty irrelevant.

    I have friends who work at the local Safeway. From the time they arrive at the centre and find a carpark, it takes them more or less 5+ minutes to walk to the Safeway through the shopping centre.

    That's their problem, just like it's your problem that you have to walk.

    Stop complaining, it sounds like you're better off with a new job where you'll be more satisfied anyway.

    • donga100 on 15/03/2014 - 10:50
      +10

      If you decide to get a new job, don't forget to ask in the interview if walking from the front gate to your desk is included in the paid work time.

  • donga100 on 15/03/2014 - 10:47
    +4

    If you get paid for walking from the front gate to your desk it should be written in your job description as part of your duties. Your employer should then be able to measure your performance in this part of your job. In my opinion it would reasonable for the employer to make you sprint between the front gate and your desk as they are paying you for this time. If you don't sprint fast enough it would also be reasonable for you to be placed on a performance management plan until your lap times improve.

    • [Deactivated] on 15/03/2014 - 10:54
      +2

      It wouldn't be reasonable I'm not employed as an athlete. That's just a stupid comparison. As well as being unsafe and against rules. But maybe you would like to get run over by fork lifts, trucks and cranes.

      • p1 ama on 15/03/2014 - 16:22
        +3

        No it's not, what you're demanding is unreasonable. It takes you 10 minutes to walk, it might take me 20 minutes to walk and it might take the guy who broke his leg last weekend 30 minutes to walk. Does that mean that the employer should pay that guy an hour extra per day cause he takes longer to get to where he needs to be? No.

        They are not paying you to walk. They are paying you to work and work commences when you begin working.

        • gmatht on 16/03/2014 - 00:08

          The rate at which people "work" also differs. An experienced programmer can easily be ten times more productive an a junior one. If they are paid by the hour that means that the junior programmer can only negotiate a much lower rate, not that they are told they only really work six minutes in the hour.

        • p1 ama on 16/03/2014 - 14:18

          That is reflected in the hourly rate though.

  • zorrt on 15/03/2014 - 11:03
    +10

    Thinkings like this is why all the work is being shipped off shore. People honestly do not understand the meaning of hard work nowadays and think they are entitled to the world demanding more pay. Do you honestly think you deserve 20mins extra pay? I think your job is better off going to the people out there who are honest hard workers who simply cannot get a job.

    • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 11:48
      +3

      Thinkings like this is why all the work is being shipped off shore.

      you have no grip on reality and its people who think like you is the reason jobs are being constantly shipped off shore.
      workers lives are worthless/valueless in india/china etc. so what if a few thousand people die needlessly so the shareholders can get fat off there worthless lives (aka the indian garment factory that collapsed killing thousands).

      • Tal_Shiar on 15/03/2014 - 14:05
        -1

        you have no grip on reality

        well well, if this isn't the pot calling the kettle black….

  • Adz81 on 15/03/2014 - 11:04
    +20

    I have always considered the "start time" to be the time that you are ready to commence your shift… For instance if you start at 0500, you arrive 5-10 minutes early to ensure that you are ready to start actual work at that time and you know what is going on… It worked for me when I was on the tools and was an expectation that worked for me (and fellow staff) as a manager… So if it takes 10 minutes to get to the work shop, then so be it, arrive 10 minutes earlier… Are you honestly saying that you don't get any of that time back through the day and you're constantly on the go? No breaks to check your phone, no toilet breaks other than at designated lunch breaks? It's swings and roundabouts, some days, your boss will be better off, some days you will be… It generally balances out in the long run (at least in my experience).

    • ankor on 15/03/2014 - 17:01
      +2

      Holy sh_t common sense?! No way!

  • PissLUR on 15/03/2014 - 12:13
    +4

    Lets take a tower crane operator for an example.

    Do you think he gets paid for climbing up and down the ladder to get to his work position?

    • Tal_Shiar on 15/03/2014 - 14:07
      +1

      he definitely gets paid to climb up, that's for sure

      • MATTDAMON on 16/03/2014 - 16:32
        +1

        And climb down. They are paid when they present themselves to work (ie the usual safety briefing of a morning if onsite)

  • scrimshaw on 15/03/2014 - 12:22
    +2

    What do your team members think of this issue? If there is a general consensus then perhaps hold a meeting with your boss to discuss this problem.

  • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 12:25
    +1

    i think the argument to end all arguments in this thread is to make it as simple as possible so as not to confuse people who obviously do not understand it.

    when traveling to work from his home the OP is aloud to do what ever (unsafe) things he wishes. ride bikes, ride scooters, run or even skip.

    once OP steps past the invisible line of the work gates he becomes an employee. he is coverd by workers comp etc and is under the control of the company and its rules/OH&S. he gives over his free will to do what ever he pleases (bike/scoot/run etc) and begins doing what the company demands…. this is the exact second OP changes from "free person" to "employee"

    you can try and cloud these facts with what ever other crap thats gone on in this thread but none of the "but its what ive done for years" etc changes the fact that once the OP steps into the site the OP is under the control of the employer

    • fleetoiler on 15/03/2014 - 18:22

      This does well to sum up the invisible boundary between what activities are "work" and what is pleasure. I do not like that the definition of "work" is so vague that some people are treating it as a single activity within their role, but not certain other activities.

      If there are rules and regulations and guidelines that the employer enforces employees to follow INSIDE the company boundaries then it is work. Otherwise OP would be allowed to do all the things to affect the speed of which he arrives at a particular place of work (e.g. department) that happens to be where he starts doing other types of activities that are also deemed as being work.

      IMHO, I am not a lawyer, but I do know people who I would talk to if I had this issue myself - union reps who would be a first port of call to discuss this with people who know the ins and outs of "workplace rules" and probably deal with this kind of hairy issue all the time…

    • p1 ama on 15/03/2014 - 18:55
      +2

      But at the end of the day, it is trivial.

      You can come up with whatever excuses you want, but the truth is, throughout the day, you will be doing things such as taking toilet breaks, talking to your mates, taking a drink, taking a break and more or less "not working" in the hours which you are paid.

      There is no such distinction between "free person" to "employee", what you are saying doesn't make any sense at all because what if I do contract work and work at home and work at whatever time I please? Then when am I an employee and when am I free?

      The rules that the OP has to abide by are for SAFETY purposes and has nothing to do with him being an employee. If a visitor was visiting the workshop, I am sure that they would not be allowed to ride scooters around if it were a safety hazard. The visitor is not an employee. The rules have nothing to do with being an employee.

      You are paid to work a certain number of hours per day. I would highly suspect that all of us take more than 20 mins off work during the day to just take a break, stare out the window, read the newspaper, check our phones, talk to the people around us or have a snack. So at the end of the day, it goes both ways, you win a bit, you lose a bit, but let's face it, if you don't like it, go work elsewhere, the employer can find a heap of people who don't have a job and won't mind walking 10 mins every morning and afternoon.

    • earths_pacifist on 17/03/2014 - 12:42

      I am about 95% in agreeance with this, however I would not look at pursuing a small amount of time like this as most would make it up in other areas; smoko, chating, daydreaming etc.

      However my one arguement to this is that most never really have complete free will in regards to their employer. Many people have clauses in their agreement about how they must portray themselves in public while not at work. One example I can think of is public servants… I remember reading about a woman who was sacked last year for having an opinion on twitter last year about something she didnt like about the government (from memory it wasnt slanderous or giving away secrets etc).

      So the question should then be asked should we be charging for our time when out in public as we still have rules that need to be followed in this circumstance?

  • anna10 on 15/03/2014 - 12:29
    +1

    Has that changed, that you are no longer covered by compo to and from work. I seem to remember that if your route was to always go via the pre school to pick up the kid, or always via Coles at 6pm to buy the whatever, it was covered.

    • ItsMeAgro on 15/03/2014 - 16:52
      +2

      Yup. It's called a Journey Claim. I broke my ankle a few years back - fell down the stairs at the train station on the way to work.

      Covered by my employers workers compensation policy. In face, by law, my employer can't get charged an excess or increase in premium for it.

      Makes sense - I wasn't catching that train for fun, it was only to go to work. I can see the other side of the argument though.

    • maximum on 15/03/2014 - 19:31

      If you are federal government employee you are not covered for journey since Howard changed the rules in 2007.

      • grasstown on 15/03/2014 - 19:37

        Barry changed it in nsw after he got in. The psa union covers journey claims for its members.

        • MATTDAMON on 16/03/2014 - 16:33

          Most unions now cover their members to and from work. But yeah they changed the rules in 07 and 09 i believe.

    • 01011010 on 16/03/2014 - 10:20

      Yeah with the 2012 reforms, most Journey claims are no longer accepted.

      http://adamslawyers.com.au/changes-to-the-journey-claims/

    • Atre on 17/03/2014 - 10:29

      you can't get compo to and from work. I know because I was knocked off my bicycle by a truck and couldn't get anything for the week I was off work.

      Furthermore, I think wanting to be paid for 10 mins is lazy! it is exercise and given how fat people are these days you should be thankful. My last work I cycled to work, not having a car, and my coworkers all drove up to the front door and sat inside all day, then drove home. Needless to say, they were huge!

  • Elee3112 on 15/03/2014 - 12:37
    +5

    So how so you propose this to work anyway? Let's say you ARE paid to walk from the car park to your desk, and it takes you 10 minutes, Bob on the other hand, he's a bit wider in the middle, and takes 15 minutes, while Steve, who's a retired athelete, only need 5 minutes for the same walk, will the employer need to hire Jody and Julia to time how long each employer takes?

    Or do they just go the average, assume everyone takes 10 minutes, then wait for a discrimination case from poor old Bob who's getting short changes?

    • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 12:49
      -4

      that argument is also brainless and falls apart on closer inspection..

      generally, bob will be slower at most tasks (what job does not include at least some walking?) on the job site (unless eating jelly donuts is in his job description). so are you proposing that bob also qualifies for a different hourly rate to the other employees?

      • Tal_Shiar on 15/03/2014 - 14:09
        -1
        • whoosh * that went right over your head!

        edit: if you ask nicely, i'll explain it for some of you mmmkay :)

        • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 16:01
          -1

          ever noticed how the truly delusional (schizophrenic etc) always believe its everyone else with the problem? i think its refereed to as "projecting"? and often cant actually back up there reasoning with any viable reasons?

          ive not seen you add any viable opinions to this thread yet. by all means dont let me stop you.

          /me mumbles some racial slur about a kettle and his mates…

        • Tal_Shiar on 15/03/2014 - 17:13
          -1

          I'm not perfect, but in this case it's definitely not me … Just saying :)

      • Elee3112 on 15/03/2014 - 16:14
        +1

        There's actually two ways to look at this, I'm looking at it from a point of view where the employee still have to his actual place of work at say… 9:00, in which case, Bob will have to get up 5 minutes earlier than everyone else for the same pay.

        I'm guessing you're looking at it from another point of view, in which the employee will only have to get to the front gate at 9:00, meaning Bob can take all the time he like after reaching the front gate, and he'll still be paid the same as everyone else.

        Since in my industry, there's always some sort of pre-start meeting prior to the actual work, I would assume getting to the gate at 9:00 won't be good enough.

        Speaking of my industry, here's a list of jobs where the amount of walking is minimal:
        - Overhead spotter: Literally just stands there making sure plants won't hit overhead wiring.
        - Flagmen: Literally just stands there looking for trains, might have to occasionally wave a flag around
        - Trackforce protection: Literally just stands there waiting for contact from a flagman, might have to blow a whistle and wave at train drivers occasionally.
        - Designer supports: Literally just sits in the site office all day doing last minute design changes.
        - Health & Safety rep: IN MY OPINION, they don't actually do any real work. I'm sure a lot of others will disagree with me though.

      • rr64 on 16/03/2014 - 10:04

        Your statement is unfair generalisation, not all work tasks are the same and completion of tasks is dependent on skill.
        Bob could be a skilled worker and specialised in his field. What's the point in bashing a stock character?

  • redraoh on 15/03/2014 - 12:53

    I'd consider the walk as part of the commute. Many people who work in CBDs have to walk a fair way to their office, unless they pay upwards of $10/day to park nearby.

    I've also worked for a company that moved office. The commute time for me decreased but for others, it added 20 mins each way. Should the employer have compensated them?

    • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 12:56

      no, completely irrelevant.

      see https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/136801#comment-1884155

      • redraoh on 17/03/2014 - 19:02

        Your premise is that employees lose some freedoms upon entering their employer's property.

        Mine is that for most of us, our lives are structured around our employment, including the place of employment, hours, etc.

        Before commencing employment, you should have an idea of how your life is going to be affected, both during and not during "paid time".

        If your potential employer says you have to walk from the entrance and it will take 10 minutes, then if it's an issue you should discuss it with them then.

        Same goes for the CBD worker; they can choose to accept their lengthy walk or not.

    • Cheeper on 15/03/2014 - 13:08

      I was in a situation like this once.
      For the people that the relocation meant a longer travelling time they voluntarily paid an allowance for 6 months.
      After that it was back to status quo..
      Not sure if it is compulsory for them to do this… check with your union or workplace relations people.

      • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 14:07

        Not sure if it is compulsory for them to do this

        not as far as i know, it would have been done so the company didnt lose the already trained workbase and give them time to plan for it should people start leaving. imagine if 1/2 the employees just up and left the same day?

  • Rel63 on 15/03/2014 - 13:31
    +3

    My daughter had a traineeship at the Casino in Melbourne and was required to be at her place of work ( a restaurant in the casino) at the start time of her shift. The kicker was she was not allowed to take her uniform home as they have an in-house laundry, so she would have to get to the casino,…that's OK but then walk to her change room (a few mins from entrance to casino) then get changed and walk 10 mins through the back house access to get to the restaurant. The same after shift. Plus as she was only given 2 uniforms so after the 2nd shift she would just put her stuff in the laundry hamper but then before start of the next shift she would have to go to the laundry to get her 2 uniforms back-they were kept in lockers. By not having to laundry her uniform she may have saved $2 a week, but is having to "work-by doing extra work place duties" for approx 20mins per shift. Remember she was on trainee wages of less than $14 an hour so for 2 5hr shifts she was spending almost an hr extra (11hrs) on site (doing what her employer required) but still paid less than $140.
    I worked in a Petrol Station and kept being told we were expected to be at work 10-15mins prior to our shift start time so we could count register trays and be ready to start serving on time. I resisted this as counting the register trays is part of my job therefor i expect to be paid for it. As long as i was ready to count the tray at the time i was rostered for i considered my self on time. Worked there 6 yrs so they got over trying to make me comply. To make if worse the didn't have overlap time for change of shift so one was either early to start or late to leave.
    I am not a clock watcher, i will stay back to complete my work but it also happens that i am not concerned on start time, if early or late. If employer is flexible i usually do more work than paid for. Currently work in an office so most days are relaxed not pushed and i often stay back to get things finished.

  • sam5069 on 15/03/2014 - 13:50

    My employer most of the days assigns me new work, just 30 minutes before the end of the day so I have to stay back to finish the work as the result I regularly have to work extra 30 to 60 min without getting paid every day. In the other hand, he asked me to use my mobile phone and internet for work and claim the cost from my tax (tax return).
    What are your thoughts?

    • [Deactivated] on 15/03/2014 - 14:38

      Get him to pay for your mobile phone and internet, I think this way, you will spend less than claiming the cost from tax :)

    • Aneurism on 16/03/2014 - 13:00

      "I regularly have to work extra 30 to 60 min without getting paid every day."
      "asked me to use my mobile phone and internet for work and claim the cost from my tax (tax return)."

      I would call the fair work ombudsman, and discuss with them your situation and determine your rights.
      https://www.fairwork.gov.au/contact-us/call-us/pages/default

      On the surface it seems like you might be taken advantage of.

  • resubaehtgnolhcs on 15/03/2014 - 14:01
    +1

    Wow!!! What a great example of first world problems!

    • [Deactivated] on 16/03/2014 - 09:31

      No such thing as first world problems!, if you live in first world you act like first world pompous citizen, if you work at 3rd world country then you act like cash cows without the thought of being valued as human beings.

      Its all the matters of where.

  • Geekomatic on 15/03/2014 - 14:44
    +5

    This came up for me (& other employees) at work years ago. Without naming names, the company is huge & the time from entering the first employee area to get fitted for work, until you actually reached the work area could sometimes take as long as 45 mins. We went on strike & the time was added to each paycheck for those using this facility.

    You are right, imho. They are shorting you 1.4 hrs. per week.

    • [Deactivated] on 16/03/2014 - 13:38

      That's awesome, well done on sticking it to them. It's only fair I think.

    • forever saving on 17/03/2014 - 09:15
      +1

      So far reading this post. 10 mins too short. 45 mins too long. Hope we find the equilibrium point soon.

  • Ughhh on 15/03/2014 - 16:17

    if the walk takes you 10mins, it would probably take me like 30mins. If your employer agrees with you and starts paying you for the walk, I want a job there too.

  • Orion on 15/03/2014 - 16:44
    +2

    No wonder Australian companies find it hard to compete with worker requests like this…..

    • ItsMeAgro on 15/03/2014 - 16:57
      +1

      So… greedy employers screwing genuinely desperate people in third world countries, just because they can, is an excuse for us (Australian employers) not to do the right thing here?

      Don't worry about us, mate, we make sure we get our share of the pie.

      • Tal_Shiar on 15/03/2014 - 17:16
        +1

        Something that takes 10m is pretty trivial, if it took your nearly an hour then that is definitely something to take action for

        • DarwinBoy on 16/03/2014 - 14:55

          By the end of the year it's over a week at work just walking. It's the little things that add up you have to look out for.

        • Tal_Shiar on 16/03/2014 - 20:56

          Pretty redundant comment , everything adds up …

        • chukkii on 17/03/2014 - 10:56
          +2

          Yeah no kidding, it's like complaining that the clockout machine is 10 seconds behind. over the course of 20 years it adds up.

  • ankor on 15/03/2014 - 17:10
    +2

    Ever thought of asking your union rep?

    • [Deactivated] on 16/03/2014 - 13:39
      -1

      The union is about as good as a toothless shark. Most unions are these days.

      • grog on 17/03/2014 - 11:25

        Surely you are working under some type of award etc approved by the union?

        First stop should be your union rep.

  • Connedsumer on 15/03/2014 - 17:49

    Every place ive worked wants you to be at ur post by the start time. Just because u are entering the site/buidling, doesnt mean u are ready to start work. When the clock starts u gotta be working or else you are late.

    For you, you need to consider leaving earlier to arrive on time, as the 10 minute walk to your workshop is still "travel time" to and from work.

    • fleetoiler on 15/03/2014 - 18:37
      +5

      But see… the kicker here is that he's been given strict rules and instructions about how he can and cannot "travel".

      If he was allowed to ride a bike, or jog, or skateboard, or segway his way through the place of work, his workplace, then I think his position would not be as strong as it is. Because the employer has restrictions and guidelines and rules for the worksite that he enters (that his employment could be terminated for not following to the letter!), in my opinion this "walk" is actually a work task that he's doing. He's engaging his mind and senses and safety training during this 10 minute (or 9, or 12 depending on how many cranes/trucks/safety issues there are he has to mitigate along the way… ) activity that gets him from one place of work, to another place of work which happens to require different physical & mental activities.

      I would love to see OP do a little "protesting" by buying a cheap bike or skateboard or something but unfortunately this will jeopardize his job, because it is part of his job to complete certain tasks like this "walk" in the manner the employer has specified.

      /end_rant_with_wanky_terms

      • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 19:35

        that his employment could be terminated for not following to the letter!

        i think thats a really important point. if you can be terminated for not following the rules of your job during the walk then your "under employment" and its part of your job.

      • grasstown on 15/03/2014 - 19:44

        I just up voted you but then realized the op never asserted what you say

        • [Deactivated] on 16/03/2014 - 13:40
          +2

          Well the thing is, if I don't stick to the foot paths or do something against rules I can get fired even though I haven't "Started Work" yet.

        • Adz81 on 16/03/2014 - 15:51
          +1

          Can I hazard a guess that those "rules" would actually be rules of entering the area, not of your actual role… That is, everyone would have to follow them, including site visitors, which I'm then going to further guess you agreed to abide by those rules during an induction/onboarding process of some kind?

  • stralya on 15/03/2014 - 17:52
    +2

    I had a role where I was expected to pick up mail from the post office on the way in. The employer reduced my working day by 15 minutes to allow for this, effectively making the visit to the Post Office paid time. This was a small organisation in manufacturing, with about 30 employees.

  • p1 ama on 15/03/2014 - 18:29
    +5

    By the way, maybe you should offer to pay the employer back for time that you spend checking your phone, going to the toilet, getting a drink, standing around talking to your mates and generally any time at the workshop where you are not productive and is not within your designated break times.

    • Tal_Shiar on 15/03/2014 - 18:52

      If I did that , my employer would still owe me more money though

    • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 19:39
      -1

      toilet breaks are part of being human but is also looked down on during work times…. but i bet the closest toilets arent a 10 min walk away from the work area…. also in what job do you get to "stand around and talk to your mates" during work time? if its something directly related to your job then sure but rarely would you not get in trouble for talking about how drunk you got or how much stuff you bought on OzB on the weekend.. in most employment they also have a "no fone" rule, unless your fone is part of the job.

      id love to know where you work where this sort of thing is "normal".. it must be a government job…

      • p1 ama on 15/03/2014 - 20:01
        +3

        Oh come on, are you serious?

        I see it all the time, just go to your local shopping centre and see all the employees at your local Kmart or Target or Harvey Norman standing around talking to each other.

        Also, I've seen people take 5 minutes off for a couple of times a day.

        I'm not sure where you work, but all of these things are normal to me.

        • ronorboris on 15/03/2014 - 22:14

          A bloody hairdresser paused many times during my cut to stare at the TV. Each stare would go for a minute. You are absolutely right.

  • toffee on 15/03/2014 - 19:40
    +1

    The employer has made a choice. Pay starts from the work area, not the site gate. Whether he's right or wrong depends on the market and the employees… because…

    …now the employee makes his choice. Get paid from the work area, not the gate, or work somewhere else.

    If people are still choosing to work there, I'd say the employer has it about right.

  • zooter on 15/03/2014 - 21:15

    so, tell me 1 thing..my office is on the 11th floor…from the front of the building to my desk takes about 3 minutes each way. So that's 6 minutes a day, 30 minutes a week and 2 hours a month.

    Are you saying that at the end of the year, i'm entitled to 2.5 days extra pay?

  • ronorboris on 15/03/2014 - 22:10
    -2

    Walking = travel to work. Travel to work = not paid.

    Otherwise, my boss would pay me from when I started driving from home.

  • whiznet on 15/03/2014 - 23:04

    Great example of first world problems. From a legal perspective and a common sense perspective you are not entitled to anything until you are actually 'working'. Doesn't matter when you enter the 'workplace'. You get paid for the amount of work you do. A lot of people with salaried contracts are supposed to work 9-5. However, I would be very surprised if anyone tells their boss to get stuffed when they get a bit of extra work and need to stay back to get it down or come in early.

    Stop whinging and be happy you are not part of the population with no job. Be even more grateful you are in Oz and not in another developed nation with unemployment rates in the double figures.

    • NosDan on 15/03/2014 - 23:10

      so many boiled frogs….

    • juventino on 15/03/2014 - 23:56
      +1

      exactly !!! I can come 30 minutes earlier to the 'workplace' but I won't be considered as an 'employee' as I have not started any work yet. Any reasonable person will just come 10 minutes earlier. Its bloody 10 minutes, you probably hate your jobs so much that you cant spare 10 minutes to walk to your work site.

      Hell, in that 10 mins do you do any work? Nope, you're just walking.

    • gmatht on 15/03/2014 - 23:57

      I understand that in the US prepration time is usually included in 'work' time, but I am not very familar with Australian case law in this area. Could you give me a quick pointer to the relevant case law on which you formed your legal opinion?

    • devilishm on 16/03/2014 - 11:30
      +2

      This. Exactly what your employers want you to think. Just because it could have been worse does not make it right. The unpaid overtime that is. Perfect example of why things have deteriorated to this point and will keep deteriorating.

    • [Deactivated] on 16/03/2014 - 13:44
      +1

      Be happy I have a job…. Mate you need a job to live in this world. I hate when people say that, there is plenty of jobs out there if you're willing to go for it. They might not be what you want or high paying, but they are out there. Yes I live in Australia, and we get paid decent wages and our companies we work for make very very decent profits…. so why shouldn't I get rewarded…even if it's an extra 10 minutes for walking a day.

      • 2ndeffort on 16/03/2014 - 23:16

        Not all companies are making decent profits. If they were they wouldn't be laying people off. I was laid off by an enormous multi-billion $ per year US corporation because the local office wasn't making its margins and they wanted to consolidate interstate.

        End of the day people only have jobs to help companies make profits. Companies aren't social welfare institutions. It is nice when everybody wins but there arent too many companies that will keep covering losses to be nice to their employees. I spent a few nervous months where I would have been happy with anything coming my way, eventually worked out OK, but I would have been OK with an extra 30 min walk each way just to get a job for a while there!

  • wtfnodeal on 15/03/2014 - 23:25

    OP, if you want to ozbargain your employer you should have asked about getting paid for the 10 mins walk from the gate to your desk when you had the job interview.

    • juventino on 16/03/2014 - 00:19

      it's pointless. He wouldn't get the job anyway :)

  • dbun1 on 16/03/2014 - 00:27
    +4

    I can't believe this is even a thread. Are people that small minded that they would argue over something as trivial as this?

    • gmatht on 16/03/2014 - 00:49
      +2

      People on OzBargain? Is that a rhetorical question? 20 minutes a day is worth over a hundred maccas soft serve cones a week, i.e. your average OzBargainer's entire food budget :P.

      • dbun1 on 16/03/2014 - 21:37
        +1

        True!
        I'm just surprised because the OP should be thankful he has a job.

        There are plenty of people around that would love to be in the OP's position, and wouldn't complain about walking 10mins to their work.

  • Kevan2 on 16/03/2014 - 00:42
    +1

    Really. If you are concerned about 20 min of 'healthy walking' where you are covered by the boss's insurance then change jobs. 10 min walk after one hour drive will extend you life by 5 years compared no walk after the drive.

    If the job is important and the time issue is also, then keep a record of the time, and when you leave that employer go to fair work/union or whatever authority in place to get you money.

    Many replacement. Jobs are hard to get.

    Note 20 min a day is 100 min a week for one person.
    If there are 20 extra employees doing the same …—.. 20 x 100= 2000 mins plus your 100 min. 2,100 min.

    Assume the week is 38.5hr working time or 2310 min. Who do you suggest loses their job to pay for the 10 min.

    When that happens can the rest of the team members increase their work output to cover the '' man' gone. If you can you are not being fair to your employer who pays you.

  • gmatht on 16/03/2014 - 00:44
    +2

    To summarise the existing comments: Absolutely yes! Definitely not!

    Another possibility is not kick that particular hornets nest and instead ask for a raise.

  • johndowy on 16/03/2014 - 00:47
    +3

    "My employer expects us to be at the work site on time and not to leave until exactly on the hour at the end of a shift".

    If you knew that from the beginning and still took the job then you have nothing to complain about. If you don't like it then quit. I am sure there are plenty of other people who would be glad to take your job.

    • [Deactivated] on 16/03/2014 - 13:46
      +1

      Well actually I was employed by HR signed the contract etc, then met the boss and was told that information.

  • minniethemoocher on 16/03/2014 - 01:32
    +1

    Tough crowd! I think OP has a valid point, however most of us have a similar problem with work unfortunately.

    • ItsMeAgro on 17/03/2014 - 11:48

      I really like this discussion, actually, it's an iffy question with sentiments I can empathise with on both sides.

      I hope it's making some folks think a bit deeper than our knee-jerk reactions.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join