Casual Fast Food Employee. If I'm Say 5 Mins Late to Work, Can My Boss Force Me to Stay Another 5 Minutes past My Rostered Time

AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 01:22
Last edited 24/06/2018 - 12:36 by 1 other user

Had a family member waiting in the parking lot to pick me up, they weren't really amused. I have a feeling the boss forced me to stay longer and forced my ride to sit in their car twiddling their thumbs to prove a point, but I'm just wondering is it legal to fire an employee for not staying beyond their rostered time even if they were late to that shift? Wouldn't normally care, but this isn't the first time I've been expected to work a few minutes longer than rostered time while my ride sits in the car wishing I would be let out on time so they can keep doing the rest of their chores, but this is the first time I've been a few minutes late. I'm usually about four minutes early and jump straight into the work, even though I don't mark those few minutes down in the time book unless it's like a full 15 minutes early (it's boring waiting around for your shift to start anyway).

It's just the being forced to stay longer than the rostered time that I'm wondering about. I have not seen that in this kind of job before, usually the clock out time is the rostered clock out time, unless the manager asks you nicely if you wouldn't mind staying a bit longer this shift with my permission. I'd just like to do whatever Fairwork says we should be doing, instead of wondering whether the boss is going to be grumpy today and demand some extra work. Also I'm not too bothered about the 40 cents per minute or whatever. I'm applying for full time work that matches my studies, so a bit of unpaid minimum wage work here and there won't exactly alter my longterm career plans and savings much.

Education & Work

closed Comments

  • fantombloo on 24/06/2018 - 01:32
    +72

    No-one (except the state with its legitimised violence) can force you to do anything. All your actions have consequences. Think about it.

      • sillyguy on 24/06/2018 - 16:24
        +4

        Seriously?

        • Scrooge McDuck on 24/06/2018 - 16:35
          -5

          Am I wrong?

        • lostn on 24/06/2018 - 18:42
          +5

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          Forcing means putting a gun to your head and saying you must do it.

          If your options are do what he says or lose your job. That's still not forcing. You have the option to give up your job if you really don't want to do it. Forced means you have no choice. Very few things are truly forced.

          But if you don't want complications in your life, just do it. That's called being pressured into it.

        • fantombloo on 24/06/2018 - 19:38
          +1

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          I agree with you and respect that thought (and actually most often do except when you're being an intentional db). Truth is I see the force to labour for others in the face of the alternative poverty is probably one of the most insidious forces in our society that keeps everyone "in their place." However I think that idea will be meaningless to most people here as a first remark (and the comments above/below prove it), plus it seems to me like the OP doesn't really care about this particular job too much anyway.

        • sillyguy on 24/06/2018 - 20:13
          -1

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          Yes & No

          Yes: This statement "No-one (except the state with its legitimised violence) can force you to do anything. All your actions have consequences." is not naive due to the 2nd sentence.

          No: all your points are valid.

        • Blitzfx on 25/06/2018 - 08:43

          @lostn:

          Forcing means putting a gun to your head and saying you must do it.

          I'd argue that's still not forced. For a non-trivial amount of us, the other option would be really nice. Much nicer than infront of a train or car, and not enough pills might leave you alive and a vegetable.

        • tomcat83 on 25/06/2018 - 09:57
          +6

          @Blitzfx: you ok buddy? PM me if you need to talk!

        • HighAndDry on 25/06/2018 - 10:17
          -1

          @Scrooge McDuck: Yes.

        • HighAndDry on 25/06/2018 - 10:19

          @thevofa:

          Truth is I see the force to labour for others in the face of the alternative poverty is probably one of the most insidious forces in our society

          That's just the simple fact that you need certain things to survive and they don't fall free from the sky. Either you work to support yourself, or buy a plot of land and go subsistence farming. It's not society that "forces" anything, it's biology.

        • Blitzfx on 25/06/2018 - 10:20

          @tomcat83:
          oops. yeah I think I'm fine. thanks for the concern.
          Sorry for the dark comment lol

        • Scrooge McDuck on 25/06/2018 - 10:32
          -3

          @HighAndDry:

          Why?

        • KangarooOz on 25/06/2018 - 12:38

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          I am not forced to pay my tax

        • HighAndDry on 25/06/2018 - 13:08
          -1

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          Being "forced" means you have no other acceptable choice. I.e.: Govt says pay taxes or go to jail. That's being forced. Robber says your wallet or I stab you. That's being forced.

          Your examples though? Advertising - "Buy this!"… or what? Just don't buy it. Abuser? Depends on the abuse, but if it's just "Do this or I won't love you" or "Do this or I'll break up with you", so long as you're an adult you're not owed either. An "illusionist" tricks you, not forces - and that'd be fraud. OP isn't being tricked here either.

          A private citizen or a company can't force you to do anything. They can sue you, and then the government through the courts and its sheriffs can force you to do stuff.

          The rest is (to me at least) semantics. You know what the commenter meant.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 25/06/2018 - 13:09
          -1

          @HighAndDry:

          You know what the commenter meant.

          The commenter agreed with me:

          @thevofa:

          I agree with you and respect that thought

        • HighAndDry on 25/06/2018 - 13:11
          -1

          @Scrooge McDuck: Commenter is nicer than I am. Or more generous with interpretations. In context their original comment is perfectly fine - OP isn't being forced to do anything and no one (in this context) is forcing or can force him to do anything.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 25/06/2018 - 13:12
          -4

          @HighAndDry:

          Commenter is nicer than I am. Or more generous with interpretations.

          Or better at comprehension, better at understanding different perspectives, less narrow-minded, etc.

          In context their original comment is perfectly fine - OP isn't being forced to do anything and no one (in this context) is forcing or can force him to do anything.

          In a discussion, more topics than just the original one arise. In this case I was challenging the assertion by the commenter that "the state" has a monopoly on "force".

        • HighAndDry on 25/06/2018 - 13:19
          -1

          @Scrooge McDuck: I… shrug at you? Again, it's just semantics because in context, this is an employee being asked to do something, the worst possible consequence for refusing of which is that they lose the job. People lose jobs all the time and often for far worse reasons. It's not an unacceptable proposition by any means, so again it's not "forced".

        • fantombloo on 25/06/2018 - 16:02

          The commenter agreed with me

          Yes I did. Highanddry apparently knows more about me than I do.

        • puckman on 26/06/2018 - 11:06

          @HighAndDry:

          I see… You don't want to to talk semantics. You just want to talk about how the OP shouldn't have used the word "forced" because you think it means something different to what OP clearly intended.

          …Right.

        • HighAndDry on 26/06/2018 - 11:08

          @puckman:

          You just want to talk about how the OP shouldn't have used the word "forced"

          Yes, because OP wasn't being forced to do anything. Literally the entire discussion here.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/06/2018 - 18:46

      Correct. The OP does not have to work there if he/she does not want to. Freedom. Yeah.

  • ronnknee on 24/06/2018 - 01:33
    +120

    So basically you think it's unfair that you have to say back a few extra minutes to make up for your lateness?

    Would it also be unfair to your boss that you're late and don't complete your full shift?

    • Scrooge McDuck on 24/06/2018 - 15:13
      +7

      I don't think OP is considering fairness, I think they want to work the system to make their travel home more convenient.

      Also, notice their wording:

      but this isn't the first time I've been expected to work a few minutes longer than rostered time

      They used "I've been expected to work" not "I have worked". Perhaps OP has been noncompliant with their manager's requests previously and the manager used OP's lateness on this occasion to leverage their request. So OP is asking if that leverage is lawful.

      • puckman on 26/06/2018 - 11:13

        You left out the second half of the sentence from your quote. The fact that they talk about their ride having waited in the car-park before implies they did work back on previous occasions, and they also say they weren't paid on those occasions, again implying such occasions have occurred before. A lot of people use "I was expected to" synonymously to "I was expected to and did". Suggesting the OP wants to "work the system" seems like an unkind characterisation of their post.

        • HighAndDry on 26/06/2018 - 11:19

          The fact that they talk about their ride having waited in the car-park before implies

          Why look for the implication? OP expressly says in another comment:

          My ride just assumed I was waiting for our dinner to finish cooking, I frequently order food at the end of a shift because why not if I’m already there anyway.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 26/06/2018 - 12:04

          You left out the second half of the sentence from your quote. The fact that they talk about their ride having waited in the car-park before implies they did work back on previous occasions,

          The latter part of the sentence follows on with the conjunction "while". So the nature of its occurrence is equivalent to the former part. That isn't talking about something which occurred "before", you're reading something which isn't there.

          and they also say they weren't paid on those occasions,

          Where?

        • Scrooge McDuck on 26/06/2018 - 12:09

          @HighAndDry:

          Why look for the implication? OP expressly says in another comment:

          My ride just assumed I was waiting for our dinner to finish cooking, I frequently order food at the end of a shift because why not if I’m already there anyway.

          That refers to the occasion when OP was late. We're not disputing that, we're disputing what has occurred previously.

        • Trishool on 26/06/2018 - 15:51

          The question is whether he was late on previous occasions where his manager expected him to stay back. If so, I'd call that fair. You cant have your cake and eat it too. It costs businesses money each time staff are not available or underperform. If you want the job, be on time, and when late, apologise and make up the time (without your manager having to ask you).

    • Munki on 25/06/2018 - 15:23
      +3

      Maybe they should dock 5 minutes out of his pay if he wanted to leave on time.

      • HighAndDry on 25/06/2018 - 15:24
        +3

        No doubt OP would still be here complaining.

        • Munki on 25/06/2018 - 15:25
          +2

          Absolutely. Genuinely surprised this is even a legitimate question.

        • nayfon on 26/06/2018 - 15:02
          -1

          @Munki: self entitled state of mind. It's what you get when you raise a generation of kids who receive participation awards.

        • Munki on 26/06/2018 - 15:27

          @nayfon: I bring my kids down whenever they tell me they got an award for trying.

          WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD, SUCKER!

  • mbck on 24/06/2018 - 01:35
    +30

    Yeh you're right, you're supposed to finish when your shift finishes. Also, you're supposed to start when your shift starts…

    If it's a job you don't care about, then just stick with the contract to the latter(letter?) If it's a job you love, then put extra effort, you'll be seen by your superiors and probably be in their minds for furthering your career.

    Like thevofa said, your actions have consequences…

    • WhyAmICommenting on 24/06/2018 - 23:52
      +2

      FYI, "letter".

      Cheers,
      Grammar Police

  • zonra on 24/06/2018 - 01:39
    +102

    You’re in for a world of surprises if you think a couple of extra minutes is an issue.

      • [Deactivated] on 24/06/2018 - 02:20
        +80

        How about the inconvenience of having your employee arrive late? Did you give your manager a warning that you were going to be late?

        Come on dude, you screwed up. Boss did the right thing and still paid you your hours and just expected that you make up the time that you were going to get paid for.

        In the case that you work extra time, whether it be before/after your scheduled shift, you should log it, but it seems as if you made the decision not to.

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 02:33
          +19

          I guess things were just getting a bit casual. I’d done some business related design work for him in my own time which he took, so I thought we were just getting more like friends than an employee. But you’re right, it was always a strictly boss/employee relationship, I was just fooling myself. I’ll follow up invoices on future side work and make sure rostered work starts and stops on rostered times.

        • [Deactivated] on 24/06/2018 - 02:41
          +3

          @AustriaBargain: all the best dude, good learning opportunity prior to your next full time role.

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 02:51
          +2

          @superfly8eight8:

          It’s actually enlightening. The managers at the store bust their balls for extremely low pay. Meanwhile my friends who graduated a year ahead of me are getting paid median wage to just do what we did at uni basically, except being trained to be in a team that works on real world projects. They have flexitime so can show up when they want, the workload is just uni 2.0, everyone is always got each other’s back Despite endless stories of vicious office politics they all still treat each other like fellow humans. Meanwhile fast food managers deal with their quirky bosses much more intimately than any low level employee and have to deal with their moods all the time, and work crazy hours for crazy low pay. I don’t think I’ll ever take any kind of other work that pays more and has better conditions for granted for the rest of my life.

        • FunkyHoratio on 24/06/2018 - 08:55

          @AustriaBargain: yeah, you're learning an important lesson here, something I learnt during university whilst working at Woolworths. Busted my arse and got promoted to nightfall manager, but wasn't really worth the extra effort. Gave me a decent referral for my eventual full time job, but don't really know how valuable that was compared to my uni results.
          Good luck in your new work if you decide to shift over- something related to your long term career should always be preferred, even if it's lower paying.

        • peterpeterpumpkin on 24/06/2018 - 12:53
          +8

          @AustriaBargain:

          While your observations about the retail/hospitality world are spot on, your recently graduated friends are in the "honeymoon phase" of their careers. The depression, apathy and bitterness doesn't usually hit until you've experienced a few years of introspection.

          In "professional" jobs, workplace politics are often a lot more subtle than you see in menial jobs. From my uni, 100% that I've spoken to have eventually complained about office politics.

          I fell for the "flexitime" bait as well. If you want to be perceived as "conscientious" you have to arrive early. If your direct manager works 7 am to 3 pm and you work 11 am to 7 pm, subconsciously your manager and all the other early-birds will feel you're working 11 am to 3 pm (especially if you look "fresh" everyday while they're exhausted by 3). You can't win with timing your lunch either as a late starter. If you eat with your early-bird co-workers so as not to look anti-social, it'll look like you're barely working in your perceived 4 hour window. And you know who they talk about at the 9.30 am morning tea?

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 17:01
          +1

          oh I've seen the depression. The monotony, days where they are working hard non stop, other days where they are being paid to be available until project work comes through. Mostly it's the monotony of the job and needing to be there every day even if there's no immediate work to be done. I've heard a lot "I would rather be doing busy work like you", until they find out my hourly rate anyway.

          How did you flexitime arrangement work out in the end, are you still doing something like it now?

        • dsp26 on 24/06/2018 - 18:19
          +3

          @AustriaBargain:

          Nothing wrong with being mates with your boss. During work ours, you are their employee. Simple.

        • peterpeterpumpkin on 24/06/2018 - 18:41

          @AustriaBargain:

          Ah great. You described it perfectly.

          I was actually so fed up with my flexitime job that I've technically quit my former profession for now (prefer not to discuss on OzBargain, but it doesn't have many part time positions).

          I picked up other skills that allow me to work from home to avoid the "pretending to work" nightmare, but this has its own drawbacks (e.g. a series of 14 hour workdays without socialising beyond work emails). For the same reasons your friends describe, I do minimum wage menial work when I need money but want to leave the house.

          Due to Sydney's rental prices my formula isn't ideal, especially now that odd jobs and working from home is "in" and competition might swell. When I was fresh out of uni I used to negatively judge co-workers that hated their jobs, looked miserable every day and said they had no other options to pay the mortgage. But having been to countries with financial crises and living now in a country where the philosophy of "rent money is dead money" holds dear, I understand the anxiety of those with families especially feeling they're getting further and further behind.

        • stewy on 25/06/2018 - 01:14
          +1

          @peterpeterpumpkin:
          Your comments around flexitime are spot on.

          Doesn't matter that I put in whatever hours it takes to get the job done, because you started later than the rest, you are perceived as not putting in the effort.

          On the odd occasion I have started early, I see often how unpunctual people can be with getting to work, yet they seem to be smack bang on time leaving. Even on the times I start early, I usually seem to be at work til later than the rest.

          Same for when I have gone in on weekends to catch up on work, I have never once seen anyone else there.

          That said, not everyone is stupid. Our new General Manager I think sees it but it really pissed me off hearing the owner of the company dismissing what he said because "oh no he just starts late".

        • mskeggs on 25/06/2018 - 10:34
          +4

          @AustriaBargain:
          As a new entrant to the corporate workforce you are allowed to use your flex time to start between 15min and 1hr earlier than your contract states, and finish 30mins to 1hr later than the contract states. You can routinely use 50% of your allotted lunch break.

          Once every quarter or so you may leave 30mins before your usual time, with your manager's permission, to attend a doctor's appointment or collect a sick child, but don't make a habit of it.

          You may leave your desk at 9:30 and purchase a coffee.

          You might be concerned to see this adds up to 45 or 50hours a week, not your stipulated 37.5. You can choose to work only a few more than stipulated, should you no longer wish advancement or pay rises. You will be filed with the 'return to work' part time mothers and disabled or chronically unwell who are conscientious, but forced to use up their sick leave.

          However, if you keep at the treadmill, in a decade or two, you will have advanced to the point where you are genuinely able to make use of flex time. You can start at 9:30am, for example, assuming you began replying to last nights emails at 7am and have taken a few calls on mobile. And you can leave at 4pm in order to make the flight back to your home city where you might see your kid before she goes to sleep at 8:30. As long as you work in the Qantas club, and on the plane. And catch up after you kiss your daughter good night.

          And at that point your performance will be assessed against the outcomes of your initiatives, projects and strategies, which typically are open ended, allowing you to work productively on them for an infinite amount of time, even sometimes when you are asleep.

          And when your lift is kept waiting, cooling their heels, it will be because you 'have just to finish one more thing', so you don't even have the satisfaction of a boss to blame for the delay.

        • fLamous on 26/06/2018 - 09:11

          @mskeggs: Wow…. spot on

      • Ryanek on 24/06/2018 - 05:17

        Did you warn your ride you were going to stay back another 5 mins?

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 05:39

          I got the impression pulling my phone out or leaving the store to tell them was not the response he was looking for right that moment. My ride just assumed I was waiting for our dinner to finish cooking, I frequently order food at the end of a shift because why not if I’m already there anyway. And food is kind of trade for the ride.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 24/06/2018 - 15:30
          +6

          @AustriaBargain:

          My ride just assumed I was waiting for our dinner to finish cooking,

          Doesn't sound like a big deal.

          Either way, have you considered scheduling more of a buffer between the end of your shift and your ride arriving?

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 18:51

          i probably should start catching taxis or Uber’s actually, give me more leeway without disturbing anyone’s schedule. I’d even be able to see them coming on the map, which would be nice. If I stopped buying so much fast food I could easily afford an Uber to get to work every day.

      • BanannaMan on 24/06/2018 - 16:17
        +5

        If that's your only concern, why don't you tell all your rides to pick you up 5min later than your finish times?

        Again, you have insane double standards

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 18:56

          My ride actually fits me in between two of their own obligations, work and their children. When I started working there the boss told me that they would be happy to roster around that and that they didn’t want me to be wasting my money on taxis. He was also hoping I’d code his website for free when I was hired, so maybe I’m not as valuable now as he thought I would be when he hired me. Could be the friendly arrangement was conditional on me continuing to do side work for free.

        • WTF on 25/06/2018 - 18:58

          @AustriaBargain: Geeze …Maybe you should stop being such a lazy bum and take some responsibility for your own job/rid/life.

          ffs grow up!

        • AustriaBargain on 25/06/2018 - 19:00

          I wouldn’t call any fast food worker who works at a good speed and standard lazy. Just because that girl at Hungry Jacks makes minimum wage and gives you your food, doesn’t mean she’s lazy.

        • WTF on 26/06/2018 - 11:47

          @AustriaBargain: I was calling YOU lazy - not every fast food worker. Going by your attitude, you are going to be joining the certerlink que soon. Good luck..

  • SPCTRE on 24/06/2018 - 01:48
    +21

    Welcome to the workforce.
    If that’s all you got to bitch about work, then your lucky

  • jikijiki on 24/06/2018 - 02:36

    On the one hand, no one can force you to stay behind.

    But on the other - is 5 minutes really worth potentially losing a job over? Why not just do 5 minutes extra to make up for what was lost? A bit of give and take - just my 2c.

    • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 02:42

      Yes. Even if he can’t technically fire me over refusing to stay longer, even if I wasn’t late. You’re right that he’s at will to fire me the next day anyway for any reason he wants. So it’s best to do what you’re told unless it’s too unreasonable because keeping the job is worth more than losing it over minor inconveniences.

      • 01011010 on 25/06/2018 - 15:11
        +2

        you're casual, he doesn't fire you, he just stops giving you shifts.

  • crayner on 24/06/2018 - 07:17
    +11

    If you're a casual you can be fired for any reason, an employer can simply choose to no longer offer you shifts.

    • johndowy on 24/06/2018 - 13:56

      I wouldn't really call it being 'fired'. As a casual employee they can let you go at any time. Your contract with the company only lasts from the beginning and end of each shift. Each shift is a new contract.

      • Gina Rinehart on 25/06/2018 - 07:25
        +1

        Yes but there is somewhat an expectation that you'll receive at least some shifts, so if you've been working 20ish hours a week for months, and suddenly get none, you can basically consider it being sacked..

    • puckman on 26/06/2018 - 11:19

      Although I know in practice this happens all the time, this could be considered an unfair dismissal. As soon as you've worked for 6 months (12 months for a small business) your employer cannot legally stop giving you shifts without cause. Again, I know it usually doesn't work that way in practice, but it's good to remember the law as well as the reality.

      • AFOS on 26/06/2018 - 12:16

        Could you please provide a source for actual periods (6/12 months)?

        Casual employment is there for a reason. High season, Christmas period, temporary replacement etc. If one works the same hours for significant periods this may not be considered casual employment. Having said that, I am not sure if exact periods (6/12 months) are actually legislated.

        If the poster is on working holiday visa then he/she is restricted with maximum of 6 months of continuous employment for one company. Under the circumstances it can be argued that hiring him/her on a permanent basis would not be a good option.

        As far as original question is concerned, an employer may request to stay reasonable overtime (which will not be overtime since op was late). Refusal may not be considered a ground for immediate dismissal. However, if the employer just stops giving shifts there is nothing op will be able to do.

      • chriskq on 26/06/2018 - 16:08

        Microsoft became famous for not treating their contractors like employees, the contractors filed a class action lawsuit and won.

        Thats why as a contractor the max period you can work at MS is for 3 years…. then you piss off for 3 months and might be able to get your job back.

        • HighAndDry on 26/06/2018 - 16:09

          Sounds like the contractors shot themselves in the foot with that lawsuit…

  • Savas on 24/06/2018 - 07:19
    +41

    Wow I would've fired you already

    • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 17:09
      -1

      I don't think they can afford to tbh. The ops manager was so overworked when I joined up that he was literally having panic attacks, went to the hospital for it. if I stopped working a lot of my workload would go straight back onto the ops manager. I'm one of the few employees available during certain hours.

      • WhyAmICommenting on 24/06/2018 - 23:57
        +1

        Good position to be in, but I'd suggest being gracious about it will go a long way - give more than you take etc

      • Gina Rinehart on 25/06/2018 - 07:27
        +4

        This might be the case, but don't be naive about it. It is fast food after all, you are replaceable. Same goes for many jobs, unless you are lucky to work in a highly specialised field with 0 supply and lots of demand.

      • centrelink on 25/06/2018 - 14:55
        +1

        If you have hat leverage, I dare you to just call up and say you quit

      • Flyingmoo on 26/06/2018 - 09:29

        No one is irreplaceable. No one.

  • chumlee on 24/06/2018 - 07:21
    +27

    LOL.

    Better not get a job in the corporate world then. Unpaid overtime is a daily requirement in a lot of roles.

  • pennypincher98 on 24/06/2018 - 07:35
    +10

    Next week: My boss fired me after I rocked up 10 mins late to each shift. What to do?

    Mate, I hate to tell you but if you are rostered on then you are supposed to show up then. If you don't, the boss will find someone who will.

    • puckman on 26/06/2018 - 11:20

      The OP said they were late one day, for 5 minutes. You've never been late?

      • pennypincher98 on 26/06/2018 - 11:51

        I'm not sure if you realise but if nothing happens when OP rocks up 5 mins late, they'll be more inclined to keep rocking up late because why not?
        5 mins once off will turn into 5 mins occasionally, then regularly and before you know it's 10 minutes each shift.

        Boss is equally within their rights to get the hours they are paying for.

      • HighAndDry on 26/06/2018 - 11:54
        +1

        I'm sure everyone has been late. But most people wouldn't be late and whine about having to make up for that time.

  • o53djz7qTPY4der on 24/06/2018 - 07:43
    +8

    Surely, if you're late you would expect to stay later?

    Or, did you expect to receive the same pay despite your lateness?

    Nobody, forced you to stay. In the same hand, nobody forces the owner to continue to offer you shifts despite your tardiness and self-righteousness.

    I'd fire you for being late.

      • CocaKoala on 24/06/2018 - 19:42

        fire me for being two minutes late once.

        I thought you stated that you were about 5 minutes late on several occasions?

        • AustriaBargain on 24/06/2018 - 19:46

          It was two minutes, but the boss called it me owing him five minutes. So for the sake of simplicity I just stuck with five minutes. But when it comes to talking about how much time I was actually late by,and not what the boss says I owe him, that was actually two minutes. He must round up five minutes, which I’m not really bothered about.

        • CocaKoala on 24/06/2018 - 19:48
          +1

          OK, that brings us to the next point, "Welcome to the workforce". If going home five minutes late from time to time is your biggest worry at work, you're doing pretty good.

        • WhyAmICommenting on 24/06/2018 - 23:58
          +1

          @AustriaBargain: A lot of places round to 15 minutes

        • HighAndDry on 26/06/2018 - 11:56

          @AustriaBargain: You're leaving out that the boss calls it owing him five minutes because, from your other comment, you put down your clock-in time as being five minutes late.

  • Hirolol on 24/06/2018 - 07:59
    +2

    Guys, he gets it. He’s meant to turn up on time…

    If he docked your pay for the time you were late would you care?
    If you don’t want to stay back just say dock my pay!

    My guess is it’s more work for him to dock your pay so that’s why he wants you to work back.also needs to set an example otherwise everyone will start rocking up late.
    I’m pretty sure they can’t force you but then you can get fired for being late too much, I guess it’s a catch 22.

    • JimmyF on 24/06/2018 - 11:38
      +3

      Guys, he gets it. He’s meant to turn up on time…

      I don't think he does… hence this post.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 24/06/2018 - 15:47

      My guess is it’s more work for him to dock your pay so that’s why he wants you to work back.also needs to set an example otherwise everyone will start rocking up late.

      And a casual shift is a requirement to work the span between the start and finish times (minus any breaks), not an option to work between those times.

  • J23SD on 24/06/2018 - 07:59

    This is a clear infringement of your fair work rights you should contact the union and get a protest march happening and disgrace this fast food joint on a national level, just like this cafe in Melbourne after they underpaid staff for years. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-23/barry-cafe-in-northcot…

    If your boss has asked you to stay for an extra 5 minutes this one time I can only imagine how many times he/she has asked others to do this?!?!

    Postscript: I would be up for joining in the march, what should our banner say?

    • JimmyF on 24/06/2018 - 11:38
      +1

      Not sure if you're joking or not….

      just like this cafe in Melbourne after they underpaid staff for years

      OP was paid for these '5 mins' extra work, it wasn't unpaid.

      If your boss has asked you to stay for an extra 5 minutes this one time

      Boss asked employee to make up the PAID WORK TIME they missed at the start of the shift, at the end.

      So lets say the OP was paid for 4 hrs, they worked 4 hrs. NO under pay or unpaid work done here.

      OP was 5 mins late to work, and worked 5 mins later to make up for the time they had been paid.

      • J23SD on 24/06/2018 - 15:26
        +3

        Sorry should have added a wink face to my entire comment

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join