To decide myslef how to spend my lunch break

[OpenMe]

I'm a school business manager in a small school which means I do the finance (everything from orders to the budget), personnel, payroll, health and safety, premises, most of the admin, as well as manning the front desk and the telephones. It's a wonderfully varied role but it does mean that people always want something from me and my working life is full of interruptions and chaos.

I started in September and am contracted for 7.5 hours a day plus a 30 min unpaid lunchbreak.

I've had two probationary reviews which have gone very well but each time the HT has "suggested" that it would be nice if I spent my break in the staffroom, so the staff can get to know me. I don't think I'm particularly unsociable, but if I go in the staff room everyone takes the opportunity to tell me what they need from me, what they're waiting for, what they forgot to tell me about that is now urgent etc etc.

It's also really noisy. It's a lovely school and the staff are all very friendly, but the noise of them chatting at lunchtime is horrendous

Anyway, my preferred way to spend my 30 mins is reading, running out to the shops or (best) just going for a walk. Just 20 minutes of quiet away from the chaos.

I understand where the head's coming from but I also like (need?) my break. AIBU to ignore her or only go in there when it's raining occasionally?

[BossWitch]

Essentially, schools are a bit of a shit workplace in this regard, where contracted hours are irrelevant because no one can possibly do their job within their contracted hours of work. So no one thinks in terms of 'I'm not paid for this bit of the day, I'm on my own time'. In my experience there's no such thing as 'my own time' as a teacher, just 'when can I squeeze this in?'. This is a profession in which working til midnight and then getting up at five the next morning to finish off isn't an unusual practice. The head has (presumably) only ever worked in this environment, and will see using the lunch break to speak to a few people, who you wouldn't otherwise get a chance see during the day, is totally normal.

I think it is very much part and parcel of working in schools. You have to decide whether or not you are willing to put up with it - even just a day or two a week - or if you'd be happier working in a different workplace.

For what it's worth, I completely sympathise OP. I'd love to have a job with a real lunch break again. It's one (of many) reasons I'm trying to career change out of teaching. Sadly, I think it's an increasingly rare thing in most careers these days. My grandfather ran an engineering firm for decades. He used to go home for lunch and a nap every day in his hour's break. Can anyone imagine a company head doing that now?!

[futureme]

Agree completely boss. And yes that sounds bliss.

[venusinscorpio]

I love this idea that just because teachers don't or won't switch off from work, it's hugely unreasonable for the OP to even suggest she wants some time to herself during her unpaid lunchbreak. It really isn't. It's a totally different job paid much less money, and she deserves some time out without people whinging on about their petty admin issues. But let's all join the race to the bottom, eh? OP, agree a sensible way round it would be to take your lunch break after the teachers have finished that. I don't really see why the head should have a problem with that. You're not really "socialising" if you go in there, you're working, as many posters here clearly feel entitled to pester you while you're eating.

[knobblyknee]

Employers get away with this kind of bullshit as long as people agree to go along with it.

[venusinscorpio]

Agree, knobbly.

[Tokoloshe]

I work through my unpaid lunch break so you should too seems to be the attitude of an amazing number of people here

Complete rubbish - you can choose to work unpaid overtime if you like, but have no right to say that is what other people should do.

I work for a small business and generally work through my unpaid lunch break - but if I need to leave early, take an extended lunch break, or any other sort of flexibility then my boss has no problem with it. It goes both ways, which seems to me to be a healthy compromise.

[Tokoloshe]

I've also worked in too many jobs where I knew I would be more productive if I worked fewer hours.

On one entertaining occasion I suggested I reduce my hours to 4 days per week (from 5). They only need pay me for 4 days, so would save money, and I would guarentee to complete the same amount of work. We could review after 3 months, and if they felt my work had reduced in quantity or quality then I would go back up to 5 days again. I would be available for urgent queries on the 5th day by phone and email, and the day off could be varied depending what meetings etc were happening that week.

They turned it down, on the grounds that 'this has been graded as a full time role'.

Bizarre.

[KacieB]

I think the op may have left this one!

[KakiFruit]

I'm sad that so many people told the OP to "take the hint" and go what the head wants. If the head wants her to spent 30 minutes a day in the staff room, the head must pay her to spend 30 minutes a day in the staff room.

It's no wonder employers get away with so much crap when people roll over and take it.

[KacieB]

True - but life isn't fair and sometimes you've got to pick and choose what fights you take on.

Quite a few have suggested a mixed diplomatic response, certainly not just about capitulating and rolling over, but being mature about dealing with it and not just digging your heels in...

[venusinscorpio]

That's because most people commenting here resent the idea of anyone else having a real lunch break because they personally choose not to so they can leave earlier.

Those people annoy me, actually, as it means you get these silly attitudes that you shouldn't have time for yourself and should be at your desk/on call all day, which it makes other people's lives harder with people feeling justified in making snide comments etc, but at least I do get that it's none of my business how other people choose to spend their free time, and if they choose to work through, that's up to them.

Oh, and I've always simply blithely ignored any snide comments and it's never been a problem in any workplace, including the education ones. Some people just love to feel that they're totally indispensable and can't possibly take a half hour break. That's their problem, not mine.

[venusinscorpio]

That last to Kaki.

[nextusername]

That's because most people commenting here resent the idea of anyone else having a real lunch break because they personally choose not to so they can leave earlier.

I'm not sure that's why teachers don't get lunch breaks. They may well be dealing with things that have come up during the day and need to be done before the next lesson starts.

[KacieB]

Well I maintain that life is unfair and that occasionally socialising with work people at lunchtime is not the worst concession to make.

I've worked shitty jobs with shitty people and great jobs with great people and the whole spectrum in between. I've quit because of bullying and I've thrown my share of eye rolls at oddities.

If the OP's job is absolutely fabulous aside from "my boss wants me to be friendly in my free time sometimes" then yes, I think they should accept it occasionally. It's extremely immature to be totally inflexible and aggressively stick to your guns and rights no matter what in situations like this.

I read this as a manager trying to make a more sociable workplace and help everyone integrate more (including the introverts). Those workplaces have always been hands-down the best places because of that light friendly bond away from the desk.

[KacieB]

But I also think this conversation is fruitless as the op clearly came here to be backed up and has now vanished

[LittleBearPad]

Maybe she's in the staff room besieged by teachers

[KakiFruit]

I can't believe taking a 30 minute unpaid lunch break to, you know, have a break, is "digging your heels in".

Wow. venusinscorpio has it spot on.

[BoboChic]

Clearly, OP, your job is full of tiny and often unplanned detail and interruption and you need to clear your head at lunchtime rather than other people seizing the opportunity of their lunchtime to ensure you work through it! You need to explain this very clearly to the head teacher.

[KacieB]

To clarify - I'm one of the ones who suggested half an hour in the lunchroom and then a lunch break.

But yes - refusing to be sociable ever because that's legally fine is not the same as being a smart move.

[venusinscorpio]

Nextuser

I don't accept that gives them the right to bother OP when she's eating her lunch. It's very rude.

[venusinscorpio]

Re Smart moves.

Neither is letting go an efficient and capable school finance manager because of this very minor issue. They're hardly ten a penny. Any headteacher that did that would be an idiot.

[BoboChic]

I'm also someone who has to get fresh air and to clear my head at lunch time if I am working. I have formidable powers of concentration but the downside of working so intensely is that I need a real break.

[venusinscorpio]

Exactly. Me too Bobo. When I do work through I am much less productive and more stressed.

[nextusername]

The teachers will be asking one another at least as many work-related questions as they ask the OP. "Is football on tomorrow?" "Has X told you that Y will be needing Z this afternoon?" "Do you know who was last using the screen?" "Have you made the list of names I asked for?" "How long will the meeting last?"

[Pangurban1]

It most certainly up to you how you spend your unpaid time. However, it might be politic to do it a couple of times.

When someone mentions something they need off you, tell them to come to your desk after lunch or when you are there in case you forget. Onus on them for appropriate place and time.