That replying to work emails on the train IS working?

[managedmis]

Jury seems to be out on this one at work so thought I'd ask on her.

I commute 2 hours per day to get to work, an hour there and back. I have my work email on my phone and reply /send emails when I'm on the train. Note that my role is admin based, so always loads of emails to respond to etc.

I consider that this is work.

What do you think?

You're right, but a long commute that involves regularly working can make a strong case for a couple of WFH days each week (generally speaking I mean, I've no idea what this particular case is about)

Agree, I WFH sometimes myself and get a lot more done without the commute. It's a sensible option when your job can be done properly remotely.

I think it's fine - as long as your employer agrees. You certainly don't have the automatic right to include time spent on regular home-work commuting as part of your working week.

I'm of the opinion if that work gets done then that's all that counts.

depends.

If you have a job where you have to justify your hours and do your 40 hours a week, I am guessing starting to count your commute as "work time" is an absolute no no.

If you have a job where results matters more than hours, it's less of an issue. But then no one will expect to see your timesheet - unless you bill client per half an hour or hour and you can justify your work. (but then, you are again requested to have results, not hours if that makes sense).
No one on that level start whining about sending a few emails "out of hours" anyway.

I cannot see a company accepting to count your commute as work time. I can picture it opening an horrible can of worm, with people doing actually bugger all because of no seat, bad condition, starting to demand the company to pay for 1st class ticket as a business expense. Hell no.

I think you'd need to agree this with your manager as part of a flexible working agreement. It really depends on whether you are needed to be a presence in the office, as well as completing your personal tasks.

Obviously you can answer emails on the train, but you wouldn't be around to answer the office phones, for example, or take a call for someone else who is absent, or attend ameeting or training course that didn't finish till the end of the day. Those things might not be part of your role, of course, but it's the sort of thing that needs to be considered.

I can also see some companies struggling to agree in writing with you accessing confidential information on your laptop in a train for the world to see.

The whole thing would be a nightmare. We've all done some work on the train, but counting it as part of your work day is another issue entirely.

I think the working on the train thing, unless part of a full organisational plan for flexible working is opening the door for cheeky fuckery.
Answering emails isn't the same as being available to fullfil all working duties.

I think choosing a long commute and then trying to find a way to swing it as part of your day feels off to me

I've worked many a job where I got my job done in my hours but I still had to work the 40hours and there was always things to do to make the working hours up. Saying X number of hours a week are on the train and my work gets done sounds like a front for "and I'm getting out the office to pretend I'm working at full, reasonable capacity and thy way I can chill on my commute, reply to some emails but avoid anything else being given to me".

technically you can also send a few emails from your phone when you are having your hair done... where does it stop?

It's not a black and white question. It is work. But it's a certain kind of work. If you were in the office you would be available for different kinds of work as well - meetings, client facing stuff, hands on stuff. So from your employer's perspective 2 hours on train may not be "worth" two hours in the office. But to claim work done on train counts for nothing doesn't make sense either. It depends on your role and how you mainly add value. It's one to negotiate with your employer.

The law is clear. You are doing work related activity and therefore according to the Working Time Regulations 1998 this is working time. NOTE it does not say you have to be remunerated for it although there is an argument of payment of the minimum wage.

The employer get out is that it is not authorised work so should not be paid. However, legally you have to record your hours so you should include the time.

Yes it's working.
Whether it's you choosing to work on your own time or whether it counts as working hours depends.
Some organisations recognise a commute over a certain length (time) as working time. I've worked at more than one place where that has been official HR policy. An hour's journey during which emails were dealt with or documents read/updated, or similar type of work would have been counted as working time. A 20 minute journey during which 1 short phone call was made, would not count.

It is work but you're doing it in your own time. It's not part of your working hours so you could choose to read a book, listen to a podcast or just stare out of the window.

That's work. But if it's not being considered work by your employer, stop doing it and only work in the office.

These threads are always about someone trying to claim they work on the commute so that update is not a surprise at all.

These threads are always about someone trying to claim they work on the commute so that update is not a surprise at all.
Always.

And I imagine always always because it suits the one asking to write off a few hours off their working week under the guise that pinging a few emails somehow equates to proper working effort.

I used to work flexible hours and the only time I ever counted my travel in my working day was when I was travelling between places of work/locations, not my commute.

There are just too many variables.

One major concern would be about privacy. I'm lucky enough to have some autonomy about where and when I work, but I'd think twice about working on a train, in terms of who can be overlooking the screen.

Talking about having to do 40 hours but doing exactly 5 on the train makes it clear that you are wrong. I actually work on trains; what that means is that some journeys I get nothing at all done in 2 hours and other "journeys" I work 1h 30 out of 1h 45 plus spend half an hour finishing up whatever I started on the train once I get home. I'd believe you are working if you were regularly working 46 hours one week and 49 the next, plus thought you'd done 3 hours during your commute one week and 7 hours the next... but then your boss probably wouldn't be questioning you, they'd be encouraging you to come in late one morning and just catch up emails on the train. Lazy workers don't get the same leeway with perks, sorry.

Unless you're required to and working on the train is a totally necessary and authorised part of your working time, then no. If you're not authorised to take it as work time (and most don't take their normal journey to work as such), then just don't do work stuff or, if you do, know that it's voluntary. It's taking the piss if you simply expect it to be, perhaps unless your job is solely answering emails (which I highly doubt).

The employer get out is that it is not authorised work so should not be paid. However, legally you have to record your hours so you should include the time.
She should only record the time IF specifically agreed. You can't just unilaterally decide you're taking work time before you get to work if nobody is compelling you to work or agreeing it.

Exactly. My employer is happy for me ri do a shorter day if I have been logged on in the morning. They have agreed this. Because sometimes I have to log on early, due to the nature of my job. They agreed this.

I couldnt however, finish work on monday at 5pm. Log on at home 8pm till 2am and then message my boss saying I am not coming pm Tuesday. I chose to work tonight instead. Because my employee hasnt agreed that. If I work 8pm to 2am through choice. Its exactly that. Choice.

Some employers may not care
Some will think it's a piss take.

My commute is about 5 mins. So neither here nor there.

Cheeserton
I agree. It's about whether the time is directed or not or there's a clause for a salaried job about reasonable hours to exercise duties.

Eg. One of my teaching colleagues used to get the train to work. She'd do her marking on the train and some lesson planning. It was an hour on a quiet train and she'd get 2 hours work done (whereas I stayed late on site). That counts as work because it's reasonable under our job.
But it would be unreasonable for her to try and get time off in lieu because shes contracted 32 hours a week but technically does 10 of those hours on the train.

My work expects me to check and reply to emails during my commute. I need the commute to catch up on household organisation.

If you're not at work, not under the hours that you're directed and you don't have a clause that talks about reasonable additional hours then you can walk out of work and do nothing until you get back to work.
Even with the reasonable additional time, I don't believe they can dictate what that looks like outside of your contracted hours (plus I always think personally that email is an odd one because to me reasonable additional hours is about any prep time I require for my own job or mopping up some task, not being available for contact)

Lola 'directed' time isn't a thing for many people, it's not a phrase I've ever come across anywhere I've worked. I've seen it on threads on MN, usually about NHS staff, but never in real life.

These threads do highlight how different people's working practices are. One of my team has a three hour commute several times a week (he stays over and then travels home). I have no objection to him working from the train but equally I know he has worked through the night sometimes due to his own work ethic and professional pride. It's give and take. And I know he values this because he's resisted applying for promotion in case future managers are less flexible, so it's benefited me in terms of staff loyalty. Our jobs mostly are answering emails though!

CassianAndor
Most people will have a specified number of hours in their contract that they work though. In that time their managers will generally direct what they do.

Some people, usually in salaried professional positions, are expected to a bit of reasonable work on top of that as required by the job but they tend to do that when convenient (eg one of my friends is in law and she'll dictaphone her documents from the car when her child is at their sport club ready for the next day, but work couldn't expect her to reply to emails within 30mine at 7pm / I will do some marking or lesson planning out of contracted hours but that's for me to decide when and work can't tell me I should be replying to parental emails at 10pm).