Missed 3 hours of lunch break

[ThereIsNoLeftFalangie]

AIBU to feel quite pissed off that I've missed out on 3 hours of my lunch break.
Work in a school, have been on quite a few trips for the last term. On trips the children get 30 mins lunch with staff eating alongside and supervising. Normally at school staff will get an hour lunch which is not paid. I don't mind missing out 30mins on the odd trip but it's taking the micky when im owed 2 hours. We're all expected to do things out of goodwill but thoses favours are never reciprocated by management. If they had to pay me for all the times I've worked passed my finish time they'd be in for a shock. Should I mention the 3 hours im owed?

Would you take the same attitude if you were a cleaner on minimum wage?

And why are you whining about teachers when the OP is not a teacher?

(Or I should say, is not paid to be a teacher, she is paid to be a TA)

I'm on an annual salary and with all the over time i do if you break it down to hourly it's not so appealing!

If I was paid hourly I would 100% walk out once my time was done unless I was paid for every hour I was there after that

Most of the replies on this thread are missing the point. If, as a TA, she is hourly paid, then the school is breaching employment law by not reimbursing her for extra hours worked. In addition, if the trips add up to significant unpaid hours, the average could take her below minimum wage, which is illegal. This is happening more and more in the workplace and in my view employees shouldn’t just meekly accept employer expectation of significant unpaid hours. Employment law has been significantly watered down in recent years and by allowing your employer to find creative ways to circumvent it you are helping to erode it even further. If the OP is hourly paid, she should approach management and point out the extra hours worked, so that recompense in whatever way, can be arranged and a framework put in place for the future. If the won’t play ball, contact ACAS for advice. Similarly, it’s nonsense to suggest that salaried staff have no set hours - they will still have a contract of employment which should lay out working hours, breaks etc. I was salaried to a working week of 37.5 hours. Anything more was overtime or time off in lieu. You don’t get anything for nothing in this world so why should the workplace be any different.

If I'd been paid for all the lunch-breaks I hadn't been able to take due to demands of the job, I would have been able to retire a year earlier than I did. 2 whole, big hours, poor you!

Even shop assistants have to wait until the last customer leaves after closing time and often then wait to cash up etc.
It's not just schools where people work extra for no pay unfortunately.

Even shop assistants have to wait until the last customer leaves after closing time and often then wait to cash up etc.
It's not just schools where people work extra for no pay unfortunately.

I think it's shocking that some shops don't pay for that.

I work in retail and I'm paid from the minute I clock in to the minute I clock out. If I have to stay late to cash up or deal with an awkward customer I get paid to do so. Similarly if I need to come in early to set up for a sale or something, I get paid for that too.

I wish people weren't so quick to accept poor working conditions. Too many people write it off as being normal or "necessary to progress" which is not only corporate bullshit designed to get you to work for free, but also massively unfair on people who cannot stay past their contracted hours for whatever reason (childcare, transport to catch, caring responsibilities etc.)

If employers need people to work above their contracted hours then they need to pay them for it, or offer TOIL. Expecting people to work for free is shitty management and a sign of a poor working environment.

*I realise in salaries professions things are different but the above should absolutely apply to everyone who is paid hourly.

Sorry I haven't read the full thread - BUT....part of being on a trip is the joy of not being in a classroom. Yes you are watching/herding children and interacting with them, but usually it's a great day out where we get a bit of breathing space and don't have to worry about the usual constraints of the day. That's a bonus to me. A bit less of my lunch-break is a good swap I'd say.

It is utterly bizarre that people truly believe the lowest paid workers should happily accept the worst conditions, even if it takes them below minimum wage and means employers are acting illegally.

Posters genuinely arguing that TAs and shop workers should work unpaid overtime and not get breaks, and be grateful about it

TAs only earn about £12,000 in a year on average. For that, I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to work through breaks unpaid. They are employees, not volunteers.

The law says employers must pay at least the minimum wage for any hours worked in excess of what is agreed in the employee's employment contract.

The law says employers must pay at least the minimum wage for any hours worked in excess of what is agreed in the employee's employment contract

Not quite. Employers must ensure that employees receive at least the NMW for each hour that they work. But someone could earn a salary that takes them significant over the NMW even if they work overtime. Then it would be a matter of contract as to what the employee was paid. The law is only interested that workers receive the NMW for each hour worked.

It does all come down to the OP's actual employment contract in the end. Teachers' contracts require teachers to be flexible about time worked. TA contracts are generally for fixed hours, which specifically carve out unpaid breaks. Even if the contract is not for hourly pay, it will be extremely easy to calculate what the annual hourly pay is supposed to be and how much time in excess of that the OP has been told they must work. It will therefore be easy to calculate whether the OP is getting minimum wage. No employer can oblige an employee to work unpaid and any employer that actively asks an employee to do this without offering TOIL or overtime for it is an appallingly bad employer.

‘TAs only earn about £12,000 in a year on average. For that, I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to work through breaks unpaid. They are employees, not volunteers.’

Why is it reasonable to expect ANYONE to work for no pay. Honestly there really are some shitty attitudes on this thread, from both employees and employers. From an employer point of view, judging someone’s loyalty and commitment by how much they are prepared to do unpaid is, as a previous poster commented, corporate bullshit, and judging by the martyrs who have posted on here, it works !! Employee rights have been eroded massively over the years and looking at some of the comments here it’s not hard to see why.

I haven’t had a proper lunch break in 12 years, stuff food at my desk whilst answering calls. I work past my finish time all the time. School trips are few and far between wouldn’t be one of ‘those’ people plus you do get roughly 3 months off a year!

I run a not for profit charity preschool. I am paid £11.40 an hour, but I am ‘part time’ and my working days are 9-3. I am regularly there before and after these hours, don’t have a lunch break, do evenings, weekends and holidays. The hours I do unpaid over a 12 month period totals between 150-180. I suggest OP that 3 hours of lunch missed is not too bad...

MrsBadcrumble - yes, holidays are all very nice when your employer pays for them... funnily enough, however, this time is unpaid. If the reality of a school is that staff seldom get breaks, then their employment contracts should reflect the truth and give them paid breaks, not unpaid breaks. Then everyone understands the breaks are for health and safety reasons. Otherwise the "breaks" are just taking the piss.

@lizbethb37 No - just because you accept terrible working conditions doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't want to accept them has no reason to complain!
Imagine taking that argument to the Relationships board - "You husband is verbally abusive? Well my husband hits me so a bit of name calling is not too bad..."

To clarify - TAs get no more holiday pay than any other employee in the UK is entitled to. The rest of their "holiday" is unpaid.

I work in a building society HQ. My nominal hours are 8.30-4 with 30 mins lunch.
I almost never have a lunch break - people schedule meetings right through lunchtime, and rarely start and finish on time either.

I'm paid to do a job, not to fill space by the hour.

lizbethb37 - you are doing 150-180 hours per year of voluntary work. Clearly you can afford to do this without it causing financial problems, and actively want to do it, and feel appreciated for doing it. How would you feel, though, if other responsibilities meant you could no longer do all those extra hours and your employer told you they were disappointed in you for lowering you standards? Would you be so happy to give so much of your time for free then?

The amount of people proud of doing unpaid overtime is batshit crazy.

Why is that something to be proud of? You do know that it’s JUST a job right? Your employer would easily get rid of you if they could.

Biggobyboo - because for a lot of people, their job is a large part of their identity.

The ‘competitive overtime’ on this thread is so depressing!

I can’t work out what more depressing - the martyrs placing such little value on their time that they put in so many unpaid hours, or the employers who must be delighted so many workers are willing to do this and so don’t discourage it.

To all the ‘overtime martyrs’ on this thread - you do realise that you are completely expendable don’t you? If you dropped dead tomorrow your employer would have a job ad out for your job within a couple of weeks, and a month or two later someone else would be doing your role.