Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Shift pattern changes, uncooperative union

5 replies

Jaffapedigree · 29/08/2025 21:18

My workplace has decided to bring in some drastic shift pattern changes. They're awful! For a start, they're not compliant with the Working Time Regulations, as there isn't an average of 11 hours between shifts over a 14 day period, and there are some crazy shifts, including a 6am start the morning after a 9pm finish.
The union hasn't been very useful; nobody received emails regarding the changes and the eleventh hour meeting to vote was scheduled for the following morning, at the busiest time of the day, when we were slammed and unable to leave our stations. So, as nobody could turn up to vote, we were told that the changes were deemed acceptable and would go ahead.

A small number of my colleagues got together and made a new shift pattern that they submitted for consideration the day after thus, after badgering the union rep. I didn't see it, had no input on it, and was told by my colleagues that they all preferred it and that not only was it better than the original proposed shift change, but that it was also better than our current pattern (which actually works quite well for me personally).

What I later found out about this colleague proposed shift pattern, was that for me, it's far worse than what I have now, and not really any better than the first pattern proposed. There will still be the 9pm finish/6am start, and now the days are proposed to be condensed into longer shifts, each around 12 to 13 hours, to get more days off in a row.

Sounds good? Not for me! I've done condensed hours before and hated it, it left me exhausted doing three 12 hour or four 10 hour shifts a week. I'd spend the first day off recovering and unable to get anything done. Then I'm cramming all my housework, shopping and batch cooking into my days off, so I'd rarely get to enjoy them. And I couldn't cook a mea fresh each evening, or have a whip round with a duster like I've done tonight, as it would be too late and I'd be too tired. Plus, I wouldn't be able to go to the gym or do other non home based activities regularly.

I'll also be living on my own soon with my cats, and don't have any family or friends willing to pop by often to feed them. Yes, I could get an automatic feeder, but I hate the thought of leaving them on their own every three days for around 13 hours per day. My cat sitter costs £8.50 per visit, so three visits a week soon adds up.

I also like my odd random weekdays off, plus doing occasional mornings and getting off work at lunchtime. But apparently, nobody else does. I appear to be the only one who likes the current shift pattern and doesn't want condensed hours. The occasional long day is fine, but not three in a row every week! Everyone else loves the idea though and I'm being made to feel a bit like an outcast for not wanting it. Plus if the collective majority wants it, I'll be forced into it anyway.

The union are useless; our onsite reps don't seem to care, and head office just keep referring me back to them!

OP posts:
CantHoldMeDown · 29/08/2025 23:38

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

Jaffapedigree · 30/08/2025 07:22

Ah, I was pulling those figures from memory with regards to the WTD. But the fact still remains that of all the new proposed patterns, only one is compliant and it looks like my colleagues are ready to shelve that one in favour of the extended days. If they agree and vote for it, I'm stuck with the majority whether I agree or not.

I'm a prison worker, but not an officer. We're not exempted from the WTD. We can strike, but as there are very few of us who are union members, it won't make enough of an impact to matter much. Plus, i couldn't afford to do that personally.

OP posts:
EmmaMaria · 30/08/2025 14:57

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

That's not entirely factual either. It is possible in some situations - and shift work is one of them - to not have 11 hours between shifts, provided that compensatory rest periods are available. It would have to be looked at based on the actual proposals.
https://www.acas.org.uk/rest-breaks/making-up-for-missed-rest-breaks

If they agree and vote for it, I'm stuck with the majority whether I agree or not.
I assume the union(s) concerned have collective bargaining authority? In which case yes, you are correct - management and the union can make an agreement and that agreement is binding on everyone, union member of not.

Missed rest and compensatory rest - Rest and breaks at work - Acas

What happens if an employer cannot provide someone with the rest break they're legally entitled to.

https://www.acas.org.uk/rest-breaks/making-up-for-missed-rest-breaks

CantHoldMeDown · 30/08/2025 16:23

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

EmmaMaria · 30/08/2025 17:14

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

I wouldn't be asserting what is "regular" and what isn't, and what a court might decide, without any detail. Rightly or wrongly many employers do build shift patterns that have some pattern of shorter breaks as shifts rotate, with compensatory periods elsewhere. In the end only a tribunal decides whether it breaches the regulations or not.

Reading down that ACAS link it says "If the employer cannot find a way to provide compensatory rest, they must find another way to protect the worker's health and safety." so clearly there are circumstances where even the compensatory rest period does not have to be given. Other than them working in a prison and not as a prison officer, we have no clarity about the employmet, the shifts, the circumstances or the business needs/demands. And the regulations have a lot more grey areas than suggested. It is entirely feasible that the alternative, suggested by the employees and supported by their union, would clear the bar if tested in law. But of course, that still means somebody must test it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page