[Metrobeans]

B467 - Workplace Intervals Bill, TSR Labour, seconded by TSR Socialist

Workplace Intervals Bill

An act to tackle unfair hours on consecutive work, this is a particular problem in fast paced retail work where staff are often forced to remain on the sales floor for six consecutive hours.

BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1. Offence of scheduling shift patterns without breaks

(1) For workers over the age of eighteen, It is an offence to require an employee to work a shift exceeding four hours without a break of a minimum of twenty minutes, and an additional twenty minutes for every three hours after this, unless expressed consent of the employee is obtained.

(2) It is an offence for an employer to discriminate against an employee who exercises his or her right to a break.

(3) For the purposes of this Act-

(a)"Shift" means the work undertaken in one single day of labour.
(b) "Break" is a period during the shift in which the employee is permitted to cease working and cannot be required to partake in any for of labour.
(c) A government regulated waiver contract will be set up that must be signed by employees if they wish to waive their entitlement, it is an offence to discriminate employees who refuse to do so

(d) The Health and Safety Executive will be responsible for setting up a service for employees to report their mistreatment

(4)The employer is not required to pay the employee for time spent on mid-shift intervals

2. Enforcement and Punishment

(1) The enforcement of this Act should be the sole responsibility of the Health and Safety Executive.
(2) Violation of this Act should be punishable by a fine not exceeding £1,000 per employee.

3. Exemptions

(1) This Act is exempt where the worker's activities are affected by:

(a) an occurrence due to unusual and unforeseeable circumstances out-with the employer's control.
(b) an accident, or the imminent risk of an accident.

(2) The Secretary of State shall be granted the power to make by order such further exemptions to this Act as are found necessary.

4. Commencement, short title and extent

(1) This Act may be cited as the Workplace intervals Act 2012

(2) This act shall extend to the United Kingdom; and

(3) Shall come into force one month following Royal Assent.

Changes from first reading to second reading

• Introduction of a second break based on longer shifts, removing ambiguity from the previous reading

• Introduction of waiver contract and health and safety reporting service

• The act does not apply to those under the age of eighteen as this would not benefit them compared to current legislation.

[toronto353]

Once again the legal loophole for the Secretary of State to make every job exempt from this thus nullifying any effect of this legislation hasn't been rectified. This is absolutely pointless given that loophole - just list the professions that are exempt. Is it that difficult?

[tehFrance]

No, we need our workers working 24/7

Although in all seriousness, all jobs I know of include a cigarette break every hr... how is that not fair?

[cl_steele]

(Original post by tehFrance)
No, we need our workers working 24/7

Although in all seriousness, all jobs I know of include a cigarette break every hr... how is that not fair?

I only get one every 4 hours and thats if the boss is feeling nice -_-

[jesusandtequila]

Okay, I'm not going to ask the same question in every reading to have it ignored, I'm just going to vote No.

[Ysolt]

This looks on paper like a good idea but then you see that there are 2 big loopholes that are in it. The secretary of state being able to rule out all professions and the problem around express consent - as jesusandtequila said earlier, wouldnt an employer be able to make a potential employee incroprate it into an employment contract, and wouldnt this mean that the people most desperate for jobs had to sort of go without the help this brings? But then again the benefits system is different in the HOC because there is the Welfare ACt that raised welfare for everyone, so people are in theory less desperate to get jobs so maybe this can be overlooked without causing a big problem in the bill. However I dont think so as in a bad jobs market where people need work (even with good benefits about) the employer still has more control over the contract and terms of employment so for me this would be improved if you removed the line "unless expressed consent of the employee is obtained." from the bill, and then limited the secretary of states power (imagine Ian Duncan Smith -- he would just make all employers exempt from this act if it was passed! ) Also I think there could possibly be more detail in anti-discrimination bit -- what does it mean and how would that work??

[JPKC]

Aye.

Though members are right to recognise that the Bill could massively be improved by the author taking out their sewing kit and getting to work on the loopholes.

[Metrobeans]

This is in cessation.

[Metrobeans]

This has been withdrawn.