Overtime

[BAJR]

Have had some contact about this. and as some people suspected there is a lot more to this.

There are issues however. and I hope to see a fair resolution .

[Gilraen]

It's the norm for some of us and "management" don't like it when you still ask for it because others accept it as they don't want to "rock the boat" or be thought difficult.

Well, that is sad, and I'm sorry that this is the 'norm' for you. I certainly wouldn't waste 4 hours a day - 20 hours a week - 80 hours a month - of my life getting up at dawn's crack and getting home well into the evening and not get paid for it. If we continually act like the ground down martyrs of misery then the 'management' you speak of will continue to treat people in a way that they expect to be treated.

Although as BAJR says, there is more to this situation than meets the eye, so I hope it gets resolved and the staff are treated fairly and with respect as any decent employer should do (and before you start, yes, some do not, of course).

[BAJR]

continue to treat people in a way that they expect to be treated.

aye... true words!

And as you say

I hope it gets resolved and the staff are treated fairly and with respect as any decent employer should do

[Dirty Dave Lincoln]

Q - If company A hires diggers to company B and bills B for them (and A pays their own staff), whilst also billing B for their overtime but not paying their own staff for it- is this fraud?

[BAJR]

It would be. As the invoice would be for xxx hours @ ?xxx and ?xxx overtime Therefore if the people who carried out the overtime do not receive the overtime, then it is (IMHO and barrack room lawyer mode) fraud. against both the employees and the Company B


No different from another case a few years back - that did get reported - of company B being charged for supervisors while the staff on the ground were diggers (and paid as such) including one student! (again charged as a supervisor )

[Dinosaur]

Can someone explain to me why Company B would even want to 'rent' diggers from Company A - surely it'd be cheaper just to take on more Company B diggers in the first place? - there's hardly a shortage of people looking for the work. And if both Company A and Company B think they're making a worthwhile profit margin from this set-up, doesn't this mean that somewhere down the line the client is getting ripped-off and should have just gone to Company A in the first place- they're clearly being overcharged for the workforce?

[differentcolourmud]

Perhaps company B is one of those that happens to have a recruitment freeze imposed from above, so that even with guaranteed work they are not allowed to hire? Way round that is to sub-contract a team from Company A. As for the client being ripped off - not neccesarily, they may want the local expertise of Company B running the site or have a good relationship with them.

Having said that, if there arent enough local diggers available that you have to hire in from 2 hrs away, no matter the reason behind it, you ought to pay at least a good chunk of the travel time and drivers in full. I know of at least one unit that pays everyone, inc temps, from the moment they leave office with drivers getting an extra lump sum.

[kevin wooldridge]

Not forgetting that there are some organisations who find it mutually beneficial to have a little staff exchange here and there when one is in need and the other in surplus. Saves the cost of advertising, recruiting etc etc. I don't have a problem with such arrangements per se, but do feel that the staff should be adequately recompensed for their flexibility.....it shouldn't always just be a case of 'If you don't accept the exchange, the next exchange is the employment exchange....'

[Dinosaur]

Ah. That explains that then...all sounds a little cosy though....

[archaeofutur]

I'd like to add to this with some clarification points. Company A is indeed short of work and has arranged a subcontracting arrangement. It is my understanding that company B has had issues recruiting staff for its obligations. Travel is expected to be 1hr 20mins (according to google with normal traffic conditions) each way. Company A has offered 1.5hr a day so 7.5 hours over the week at basic to everyone, nothing has been said as to wether drivers will receive more, however they have yet to confirm this or place it in writting. The work has been offerred as 'this or nothing' but has not been fairly distributed accross the field team. Company B staff are paid more than Company A staff ( based on 37.5hr week) and no short fall is to be met. Accomodation is not an option.