How long is your lunch break?

[SpookyFrank]

Funny thing with interviews Frank, the person being interviewed is the one who wants a job, the interviewers already have one.

Yeah but they do need staff so they should probably consider not being complete cunts about it.

 

[xenon]

there are ways to do interviews. Of course.

 

[Plumdaff]

Standard NHS half hour, rarely able to take it as whole crumbling edifice based on exploitation and daft goodwill from staff. Sandwich or soup at desk it nearly always is.

 

[Looby]

Funny thing with interviews Frank, the person being interviewed is the one who wants a job, the interviewers already have one. Making them think you're not interested in joining them not really a good idea no matter what your reason.
As to whether or what I do is pointless, well perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. Doesn't bother me either way. I enjoy it, I'm good at it and I get paid very handsomely for it. Let those paying the bills decide whether it's worth doing, so far they seem to think it is.

Why is asking about really important policies an indication that you’re not interested in a job? Surely that shows interest.
You’re going to work for someone so they’re responsible for what you earn, when you get paid, when you won’t, whether you’re looked after at work.

Why is it wrong to want to know? It ignores that it’s a transaction. Why should the potential employer be the only side trying to decide if the match is suitable? I think it says more about the employer if they see these questions as a bad thing.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

i think it's generally more 'the done thing' to talk about the detail of pay and conditions if and when they get to the point of offering you the job rather than at the interview.

it does vary of course -

public sector tend to make the pay (or pay range) and that sort of thing clear in the advert, some private sector jobs they will want to ask you at interview stage how much you're on now / how much you're expecting (so that they can use that as part of their decision making as in who they can get for least money)

 

[Looby]

i think it's generally more 'the done thing' to talk about the detail of pay and conditions if and when they get to the point of offering you the job rather than at the interview.

Yeah I get that and that’s generally what I do but I think it should be ok to be more up front.

A couple of posters on this thread have said they would automatically not hire someone if they asked this stuff at interview but why? What’s so bad about it?

It’s like a weird fucking game akin to dating ‘rules’. Don’t let them know you’re interested, don’t call for 3 days etc God it’s all such bullshit.

 

[NoXion]

I work from home for a private sector company. We get a choice of either half an hour or an hour to have lunch, depending on whether we want to finish earlier or not, but in either case we have to be working a set number of hours per day. There's some flexibility in terms of when we can have lunch, although we are encouraged to have it before 2pm.

Honestly surprised to hear of the lack of flexibility in jobs where constant presence or attendance at specific hours isn't critical.

 

[Cloo]

I work in an office (well, I'm there 2 days a week) and I take my hour. Honestly, no one's watching me and I need a proper break in the middle of the day.

It does piss me off when employers treat lunch hours - which are there in people's contracts - as not real because there's an assumption that people aren't taking them. In one job I remember asking if I could work through lunch so I could leave an hour early for something pertaining to my kids, and the answer was 'no', presumably because they thought that didn't count because I should be working then anyway.

 

[MickiQ]

Why is asking about really important policies an indication that you’re not interested in a job? Surely that shows interest.
You’re going to work for someone so they’re responsible for what you earn, when you get paid, when you won’t, whether you’re looked after at work.

Why is it wrong to want to know? It ignores that it’s a transaction. Why should the potential employer be the only side trying to decide if the match is suitable? I think it says more about the employer if they see these questions as a bad thing.

Good question, asking about holidays is fine of course, people work to live not live to work. It's very reasonable that someone might want to know how much time they can have off to enjoy the fruits of their labour. But asking how many days sick you can have off immediately begs the question "Well how many are you planning to have?" The only acceptable answer is 0 unless I actually need them.
People don't generally know in advance how sick they are going to be over the next 12 months.
As for the employer/employee deciding, it's a safe bet that merely by showing up the candidate has expressed an interest in the job. Going on personal experience not everybody did, we never had a candidate say during the interview they weren't interested but at least a couple turned down the offer.
The interesting thing about job interviews is that you're not being interviewed by the company, you're being interviewed by the people or persons in the room with you. When I did it at Evil American Megacorp there would be three of us, there would an HR person to take notes and ensure "The Policies" were adhered to, there would be me to ask the odd technical question theoretically to check whether this person really knew what they claimed but really just to make the numbers up and there would be the manager who would conduct the interview and make a decision as to whether we wanted this person or not. Sometimes depending on the manager they might ask for mine or even the HR person's opinion but we didn't get a vote, the decision was down to the manager.
Interviewing is a bit like being on a blind date, every interview is on the basis that this was the person we were looking for. We wanted to hire someone, we needed the help and we had a budget to pay them with.
By the time it gets to interviewing, the most important criteria we were looking for is will the person fit in with the existing team and will they pull their own weight and not be someone we just ended up carrying. Tbh for me (and every manager I've sat alongside) them asking how many sick days can I expect? is answering our second criteria with a solid No.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

My current lunch break started in 2003 and hasn't finished yet.

 

[klang]

Good question, asking about holidays is fine of course, people work to live not live to work

We are not in an interview situ, no need to patronise us.

 

[kenny g]

I take 1.5 to 2 hours if I want a swim, otherwise 30 mins max. Prefer to be able to get home earlier for cooking duties rather than waste time at mid-day. I take a packed lunch so don't have to waste time and money shopping during lunch.

 

[kenny g]

We are not in an interview situ, no need to patronise us.

I didn't feel patronised so this may be more about you than the post

 

[kenny g]

I work in an office (well, I'm there 2 days a week) and I take my hour. Honestly, no one's watching me and I need a proper break in the middle of the day.

It does piss me off when employers treat lunch hours - which are there in people's contracts - as not real because there's an assumption that people aren't taking them. In one job I remember asking if I could work through lunch so I could leave an hour early for something pertaining to my kids, and the answer was 'no', presumably because they thought that didn't count because I should be working then anyway.

Isn't there a legal requirement employees take a lunch break under what was the working time directive?

 

[moochedit]

I have half an hour for lunch. I have an office job but it is in a factory. I sometimes had 20 mins for lunch in a previous job in a warehouse, although on longer shifts i had 30. Never had an hour in any job i've had.

 

[Cloo]

Isn't there a legal requirement employees take a lunch break under what was the working time directive?

Yes, I think so. But a lot of employers do seem make noises about 'Don't feel you have to eat a sandwich at your desk', while tutting at people who go out for lunch.

gsv worked somewhere once based outside a small village in Surrey and were annoyed at him going out to drive 10 mins to the nearest town as he needed to buy a present and some wrapping and they told him people shouldn't be going offsite at lunch, when there wasn't a sodding thing on site, not even a caff.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Yes, I think so. But a lot of employers do seem make noises about 'Don't feel you have to eat a sandwich at your desk', while tutting at people who go out for lunch.

gsv worked somewhere once based outside a small village in Surrey and were annoyed at him going out to drive 10 mins to the nearest town as he needed to buy a present and some wrapping and they told him people shouldn't be going offsite at lunch, when there wasn't a sodding thing on site, not even a caff.

I went off-site for my lunch break after finding a bug in my broccoli in the works canteen (which was notoriously shit). Given that I was the producer responsible for creating and playing out on-screen breaking news captions at the time, it's a good job there were no earthquakes or plane crashes while I was out, or I would've got in so much trouble. I ended up bringing my lunch in every day after that.

ETA: And yeah, that pressure.

Company: Don't forget to take your lunch break.
Boss: Why haven't you finished amending that document/preparing that presentation?
Also boss, at 12:50h: I need documents a, b, c, d, e and f all printing out/photocopying and binding for my 2 o'clock meeting. And can you make sure there's some of those nice biscuits? Right, I'm off for my lunch, I'll be back just before 2pm.

 

[SpookyFrank]

As to whether or what I do is pointless, well perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. Doesn't bother me either way. I enjoy it, I'm good at it and I get paid very handsomely for it. Let those paying the bills decide whether it's worth doing, so far they seem to think it is.

This is the problem with workplaces in a nutshell. To even get in the door you first have to impress some self-important mediocrity who likes to suck his own dick about how handsomely he gets paid.

I might never get rich doing my job, but you can't put a price on not having to work for a bellend like this.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Isn't there a legal requirement employees take a lunch break under what was the working time directive?

In the NHS someone senior will come and tell you off if you've not taken your break.

In education lunch breaks exist in name only. There are very often time-sensitive expectations that can only be fulfilled in those 40 minutes. And the workload is such that if you take half an hour for lunch, you have to stay late half an hour after work. I know I'm at my least productive at the end of the day so I arrive early and I work through my breaks so I get half a chance of going home on time.

 

[moochedit]

Yes, I think so. But a lot of employers do seem make noises about 'Don't feel you have to eat a sandwich at your desk', while tutting at people who go out for lunch.

gsv worked somewhere once based outside a small village in Surrey and were annoyed at him going out to drive 10 mins to the nearest town as he needed to buy a present and some wrapping and they told him people shouldn't be going offsite at lunch, when there wasn't a sodding thing on site, not even a caff.

I think they can only insist you stay on site if the lunch break is paid because of minimum wage. Never had a job that didn't allow me to leave at lunch time. I sit in my car to avoid anyone asking me work stuff during my break.

 

[MickiQ]

This is the problem with workplaces in a nutshell. To even get in the door you first have to impress some self-important mediocrity who likes to suck his own dick about how handsomely he gets paid.

I might never get rich doing my job, but you can't put a price on not having to work for a bellend like this.

You don't do well at job interviews do you Frank?

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

I've been offered an office job and I accepted, and I accepted the salary offered, (£1k less than my last job), having been told that the working hours were 9.00-5.30, which I assumed to mean 37.5 hours a week.

However, I've received the offer letter, and found out that there's only half an hour lunch break. My last job only had half an hour lunch break, but that was working in retail, and was a total piss-take, it was supposed to be 40 hours a week, but ended up closer to 45 hours a week and I wasn't paid for the overtime, which mounted up over the course of the three months I did that job.

The job I had last year was in a call centre and was only a half hour break too.

Before these last three jobs, I've never before - in more than three decades of working! - had an office job that doesn't have an hour long lunch break. Well, that's not strictly true, I did do an internship in France years ago where we had a very civilised two hour lunch break. So I've never had less than an hour's lunch break while working in an office, apart from in the last 2-3 years. Each time I thought it was an anomaly.

While it might seem churlish to quibble over 30 minutes a day, I think that's not the point. The point is that over the course of a year, to my mind, working that extra 2.5 hours a week, over the course of a year equates to a big difference; it's like working 3+ weeks for free.

It really irks that employers can't/won't be transparent and upfront about the terms and conditions. It's like they lure you in, get you interested, then you find out that you're being low-balled in the pay negotiations * plus * the hours are longer than expected.

The hourly rate will be less than I was earning doing legal secretarial work in the 1990s. I am really, really lucky that my housing costs are very low.

But the other issue with breaking it down into an hourly rate is that if I work 40 hours a week, my hourly rate is below the Living Wage Foundation's real living wage, whereas if I work 37.5 hours a week, it's above.

(I used to have to some decent well-paid jobs, but my mental health took a massive hit and I ended up suffering from Complex PTSD due to antisocial behaviour and harassment from neighbours that had an adverse impact on my health and ability to work. I'm reluctant to continue working for poverty pay.)

I was excited about getting a new job, but now I'm left with a bitter taste in my mouth and thinking they're yet another company that doesn't respect work:life balance, just wants to exploit people.

native french feels your pain here

 

[porp]

One hour in theory, in practice as many breaks as I want for as long as I want, as long as the work gets done. On my timesheet (never checked) I put an hour down without thinking

 

[abe11825]

I work for a local law firm (there's an influx of more "national" firms around here, so the one I'm at is legit a mom and pop firm) and they "require" a 1 hour lunch. This is the first job I've ever had, where it wasn't 30 minutes. I don't know what to do on an hour's lunch as I'm usually done eating my sandwich before the half hour mark. So I end up taking the 30 minutes so I can leave 30 minutes earlier.

The company also has you in the office for 9 hours to be able to justify the hour unpaid lunch. The 9 hours is either 8-5 or 9-6 depending on your role in the company (mine would be 9-6 if I took the hour, but I fixed it so I'm in the office between 8:30 and 9, and adjust for the difference to get out between 5 and 5:30. It all depends on the time I get in due to traffic and such). We get two 10 minute paid breaks - one in the morning and one in the afternoon, but we don't have to take them if we don't want to.

You're allowed to pee and get a coffee whenever you want, but they don't really like when people have food or beverages at their desks, even though it happens every day.

There's flex time, sure. So if you have a morning or afternoon appointment and need to come in late or leave early, you have to adjust the rest of your working week hours in order to make the time up, or submit "paid time off" to cover you. The challenge with paid time off / having a full day off is when someone else in your department has already requested the day. Favoritism at its finest because I've gotten asked to change a doctor appointment because someone in my department previously requested the day off. Yet, two people I immediately work with have been off at the same time as well as other people in the office have had off (and may be in the same dept). It's odd.

There are more people working remotely in my building then there are in house workers. My role prohibits me from being remote, as I do outgoing mailroom activities with another person. There are 6 people in my main department - me and another girl are in the mailroom, but I also am the float for incoming document generation. For the incoming documentation, there are two people. One person runs the file room and one person archives documents in the warehouse. This last person is extremely part time, it seems, because I rarely see him collecting files. The file room person is 100% on site. One of the two incoming people are 100% on site while the other does a hybrid week - 3 days in office, 2 days at home because her stuff is all digital once the physical papers are scanned. But the rest of the building's remote workers are digital enough that there's a good handful that work out of state.

For holiday pay, we get New Years, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas. Depending on when the holiday falls, the office closes accordingly (which means weekends make it nice but mid week stuff makes it hard to plan). New Years is half day for everyone the day prior, the day of is off, and we're back the next. Memorial Day, July 4 and Labor Day are just that one day off. Thanksgiving Thursday and Black Friday are off so we're back on Monday. Christmas Eve and Christmas Day the office is closed.

This past NYE, we left at noon on Friday and came back Tuesday. With Christmas 2023, we left Friday and came back Tuesday. But Christmas 2024 falls mid week, so we're going to be off just Tuesday and Wednesday (or whatever it'll fall on). The same will be for NYE 2024.

There's plenty of other things to go on about, but I'm running late right now, so hope this helps in any "what do you get?"!

 

[sim667]

When I started working for the NHS it was the first time I’d ever had half hour lunch break.

In a 12 hour shift I get 30 mins unpaid meal break and I’m supposed to get 2 x 15 min tea breaks which are disturbable for c1 and c2 calls, and paid. I can’t remember the last time I got my tea breaks though.

 

[InArduisFouette]

When I started working for the NHS it was the first time I’d ever had half hour lunch break.

In a 12 hour shift I get 30 mins unpaid meal break and I’m supposed to get 2 x 15 min tea breaks which are disturbable for c1 and c2 calls, and paid. I can’t remember the last time I got my tea breaks though.

tea breaks what are they ?

funny how so many crews book a 'delayed completing PRF' though

 

[sim667]

tea breaks what are they ?

funny how so many crews book a 'delayed completing PRF' though

Tactical finish

 

[InArduisFouette]

Tactical finish

Can't beat a tactical finish... especially if you are a long way from the station you started at,

Mid mealbreak window clear can be grim, last shift I did that turned into an epic with a missed break , 10 hours off station and 90 minutes late finish, at least it was the last one in the block.

 

[likesfish]

we get two 15 min paid breaks and a 1 hour unpaid lunch controlled by app you can take the break outside or back at base even if it takes your 40 mins to get back to base to take your break!
sitting in the parking is fine when it's nice when it's pissing down with rain is a different matter

 

[Ĝasper]

2 x 30 minute break on current contract.

Lots of nonsense about not leaving site early enough to start break on time.

"it's ten past, why are you still in here!?"

"eh, we didn't get in until twenty to.."