EU Court: Commuting to Customer Sites Counts as Work
Joe_Dragon writes with news that the European Court of Justice has issued a ruling (PDF) saying that workers who have to commute to see customers, but don't have a "fixed or habitual place of work," must have their transit time at the beginning and end of the day count as working time. In other words, driving to your normal office every day doesn't count toward your paycheck, but leaving home in the morning to go visit a client or customer at your employer's request does. This added commute time also counts toward weekly labor limits — EU regulations for working conditions prohibit employers from making their employees work more than 48 hours a week on average. The court said, Given that traveling is an integral part of being such a worker, the place of work of that worker cannot be reduced to the physical areas of his work on the premises of the employer’s customers. The fact that the workers begin and finish the journeys at their homes stems directly from the decision of their employer to abolish the regional offices and not from the desire of the workers themselves.
Case 1: I work every day in an office 20 miles away (or 100 yards away) from my home. I pay for the journey out of my own pocket and don't get paid as working (in some countries, like Germany, the cost of travel is tax deductible).
Case 2: My office is 20 miles away (or 100 yards away) from my home. When I get there, my boss sends me to a client anywhere in the country (within reason). I pay the journey to the office out of my own pocket and don't get paid for working for the time. The company pays for my journey to the client and pays the driving time as work time.
Case 3: There is no office. I drive from home to a client and back. This ruling effectively says that this situation is handled exactly the same as if my office was in the home next door, which is entirely logical.
The EU is already lagging in the developed world in productivity
http://images.forbes.com/media...
Why not put a few businesses out of business and raise the cost for those remaining.
An amusing graph certainly. I think people in the US work more than 6% more in terms of hours, and and in many places in Europe it's actually illegal to work overtime without compensation (aka, multiplier to pay or extra time off). That on top of generally having more than 6% more time off due to government mandated vacation requirements.
I think a more significant measure is productivity / hours worked, because especially in the non-manufacturing societies (or specialist manufacturing) the west works in, killing/firing/replacing your skilled work force is a bad idea in the long term.
Or maybe, home healthcare should be a public service paid by the whole community through taxes proportional to their income? Just saying...
Do you see a difference between being old and running a business? "Well, if you can't afford to be old, you know, you've made choices, you didn't have to be old, and yet now you want other people to look after you. I'm sorry, I'm not seeing the return on investment here. You've depreciated beyond economic repair."
"Welfare" refers to receiving government money for no work.
When employers "expect" you to commute to work "for free", that's not "welfare"; it's the contract you negotiated with your employer. If you don't like the conditions or the salary, don't take the contract. You are a legally competent adult, aren't you? And you do think that your work is valuable?
And when society has to pick up the slack in government benefits for the employees of employers cutting costs like this, constantly? What then?