Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Well this is hourly work, so if you clock in before you actually start working I agree.Also, this person doesn't take breaks due to only being scheduled for a few hours a day.
That's definitely time clock fraud 100% for sure.
They need to show up to work 30 minutes earlier.
15 minutes to get ready, 15 minutes to do their pooping. Then clock in.
If they only work a few hours, they are not entitled to a lunch break. Your company may have an internal break policy where every 4 hours worked, you get a 10 minute paid break. But that's internal.
The classic example of time clock fraud is clocking in and doing anything else but your job duties. Such as clocking in, eating breakfast, getting coffee, chatting with Kathi from asset management, and checking Facebook. And THEN going into your work backlog to start your day. That's classic timeclock fraud.
Another kind is clocking in and then driving away to do whatever.
Originally posted by BrolyBlackDepends entirely on the type of job you have, imo.
Is it wrong to work for an employer and do personal things on company time and be paid for it?
When I was doing the FD thing for all those years, we worked a 48/96hr schedule. IOW, you worked for two consecutive days at the FD, and then were off four consecutive days. Suffice to say: when you're at work for two days straight, you take down time whenever you can. Are tax payers essentially paying for you to sleep on their dime? Yes, but it's a mutual tradeoff, as most tax payers would certainly prefer us to be well-rested when we responded to their emergencies(be them fire or EMS related.)
I'm a flight medic now and 'just' work 24hr shifts these days, but it's still the same basic thing: napping/resting on the clock is actually encouraged because we never know *when* we'll get to sleep, etc... And even though working while fatigued is certainly part of this line of work, that certainly doesn't mean you can operate to your 'best' if you're only running on 30mins of sleep in a 24hr period of time(and anyone who says otherwise is a f*cking liar.)
Originally posted by Galan007👆 good post!
Depends entirely on the type of job you have, imo.When I was doing the FD thing for all those years, we worked a 48/96hr schedule. IOW, you worked for two consecutive days at the FD, and then were off four consecutive days. Suffice to say: when you're at work for two days straight, you take down time whenever you can. Are tax payers essentially paying for you to sleep on their dime? Yes, but it's a mutual tradeoff, as most tax payers would certainly prefer us to be well-rested when we responded to their emergencies(be them fire or EMS related.)
I'm a flight medic now and 'just' work 24hr shifts these days, but it's still the same basic thing: napping/resting on the clock is actually encouraged because we never know *when* we'll get to sleep, etc... And even though working while fatigued is certainly part of this line of work, that certainly doesn't mean you can operate to your 'best' if you're only running on 30mins of sleep in a 24hr period of time(and anyone who says otherwise is a f*cking liar.)
Originally posted by Galan007agreed. With certain jobs it goes both ways.
Depends entirely on the type of job you have, imo.When I was doing the FD thing for all those years, we worked a 48/96hr schedule. IOW, you worked for two consecutive days at the FD, and then were off four consecutive days. Suffice to say: when you're at work for two days straight, you take down time whenever you can. Are tax payers essentially paying for you to sleep on their dime? Yes, but it's a mutual tradeoff, as most tax payers would certainly prefer us to be well-rested when we responded to their emergencies(be them fire or EMS related.)
I'm a flight medic now and 'just' work 24hr shifts these days, but it's still the same basic thing: napping/resting on the clock is actually encouraged because we never know *when* we'll get to sleep, etc... And even though working while fatigued is certainly part of this line of work, that certainly doesn't mean you can operate to your 'best' if you're only running on 30mins of sleep in a 24hr period of time(and anyone who says otherwise is a f*cking liar.)
I worked security at a hospital for a few years and we had the option to be on call, and if called in, u get special pay. U have to follow special rules for days when ur on call tho. U have to be able to show up in a reasonable time and be in state ready to work. So no drinking, traveling etc...
Now if u do get called in, the pay for "special duty" is great.
If u dont, then u just spent the weekend, sober, at home, for nothing, while ur family went to the Sox game without u. Which sucks
But like u said its a mutual trade off.
The employee might spend a few days limiting themselves in what they can do, but u get the chance to make more than dbl what u normaly do for doing the same job u normally do if u get called in.
On the other hand the employer gets to have employees on call 24/7, but if called they have to pay out the ass for the services.
It depends on the job. I always try to find where the lines are for each individual employer I've had. As a chef, if there's EVER an opportunity to do nothing, then you clean something. If everything has been cleaned and there's still nothing to do then the boss is happy and we can all grab a smoke break. We even have a beer on the occasional Sunday shift.