Travel Time to and from Work - Mobile Workers

[Gareth83]

We have a small construction business and looking to expand by advertising 6 new tradesman positions.

All tradesman will have vehicles supplied. We have a general rule of on-site time 8-4:30 with a 30 minute unpaid break to give 40hr (paid) working week. This may be changed to a 39hr paid week and have an earlier finish on a Friday (still up for discussions)

We have a HQ/yard that they would only need to visit once or twice a week tops

Am I right in saying as they have no fixed place of work we can say travel time is in their own time. BUT this counts towards Working time but doesn't have to be paid.

All our work is up to a 1hr travel distance with some jobs on the doorstep and some up to 60 miles away, so in order 'for fairness' would it be reasonable to say the outward commute would form part of their paid time but they must log off when they leave the last job? Essentially splitting the travel time 50/50. We pay for travel there, they travel home 'free'.

Anything over 1hr travel would be borne by us eg. if it's a 2hr travel to job, we would pay for 3hrs of travel and they would travel for 1hr 'free'. That way they are essentially commuting up to 1/2hr each way with fuel and vehicle paid by us.

What do we think is fair?

 

[Newchodge]

We have a small construction business and looking to expand by advertising 6 new tradesman positions.

All tradesman will have vehicles supplied. We have a general rule of on-site time 8-4:30 with a 30 minute unpaid break to give 40hr (paid) working week. This may be changed to a 39hr paid week and have an earlier finish on a Friday (still up for discussions)

We have a HQ/yard that they would only need to visit once or twice a week tops

Am I right in saying as they have no fixed place of work we can say travel time is in their own time. BUT this counts towards Working time but doesn't have to be paid.

All our work is up to a 1hr travel distance with some jobs on the doorstep and some up to 60 miles away, so in order 'for fairness' would it be reasonable to say the outward commute would form part of their paid time but they must log off when they leave the last job? Essentially splitting the travel time 50/50. We pay for travel there, they travel home 'free'.

Anything over 1hr travel would be borne by us eg. if it's a 2hr travel to job, we would pay for 3hrs of travel and they would travel for 1hr 'free'. That way they are essentially commuting up to 1/2hr each way with fuel and vehicle paid by us.

What do we think is fair?

No. Anything that counts as working time must be paid.The yard is there nominal base. Any additional time spent travelling to alternative places should be paid. So if someone leaves home at 7.45 to get to the base for 8.00, but leaves at 7.15 to get to site they would be paid from 7.30.

 

[Gareth83]

Unfortunately you are incorrect.

The latest ruling was that travel/commute time forms part of working time but does not have to be paid. So long as the contract stipulates so

https://www.peoplebusiness.co.uk/does-travelling-to-and-from-work-count-as-working-time/

https://www.crunch.co.uk/knowledge-employment/travel-and-working-times-regulations

'The yard is their nominal base' unless of course it stipulates in the contract as such

 

[Newchodge]

Unfortunately you are incorrect.

The latest ruling was that travel/commute time forms part of working time but does not have to be paid. So long as the contract stipulates so

https://www.peoplebusiness.co.uk/does-travelling-to-and-from-work-count-as-working-time/

https://www.crunch.co.uk/knowledge-employment/travel-and-working-times-regulations

'The yard is their nominal base' unless of course it stipulates in the contract as such

If you know the answer why ask the question? Good luck at the tribunal.

 

[Gareth83]

I'm asking what do we think is fair and reasonable? Why not elaborate with your response and demonstrate the legislation or the ruling that says that travel time must be paid instead?

The articles linked are quite specific:

"
Travelling To and From Work: Does It Count As Working Time?
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on the 10 September 2015 that journeys to and from work made by mobile workers with no stable base must count as working time, under the Working Time Directive (WTD). However, it is at the discretion of employer whether or not the employees will be paid for the time they spend travelling to and from work."

So why not answer and demonstrate against the contrary?

 

[Gareth83]

"

• Make sure you state in the employee’s written particulars of employment that he or she is required to work at various places."

 

[MBE2017]

Personally I think paying them for their travel time in full is fair, and would also be rewarded back to you in more loyalty and effort in doing their jobs in the long run.

Charge the client for the journeys, like your other overheads.

 

[IanSuth]

I still have a pile of rubbish in my garden as the builder has labour issues and is truggling to get here to remove it (at least the scaff has now gone). Currently tradesmen are following the £, whilst there will always be someone down the road with a fatter chequebook it is worth avoiding doing anything that may be perceived as penny pinching as people tend to assume it will filter through to future payrises/upkeep of vans etc. For example allowing them to borrow work vans if they need to do personal transport of bulky materials is a low cost high value thing for some people.

Just try and think how you would behave if you were one of the prospective tradesmen and take it from there

 

[Newchodge]

I'm asking what do we think is fair and reasonable? Why not elaborate with your response and demonstrate the legislation or the ruling that says that travel time must be paid instead?

The articles linked are quite specific:

"
Travelling To and From Work: Does It Count As Working Time?
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on the 10 September 2015 that journeys to and from work made by mobile workers with no stable base must count as working time, under the Working Time Directive (WTD). However, it is at the discretion of employer whether or not the employees will be paid for the time they spend travelling to and from work."

So why not answer and demonstrate against the contrary?

Please read your own posts.
mobile workers with no stable base you have already stated that your workers have a stable base and so this dated report is of no relevance whatsoever to your situation.

 

[AW-UK]

Not really, is it fair to expect someone to drive from say Newcastle back down to Devon on their own dime?
I wouldn't do it, if it is in their contract then they signed up for it, that is on them, but all of the jobs i've been on where I have worked on sites I have always started the clock when I leave my house, even if I go by the office I am still "on the clock" so to speak, I usually end up doing way more time than I get paid for but at the end of the day if you want your employees to look at the job as a job and not just a 8 hour day then don't take the mick.

 

[Gareth83]

It's okay to be wrong even if you are in HR Chodge...

The article I looked to and clearly referenced said if there is no stable base. Just because I have a yard or an office it does not mean that is where the front line staff operate from particularly when the contract would state something specifically like 'work at various sites within reasonable travel time of the registered office - ie. up to 1hr'

I already acknowledged in the opening post that travel time counts towards 'working time' for the 48hr ruling BUT it does not have to be paid. The total pay however for the 'working time' must be above minimum wage. As to whether they are paid to travel to work and home from work in a van supplied and fitted by the company is the question.

I've seen it many times before, if you give that type of passage as a right. They have no urgency to get to a job, they take the longer route, they take the longest route home to try and hit the overtime hours and so on.

What other industry pays you to travel to and from your house to work and give you the transport to do so?

We're not talking hours and hours of travel expected to be free, I was quite specific in my opening post of travel up to an hour would be paid for by the company, and the return trip home (up to an hour) would be borne by the employee. Considering jobs can be on the doorstep or up to 1hr away, on average they are only commuting a maximum of half hour per day to and from work.

It would probably average out around 20mins

You have simply given wrong and misleading information in your first response, I have not once said their stable base is the office headquarters.

Your example also doesn't work in that if they live an hour away from HQ but the job is only 2mins from them are they then going to pay me 58mins back? Or do they start from site?

As the saying goes, they can't have their cake and eat it. There has to be some give and take

 

[The Byre]

If you know everything better about employment law, why did you ask in the first place?

Perhaps you just wanted confirmation of what you thought you knew? I strongly suggest you look up the Dunning Kruger Effect.

 

[Gareth83]

When somebody points something out as 'fact' when of course it isn't and the original post clearly states the situation at hand then people should be called out for the non-facts to help other readers surely?

I didn't ask whether you had to pay someone for travel, neither did I ask for confirmation of what is deemed working time. My question was to find out what is fair or reasonable of the staff.

In our works discussions the existing staff who actually are on a basic contract of 8-4.30 'on site' have actually themselves said the new proposals seem fair. Make of that what you will

 

[Gareth83]

Not really, is it fair to expect someone to drive from say Newcastle back down to Devon on their own dime?
I wouldn't do it, if it is in their contract then they signed up for it, that is on them, but all of the jobs i've been on where I have worked on sites I have always started the clock when I leave my house, even if I go by the office I am still "on the clock" so to speak, I usually end up doing way more time than I get paid for but at the end of the day if you want your employees to look at the job as a job and not just a 8 hour day then don't take the mick.

I hadn't said they would travel Newcastle to Devon. Again, look at the question in hand? Our sites are up to 1hr from the main office. Therefore advising we would pay the travel to site.... But not the last 1hr home. That's completely different to your example and certainly not 'taking the mick'.

We supply vans, fuel, health insurances, good holiday pay, bonus schemes, overtime and pay for their tools.

We know other local competitors don't even give their staff half of that

 

[SillyBill]

We supply vans, fuel, health insurances, good holiday pay, bonus schemes, overtime and pay for their tools.

We know other local competitors don't even give their staff half of that

Water down some of the other benefits with inflation and then pay from the moment they leave the house and until they get home. Job done. Nets out the same to your business over time as what you pay now then, same in their pocket? My personal preference is to make wage structures and booking time as simple as possible. Not having to get calculators out or split commute costs 50:50 effectively between there and back. You know what your business can afford. It sounds like you are saying they already get it good so why pay more. If the structure is in question then hold everything back for a year or two and inflation can pay the return leg, there is their pay rise. Either you want this simplified structure or not.

 

[Gareth83]

Thanks Bill, of course simplicity is key that's what I'm trying to achieve by nailing the new contract templates. Having worked in a local authority for years I saw how the boys would milk the system:

Pay from home, they take ages to get to the job particularly by delaying time and conveniently hitting traffic. Same on way back, they'd take the scenic route and then get into overtime

Advise start at job address or builders merchants and they'd find an excuse to pick up a box of screws or something simple so they start close to home.

Start at HQ/yard they'd find a reason to dump one bag of rubbish for instance to justify ending close to home

It's a very difficult thing to manage and an extra hour each day per man soon adds up

The CIJC for instance suggest travel payments 'one way' based on mileage to job with a 39hr on site time. But nothing in the guidance when the vehicle and fuel is provided. Hence why I thought a one way travel was reasonable all things considered.

We couldn't justify 50hr paid weeks to do 40hrs on site for instance (1hr travel each way) particularly as the extra 10hrs are paid at 1.5x

That's 55hrs cost per man to get 40hrs productive time (if that) and we're providing fuel both ways.... Not really sustainable. It has to be a give and take. My wife doesn't get paid to commute 35mins each way to get place of work in the city centre for instance

 

[UKSBD]

Can you base it on your Yard?

If they are 40 minutes from the yard you would only pay them when they got to work

If they are 40 minutes from the 1st job only pay them when they get onsite, but if they are an hour from the 1st job pay them 20 minutes extra

 

[Gareth83]

Possibly, but at the moment all our tradesman are local say 10-15min travel to the yard

We are looking to locate further afield to extend the areas we cover. Hence we deem 'up to 1hr' a reasonable travel...

One of the reasons why the initial contracts advise 'any of our sites'

 

[AW-UK]

I hadn't said they would travel Newcastle to Devon. Again, look at the question in hand? Our sites are up to 1hr from the main office. Therefore advising we would pay the travel to site.... But not the last 1hr home. That's completely different to your example and certainly not 'taking the mick'.

We supply vans, fuel, health insurances, good holiday pay, bonus schemes, overtime and pay for their tools.

We know other local competitors don't even give their staff half of that

I was giving it as an example, not as a route you generally take!
But if you must be pedantic, I would as most good employers do, expect to go to the office grab supplies and pick up the vehicle and off I go, so if I use my own vehicle to get to my main POE then I would expect that to be in my own time, if I had a work vehicle at home already loaded, my time starts as soon as I start the engine as I am "working" I am on works insurance for the vehicle, I am transporting goods for a work purpose.

On my return journey, if I am to go into the office to drop equipment back or return the vehicle I would expect my paid time to stop when I got into my own car and drove home, if I drove home using the work vehicle, again, I am on a works insurance policy that does not permit me to drive outside of my working day, I would expect to be paid up till the point I turn the engine off.

If it is anything work related then it is on the clock for me I'm afraid, and that is the way most of not all of the other contractors I speak to are, maybe it depends on your contracts i.e. wording, or industry, but that is how the company I work for operates, so any company outside of this within reason is to my opinion, taking the mick.

 

[Gareth83]

"
The way we work it is the employee is paid from the moment he is picked up so say 0700 sometimes we dont get to the first job till 0830
So he is paid for traveling to the first job

But the minute the last job finishes he is stopped on the payroll

I see this as fair as its give and take

If someone works 30 minutes from there place of work there employer isn't paying them for being on the bus or train

So I see this as fair and they seem happy at that

Hope this helps

Cheers tom"

Tomp1986 posted this in a similar thread on this site. He never got ridiculed for it. And that seems to suggest more than just myself are happy with such an idea

Certainly wouldn't be in a tribunal for such discusting treatment of staff...

 

[AW-UK]

"
The way we work it is the employee is paid from the moment he is picked up so say 0700 sometimes we dont get to the first job till 0830
So he is paid for traveling to the first job

But the minute the last job finishes he is stopped on the payroll

I see this as fair as its give and take

If someone works 30 minutes from there place of work there employer isn't paying them for being on the bus or train

So I see this as fair and they seem happy at that

Hope this helps

Cheers tom"

Tomp1986 posted this in a similar thread on this site. He never got ridiculed for it. And that seems to suggest more than just myself are happy with such an idea

Certainly wouldn't be in a tribunal for such discusting treatment of staff...

Nobody is ridiculing you for anything, you asked for opinions and you got them, do with them what you wish, you don't have to agree with them, I was just stating how the company I work for and many others I have had the experience of working with operate.

If your workers have signed up to this then what's the problem? If you try and change their contracts then you might get backlash.

You have had a few replies from people who know what they are doing when it comes to employment law etc, so it's up to you if you take their advice or not, it doesn't affect us, it's your company and your staff.

 

[UKSBD]

I worked on the building for 20 years, a little different as we worked on sites most the time rather than individual places.

Usually 4 or 5 months on each sites and sites were usually within 20 miles of Yard

We always worked 8 - 5 (on site at 8 leave at 5)

One big site we were on was in same village as me, one site was 40 minutes away, it usually balanced itself out over the years.

We did have one 3 month job which was a good hour away but for that one we met up at the yard at 7:45 and went in as few vehicles as possible.

All a bit of give and take

 

[Gareth83]

Thanks TJ I think you hit the nail on the head regards to give and take. They can't expect to have a van with fuel and be able to be paid for all of the commute both way.

I think having one way travel included within the working day is more than fair? Just need a consistent approach that is easy to monitor and again easy to track/audit if required

 

[Paul Carmen]

The working day starts when they get to work, finishes when they finish. The van, fuel and insurance are a benefit to them.

Having a reasonable commute time, or mileage/local policy and paying time above that is fair. That way if you get a big contract 50 miles away then people are paid for the extra travel and you should include that in the client project costs.

Some odd responses on here. I had a company car for the best part of 15 years, with insurance and private fuel too, perk of the job, but no one ever suggested we got paid from the minute we left the house to go to work in it!

This is similar to the argument about companies trying to cut peoples pay who aren't in the office and now work from home. That's great if you paid for their commuting time in the first place, or a London waiting type allowance, if you didn't, its taking the proverbial.

Talk to your team, make sure its an open forum and that their opinion is heard. Document it, give notice if you're changing employment contracts, and if people are happy/unhappy you need to deal with it fairly and ensure it is completed in accordance with UK employment law.