Working Time Regulations

In this first issue of Tip sheet for 2009 we make no apologies for concentrating on a massive issue for the RDS, we are compelled to take up most of this issue of Tip Sheet on the Working Time Regulations following the EU vote to remove the Opt-Out in December last year.

Members of the European Parliament met on the 17th December to vote on the issue of maintaining the Working Time Opt-out which, if removed would limit all workers within the EU to a 48 hour working week.

Naturally the RFU has an interest in this issue, specifically the implications on maintaining the provision of emergency fire and rescue response by RDS. In addition to this concern, there are also implications on maintaining the Flexi-duty system provided by officers.

Prior to the vote on the 17th, the RFU met with the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) on the 10th December to discuss this issue and made representations on behalf of the RDS, we also wrote to every UK MEP and provided a written submission to brief them on the implications should the opt-out be removed. This document is available on our website www.rfuonline.co.uk

Background:

In 1993 the United Kingdom won an opt-out clause allowing it not to apply the maximum 48-hour working week if a worker agrees to work longer. The EU Parliament proposes the abolition of this clause, which is used in some Member States, three years after the revised directive, enters into force.

Most MEPs feels that an annualisation of the reference period for calculating weekly working hours would allow a sufficiently flexible organisation of working time. Fifteen Member States currently exercise the opt-out.

In June 2008, EU employment and social affairs ministers reached an agreement. Under their common position of 15th September 2008, working time in the EU must be limited to 48 hours maximum unless a Member State introduces an opt-out clause and a worker decides to use that clause. For workers who opt for the derogation, the legislative text lays down a maximum of 60 hours of work a week on average over a three-month period. This can be increased to 65 hours a week on average over three months where there is no collective bargaining agreement and where the inactive period of on-call time is regarded as working time. The text also stipulates various safeguards for workers who use the opt-out clause.

Definition of on-call time as working time

The Council and Commission introduced the ideas of "active" on-call time (a period during which the worker must be available at the workplace in order to work when required by the employer) and "inactive" on-call time (a period when the worker is on call but is not required by his employer to work).

In its common position the Council says that inactive on-call time should not count as working time unless otherwise decided by national law or by agreement between employers' and employees' representatives in accordance with national law.

At its second-reading vote, the Parliament reiterated its position that any period of on-call time, including inactive time, is to count as working time. However, inactive on-call periods can be calculated in a specific way for the purposes of complying with the maximum weekly average working time.

Members of the TUC in conjunction with the ETUC approve of this position and attended a rally to lobby the EU to vote to remove the opt-out. A point worth noting is that when agreement was reached in June 2008, UK labour MEPs defied the UK government by voting with the EU socialist parties to remove the opt-out which led to the debate on the 17th December. MEPs voted in favour of scrapping the opt-out by 421 votes to 273.

To summarise, this is by far the biggest threat to emergency cover provided by RDS that the UK has ever seen.

Has the RFU any support in this campaign?

The UK government realises the effect that removal of the Opt-Out would have on UK business and importantly its workers. The RFU will continue to lobby BERR and others to maintain this position.
We are also heartened by the support which we have received from a number of UK MEPs who did take the time to respond to register their support;

Syed Kamall Conservative MEP for London – “Conservatives will be calling on Gordon Brown to give no ground and, as a majority of EU member states use the opt-out, we hope the council will block the deal - effectively meaning the opt-out is retained by default. I was interested to hear from you as a retained firefighter, since I received an email from an fbu email address arguing for me to support the removal of the UK opt-out.”

Liberal Democrat Employment Spokesperson in the European Parliament Liz Lynne MEP. said:

"I believe we should maintain the individual opt-out for the sake of European competitiveness, as well as for less well paid workers who rely on the opt-out to make up earnings through overtime.
What needs to be done is to make sure that the opt-out is truly voluntary, and protects the best interests of workers. My amendments would have provided stringent conditions, to make sure workers would not have to opt-out of the directive against their wishes.
We have another chance to keep the opt-out when it is voted on by the whole parliament in May. However, Labour MEPs look likely to vote with their Socialist colleagues again and against the UK Government line in opposing the opt-out. I hope they will now reflect on the damage their position will do to the British economy especially in agriculture, tourism and catering."

Brian Adam MSP Aberdeen North – ”SNP MEPs support the RFU position and voted to retain the opt-out after a compromise proposal was defeated and I agree with the position my European colleagues have taken”

Tom Wise MEP – “Dear Mr Barton, I am wholly behind you in this”

Philip Bushill-Matthews MEP – “The fight goes on”

Traditional Unionist MEP Jim Allister: - "I utterly condemn the decision of the European Parliament today to reject the British opt-out on the Working Time Directive as unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of the UK.

The Council of Ministers had agreed a com mon position which preserved the UK's right to decide for itself how many hours its workers might work each week. This common position was defeated today in the Parliament, forcing a showdown with the Council. It is imperative that the UK stands its ground.

It is intolerable that by Brussels diktat British workers should be denied the right to work over 48 hours per week. At a stroke this would rob many workers of the right to work overtime and puts sectors such as transport and agriculture in an intolerable position.

I will continue to lobby strongly in support of retention of our opt-out."

Godfrey Bloom UKIP – “You have my complete support and sympathy”.

Our understanding is that although the majority of Labour MEPs voted to axe it, (in defiance of the Prime Minister) the Green party also voted to remove the opt-out. UKIP, LD and Conservatives voted against and will campaign against its removal, their doing so can only aid our cause during the conciliation process which will take place over the coming 3 years.

It is vitally important that those employed on the RDS take heed of this issue, DO NOT FOR ONE MINUTE ignore this in the vain hope that the problem will go away, ‘it won’t happen’ etc

The vote on the 17th was the culmination of many years of work by the European Trades Union Congress (ETUC) to remove the Opt-Out. If you are a member of a TUC affiliated Union within your primary employment, then this is its position.

What can I do as a member of the RDS?
The time has come for you to sit and think about how important it is for you to continue as a retained firefighter. If as we hope, you support our campaign, please recognise that you might well receive other information to suggest that all will be well, this would be a serious mistake.

The European elections are taking place in June, this is the best opportunity to lobby your MEP, whose details will be on our website and use the template letter also on the site to write and ask what his/her position is on this issue. The reply you receive will certainly remove any doubt and we advise you to use your vote accordingly.

Further information will be provided in due course.

On-Call Insurance: - In December 2008 we wrote to all members to advise them of the introduction of our On-Call Insurance scheme, an extremely cost effective insurance package to include accidental injury, death and illness insurance, designed specifically for RDS. A snap shot of the benefits is listed below.

FAQs

RDS – WDS Migration

Our member’s dissatisfaction with the arrangements to allow Migration from RDS to WDS is growing on a daily basis; we have a growing list of members who rightly feel disenfranchised when they apply for wholetime posts and have their applications refused. This issue has now reached the stage where we have had no option but to commence legal intervention to challenge the failures and unfairness in the system on our member’s behalf. It is a matter of absolute fact that ‘A firefighter is a firefighter’ is nothing more than a convenient buzz word to use for effect when the opportunity suits. If this phrase actually means what it says then a great deal of catching up is urgently needed. If this wasn’t enough, we also have members who remain on development rates of pay mainly because the means to confirm competence doesn’t yet exist!! We shall keep members informed on any progress in the next issue of the Tip Sheet. If you’d like to be included on our circulation list for future electronic mailings please go to our website and sign up.