Loss of WTD opt-out will hurt the poorest

I take the cynical view that all government strategies are introduced to enhance statistics, so I agree with Emma Nash’s letter (Personnel Today, 24 May).

There are many people whose standard of living is enhanced by the fact that they can work as many as 60 hours per week.

But do you think that people working overtime actually want to work all those hours? They work because they need to earn a living wage.

Many shop and production staff (my family included), not to mention temps and office workers, are often paid a low salary in comparison
to the cost of accommodation and subsistence.

By doing overtime, they bump their salaries up enough for them to save, or to meet their regular mortgage or rental payments.

They should not be expected to work long hours on a regular basis, and one hopes that if they were feeling tired they would do the odd basic week, without any obligation to their employers.

But for some organisation, far removed from the daily grind, to take the overtime option away, without considering the individual’s right to choose, is like removing bread from their mouths.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

Email(Required)

OptOut

From time to time, we will send you emails about selected products, events and services from Personnel Today and OHW+ - but you can choose to opt-out at any time. If you do not wish to receive these emails, please tick this box.

Comments

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Δ

I would urge HR, government and employers alike to look at the whole picture from all sides before jumping on any bandwagons.

Annette Smith
PA to the managing director
Peerless Europe