In the US, I worked for a consulting group in the bay area (Fremont). There was a big discussion about whether or not we were on the clock while driving to client sites, because some people wanted to live in Tracy and other people closer to the office, and the client sites were all over the place. So how to calculate this?<p>One way to do it was just to say you have to show up to the the Fremont office before going anywhere ('fixed office'), but this can be wasteful for everyone, since the client site can be in the opposite direction of the office. The final agreement was that the time it would have taken you to get to/from the office was your own time, and from then on you're on the clock and paid.<p>So if you live next to the office and get sent somewhere, your whole commute time to that place is paid. If you want to live in Tracy and drive an hour into work, that's ok, but your commute to the client site is only paid if it's longer than an hour or so. If you had to go to two client sites in a single day, the time between the client sites was always paid.<p>Nobody really had any idea if this was legal or not, but all of the consultants agreed it was very fair.
The article's headline is not in line with the ruling of course, but it's not even what most people in this thread are assuming. The ECJ's rulings are to be interpreted very narrowly. In this specific circumstance, the company <i>closed an office</i> after which people had longer commutes. So this ruling in no shape or form means that people who took a job with a certain commute now all of a sudden will be paid for that commute! It's only the people where, through the choice of the employer, the commute has become longer, who can use this as a precedent. Precedent case facts matter a lot!
> Time spent travelling to and from first and last appointments by workers without a <i>fixed office</i> should be regarded as working time, the European Court of Justice has ruled<p>Oh well.
The best thing about being a consultant and running your own business is that every expense or spent time around work is considered WORK. As a basic employee in the US, you never get these sort of benefits and write-offs. When I hear people commuting 1 hour to work, that means they work 50 hours a week (assuming a 40 hours at the office). Their hourly rate is effectively much lower.
I guess this should also apply to work trips then? I knew one guy who would only book a flight from 9am on Monday mornings, rather than being pressured into Sunday night or sillyAM Monday morning.<p>When I told other people who travel for work abot this the response was pretty much that he should be fired.
Tangential, but related to the headline:<p>In China, if an employee has an accident on the way to work, the employer is required to provide care and compensation (not liability compensation, just regular employee compensation) just as if the accident had happened in the workplace.<p>This ruling was made in 2013.
I'm a bit confused how they claim this has no effect on UK minimum wage workers.<p>If that travel time counts towards my 48 hours max working hours why doesn't it also count as time I should be paid for?
Start the autonomous car, let it send a "punch the clock" event to work.<p>Status:
1) Remote
2) in office
3) working, in route?<p>Additionally, only accept meetings when status is 3).
This is for people without fixed offices eg travelling salespeople etc. This is not saying your daily commute is work. The title of this submission is very misleading
So... for <i>some</i> people, the work day now starts as soon as they leave the house. Now those with a "fixed office" can feel they are being hard done by... I have a feeling we started sliding down a slippery slope here.
I wonder if Europeans see the vicious circle they are in.<p>Step 1: More job regulations.<p>Step 2: Employees cost more and are harder to get rid of; Businesses less inclined to hire.<p>Step 3: Jobs are hard to get, so employees ask for more security from the government.<p>Repeat.