Does this person know what a break is? Not keeping any momentum going is exactly the point of it. Resting regenerates your mental capacities. A lunch break is not just for calorie intake.
Don’t get it twisted - they only intervened because it would be a bad look if word got out. HR exists to protect the company, not the individual employees
Well, it exists to smooth over friction between staff in order to maximize profits.
Sometimes that means telling a middle-manager to stfu. Sometimes it means pulling up a bunch of bullshit to justify a firing “with cause”. Sometimes it just means putting down a notice of events in a registry that nobody will ever read, on the off chance it needs to be recalled in an employment lawsuit.
Boy did I learn that the hard way. My hr also was my manager and I discussed too many details of my life during shifts. She moved me to a different store.
My boss and I always work through lunch and end up working after-hours.
We got a new, young person right out of college in the office, and my boss and I have been very clear that she is not expected to work extra or skip lunch, and not to use us as examples. And if other employees mention that she doesn’t work as much as we do, we correct them and explain that she’s the one doing things right and not us.
We want the next generation to be better than us when it comes to work-life balance.
It’s good what you’re doing, but I believe that if you want people to do better in work-life balance, the change will have to start with you. If it doesn’t, I’m fairly certain that young people will start to emulate your work habits either out of shame, guilt or a misguided image of what the path to success looks like.
Nobody is gonna see mee and think “sucess”, lol.
Edit: We’ve also been getting the City to hire us new people to help with that. We’re posting for my assistant this month, so I won’t be so bogged down in administrative paperwork stuff and can focus more on technical analysis, meetings, and using my vacation and comp time instead of letting it remain an unfunded liability for the city if I decide to quit.
The mayor realized how overworked we were when he finally got Council to let us hire the new person in January and we were still super busy all day. We explained that instead of working 60 hours a week we were now working like 50. So he’s getting us more people.
Be the team leader you wish you had. Hell yes.
Had a boss with the same attitude. He loved his vacation ski trips and would make us stay “off the clock” and not work when off.
I carry the same attitude, I’ll figure it out of necessary if someone is off unless it’s a true emergency (almost never is).
“I didn’t tell them they couldn’t eat! I just implied that them not eating at their desk will be punished!”
I used to eat at my desk, until I read research that showed you are more productive when you take a real break, time away from the work context, etc. Now I’m in a position to exploit a team of people by making them take a real break, too. Same with vacation, I’ve had to chew people out for checking in on work when they’re meant to be optimizing their brains.
Research also shows that walking breaks, and 7 hour work days help total productivity, so I’m trying to make those happen… But corporate culture is strongly indoctrinated into the “I spent more time on it, there must be more accomplished” cult… Even though what we produce is code. Sigh.
For years I had asked people to reach out on my vacation because I thought it would keep things from piling up and give me a less stressful return. This past year they actually were calling me everyday and while it felt cool to feel needed when I came back I did not have the same energy I had when they wouldn’t call. Like I never took the vacation in the first place.
Take real time off people. Those moments of rejuvenation matter.
I work through lunch so I can get off earlier, but I also work from home
Is it a paid lunch? I’m willing to do a little work if it makes my life better. Is it unpaid? Not only am I not working, if you interrupt my lunch and cause my food to be one minute less fresh, you are replacing my lunch on your time and expense.
I used to do the eat at my desk thing too because I was so overloaded with tasks and I would just eat for 10 min and keep working. It took me far too long to realize I had been allowing myself to be taken advantage of, especially given that my salary was far lower than the market rate. Don’t be past me… take your lunch, it’s yours!
I ate at my desk because I didn’t want to interact with most of my coworkers in the breakroom. I had my PC locked so I was out of contact the whole time though.
There were some positive aspects of eating at my desk for sure. Not needing to talk to interact with the large amount of in the cafeteria as well as not losing my parking spot if I left to lunch in the middle of the day were some reasons.
Several months ago my manager wanted us to track our time throughout the day. Part of it was to assist with load balancing where if person A spends 80% of their time doing reports and doesn’t have time for other stuff while person B only does 25% reports then some can be shifted. But the bigger portion was because Person C pretty much did fuck-all all day and played on their phone, but that’s beside the point.
After about 7 months the manager started to phase it out and said we don’t need to. Overall I didn’t mind because it helped me track the day and keep me a little more engaged. But the biggest reason I do it is to better track and manage my true time. If I start the day a little early and don’t take a full 30 minute lunch, you bet your ass I’m slipping out a little early!
New hire knows what he is doing based.
One hour ? In France it is customary for lunch break to be TWO hours, and I won’t stand for anything less.
In the US, it is extremely common for people to only get a half an hour, and not even a full hour, and it’s usually unpaid.
EDIT: Oh, and I left out the best part. At many jobs it doesn’t count toward your work hours either, so you work an eight and a half hour day or a nine hour day because you got your lunch break.
Yeah I take half an hour because it’s unpaid. Losing money on the already shit wage they give me
I start at 8, do 30ish minutes of lunch and am out at 430. You get what you get
And that’s the horseshit part. Now you’re at eight and a half hours of work time because they’re not paying you for lunch so you got to make up that extra 30 minutes.
And I say eight and a half hours because when you have a 30 minute lunch it’s hard to actually leave the building to go get something to eat.
Oh I definitely don’t work when I eat. And if I do I absolutely do not track it as lunch.
Where does a break count towards work hours?
Seems completely unlogical to me.
Break is you-time not company-time.Places in the U.S. even used to have paid lunch. Now the only way you get a paid lunch is if your salary.
Seems weird to me.
Paid vacation is more or less the same though.Both seem weird.
Though I am not complaining about it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s time I can’t be doing things I’d like to be, because It’s in the middle of a workday.
The company wants me to pay it for any inconvenience I cause it, the same should apply in the other direction. I already give up time for nothing in the commute they insist on in order to validate the existence of middle management and their investment in real estate, you want me to take the break I biologically need to be effective at work as unpaid too?
Shill harder.
Doesnt matter and I am not shilling.
I can go home and do stuff at home I can do in my free time the same way I can on a free/vacation day.
The workplace accomodates recovery/sustenance time to refuel your body to do more stuff.
If you skip break to run errands instead of doing it after work, that’s a you-problem.
Depends on the workplace. Where I am I have a full hour. A relative only 45min or something like that.
In my case we had half-hour lunch and two 15-minute breaks throughout the day for 1 hour total.
It’s not really (hasn’t been since the 70s). But you are expected to take an hour, and eating at your desk is typically frowned upon (there are exceptions, we have toxic places too).
I want to see part 2 OP. How could you do this to me?
work culture
🤢
I thought they meant the stuff growing behind the fridge.
I know what both words mean apart, together? It just doesn’t make sense. Like Microsoft Works.
HR is not your friend. Do not go complain to HR. It will almost always bite you in the ass. They are there to protect the upper management and don’t give a fuck about doing the right thing
Man, this isn’t always true.
At least not in civilised world… maybe US is such a shithole but HR can do a lot of good when the manager is shit at their job.
Lemmy is basically site wide antiwork subreddit so I’m not surprised.
In northern Europe this is correct. HR is absolutely the employers/Companys/organisations tool. They may be helpful if they see a manager is actually harmful to the employer/company, but that is rarely the case unless the manager has done something actually forbidden and it is documented. As an employee you’re far better off contacting your union representative.
Source: Married to an HR specialist.
I can only speak from my US perspective, but here OP is correct. If you complain to HR, they will say whatever they legally can to placate you in the moment, but they will also start a file and collaborate with your manager to begin building a case for dismissal. In the US, you’re always better off applying for a new job than talking to HR about a problem.
maybe US is such a shithole but HR can do a lot of good when the manager is shit at their job.
Unless said manager is either a friend of the higher up or banged the boss (which is only how they got the job to begin with)
They are not your friend but they are also not your manager’s friend. They’re there to protect the corporation, the CEO and the board. If your manager is doing something that can get the company in legal trouble then HR can absolutely shed the manager. Especially if you demonstrate that you’re building a solid case (e.g. documenting each incident while memory is fresh).
Basically you go to HR when you can show them that their interests and yours align against a common enemy, some guy who’s going to get the company Sued if they don’t step in
Well, it really depends on how strong your areas labour laws are. HR will protect the company from violating labour laws and being sued/fined and the HR people might be happy to help you, but in the end you don’t really matter. All they’re doing is protecting the company.
Protecting the company also means shielding it from predatory and abusive managers who generate massive class-action lawsuits, and bad PR.
Depends. I’ve thought of it as a way to document for a lawsuit, especially if they don’t fix a real problem.
Yeah, if shit is already sideways, HR can end up being a record keeper for you, and they are on the company’s side, so if they said it happened, it is in the best possible light for the company as is, and if that still looks bad… well
Correct. HR is not your friend and they are there to make sure that the company is not liable for any damages. If you are in the rare position where upper management is not your opponent and whatever shit is happening can float up to them, then HR can be used as a weapon.
Entirely dependant on the company culture, and the legal protections for workers. It isnt that simple.
The only reason HR would ever protect you is if not protecting you would be more damaging to the company. HR protects the company.
Sometimes they are there to protect upper management from the liability of employing an idiot in lower management.
HR is not your friend, or your bosses friend. HR doesn’t care about your manager, either. Documentation can be a way to stabilize things when other options won’t work.
HR recorded my sexism complaint against an old manager. Got me moved to a better team at least
But did your manager face any consequences?
She was moved to a non-managerial role
HR is not your friend when you’re the asshole, that’s for sure.
first year i let my vacation time build up, the company told me not to do it again. guessing they arent real happy with the sudden large cash outlay
I’ve been arguing with my HR department for 13 years. How can I accrue vacation each week, use my vacation in the same year I earn it? If my last earned vacation doesn’t stay until the last period expires I December, I can’t use my vacation…
It’s frustrating trying to explain the rules to them and not understand.
Much like that old clip about someone trying to explain their data charges to the ISP customer service rep
my company created the rule that if you didn’t use the year’s accrued vacation, come jan 1 of the following year it went away. no stacking
You should accrue vacation this year, for next year. Starting Jan 1, hire date, or whatever year end/beginning is chosen. Then you should have the entirety to take during that second year on Jan 1.
My company seems to think that when I accrue my vacation on December 31 I should have used it already
shoulda/coulda/woulda is not part of my company’s policy. its either do or do not. do not and you never will
Lots of companies have use it or lose it policies. I have been working about 40 years and I have never been able to bank paid time off from year to year.
Based new-hire.
I work from home for past 12 years but prior when I was in the office I would bring in a large thick old navy hoody and a small travel pillow. I would put my headphones on, my hoody over that and lean my head down on the pillow and nap.
It’s my hour.
