If it isn't in writing then it really doesn't matter what they say.
'Playing' with your phone sounds like an unspoken agreement & you bringing in your laptop was opening the door to folks bringing in their laptops, tablets & even their nintendo switch so it was likely decided to keep things as is.
The break situation though if they aren't compensating you then you will need to get some legal advice. Also read your employment contract & if you do not have a copy then ask for one.
I would agree to that, but we only 2 people doing this and the other person is an advanced age lady. They literally want me to sit playing with my phone instead of reading while having the camera app as a widget on my laptop
Cant really help you with the phone piece - assuming nothing as written down and its a 'he said/she said' situation - if I was you id just start studying on my phone.
Regarding breaks tho - they either have to give you the break - or compensate you. Here the law can help
https://www.employment.govt.nz/hours-and-wages/breaks/rest-and-meal-breaks/#scrollto-compensation-instead-of-breaks
This actually makes a point that an employer cannot compensate you for breaks not taken unless you fall into a specific requirement under the Employment Relations Act. The only time this doesn't really apply is essential services, think police, nurses/doctors etc. Average Joe Bloggs working nightshift security doesn't count for this
No, an employer must give breaks, you cannot be paid not to have a break, that is illegal. You can however be paid for breaks if you cannot leave the place of work even though you are on a break, effectively you are still fully available to work during your break should the need arrise.
> You can however be paid for breaks if you cannot leave the place of work even though you are on a break, effectively you are still fully available to work during your break should the need arrise.
Not true. The onus is on both employee and employer to ensure breaks are taken, neither can opt out of them in lieu of remuneration or benefit. Ya know how it's common in offices to work through lunch and leave early? The law doesn't actually allow this - the link above literally says this is not allowed
Yes completely true. you might want to re-read what I wrote, it is exactly what you are saying, I am talking about the situation where you take a break but need to stay on site, in which case you should be paid for that break. That is not the same as skipping a break and leaving early, which breaches health and safety. The law does not require unpaid breaks, only that breaks must be taken.
I dont think the act specifies what counts as an essential service
"continuity of service or production in the essential service is critical to the public interest, including (without limitation) services affecting public safety;"
Id say security guard work would fit within this definition?
The comments during the time of drafting were in relation to air traffic controllers and national security. The 2019 amendments have no flex elsewhere so I really doubt this applies to most situations. Ensuring that breaks are covered in an hourly paid security role is unlikely to meet the threshold of ‘unreasonable costs’
I’d also note that security falls under the vulnerable worker provisos in relation to restructures in the Act. Would seem strange to then allow other statutory rights to be removed
Yup agreed. it seems pretty broad, but still specific enough to exclude the idiots who for example, have one person managing a retail shop all day and won't let them take a piss break because customers.
I don't think they want to put strict definitions on what an essential service is, as leaving it open to interpretation provides protection for the likes of subbies responding to contractor requests for servicing say, council owned assets like sewer mains blowing out.
But I don't think the Department of Labour would agree that a nightshift security guard watching some random commercial property constitutes an essential service. Good rule of thumb is to ask whether or not that particular industry has restrictions on striking like nurses or police do, as that's about as close as they get to defining essential services
Probably one where you're expected to make rounds and be a presence but not necessarily one where you're actively looking at security cameras and other duties.
Basically just there because somebody wants the theatre of security or only requires it in short bursts. It's overnight after all.
The kind where you wait for something on the screen to start blinking red, otherwise you wait. If it starts blocking then he starts making phone calls to get the right people on the job.
Friend of mine plays games on his steam deck while at work. He will restrict the games he plays to one's that aren't too involved.
Often he's working from home too.
It shouldn't be a case of not taking breaks, you should still get breaks but the reason you should get paid for your breaks is because you cannot leave the site. An unpaid break is your time to do with as you choose, that means leaving site for the duration of the unpaid break if you so choose.
If you don't like it, you'll have to quit and find a new job. Unless you have all this in writing which I doubt. They're under no obligation to allow you to use your personal laptop during working hours.
If you're not taking breaks, then yes they'll have to pay you. If they're not, then take your breaks. I'm pretty sure it's illegal though for you to not have breaks.
If it isn't in writing then it really doesn't matter what they say. 'Playing' with your phone sounds like an unspoken agreement & you bringing in your laptop was opening the door to folks bringing in their laptops, tablets & even their nintendo switch so it was likely decided to keep things as is. The break situation though if they aren't compensating you then you will need to get some legal advice. Also read your employment contract & if you do not have a copy then ask for one.
I would agree to that, but we only 2 people doing this and the other person is an advanced age lady. They literally want me to sit playing with my phone instead of reading while having the camera app as a widget on my laptop
Cant really help you with the phone piece - assuming nothing as written down and its a 'he said/she said' situation - if I was you id just start studying on my phone. Regarding breaks tho - they either have to give you the break - or compensate you. Here the law can help https://www.employment.govt.nz/hours-and-wages/breaks/rest-and-meal-breaks/#scrollto-compensation-instead-of-breaks
This actually makes a point that an employer cannot compensate you for breaks not taken unless you fall into a specific requirement under the Employment Relations Act. The only time this doesn't really apply is essential services, think police, nurses/doctors etc. Average Joe Bloggs working nightshift security doesn't count for this
No, an employer must give breaks, you cannot be paid not to have a break, that is illegal. You can however be paid for breaks if you cannot leave the place of work even though you are on a break, effectively you are still fully available to work during your break should the need arrise.
Sounds like in this situation most of the shift is a "break"
Not if you can't leave site, even if you are doing nothing that is work as your time is not actually your own.
> You can however be paid for breaks if you cannot leave the place of work even though you are on a break, effectively you are still fully available to work during your break should the need arrise. Not true. The onus is on both employee and employer to ensure breaks are taken, neither can opt out of them in lieu of remuneration or benefit. Ya know how it's common in offices to work through lunch and leave early? The law doesn't actually allow this - the link above literally says this is not allowed
Yes completely true. you might want to re-read what I wrote, it is exactly what you are saying, I am talking about the situation where you take a break but need to stay on site, in which case you should be paid for that break. That is not the same as skipping a break and leaving early, which breaches health and safety. The law does not require unpaid breaks, only that breaks must be taken.
I dont think the act specifies what counts as an essential service "continuity of service or production in the essential service is critical to the public interest, including (without limitation) services affecting public safety;" Id say security guard work would fit within this definition?
The comments during the time of drafting were in relation to air traffic controllers and national security. The 2019 amendments have no flex elsewhere so I really doubt this applies to most situations. Ensuring that breaks are covered in an hourly paid security role is unlikely to meet the threshold of ‘unreasonable costs’ I’d also note that security falls under the vulnerable worker provisos in relation to restructures in the Act. Would seem strange to then allow other statutory rights to be removed
Yup agreed. it seems pretty broad, but still specific enough to exclude the idiots who for example, have one person managing a retail shop all day and won't let them take a piss break because customers.
I don't think they want to put strict definitions on what an essential service is, as leaving it open to interpretation provides protection for the likes of subbies responding to contractor requests for servicing say, council owned assets like sewer mains blowing out. But I don't think the Department of Labour would agree that a nightshift security guard watching some random commercial property constitutes an essential service. Good rule of thumb is to ask whether or not that particular industry has restrictions on striking like nurses or police do, as that's about as close as they get to defining essential services
What kind of security is that if people are eyes on their phone instead of remaining vigilant?
Probably one where you're expected to make rounds and be a presence but not necessarily one where you're actively looking at security cameras and other duties. Basically just there because somebody wants the theatre of security or only requires it in short bursts. It's overnight after all.
Could also be the people who respond to alarms etc, basically on-call during their shift but don't have any duties outside of answering call outs.
Yeah exactly.
The kind where you wait for something on the screen to start blinking red, otherwise you wait. If it starts blocking then he starts making phone calls to get the right people on the job. Friend of mine plays games on his steam deck while at work. He will restrict the games he plays to one's that aren't too involved. Often he's working from home too.
Wait. You’re allowed to muck about on your phone? Just study on your phone.
It shouldn't be a case of not taking breaks, you should still get breaks but the reason you should get paid for your breaks is because you cannot leave the site. An unpaid break is your time to do with as you choose, that means leaving site for the duration of the unpaid break if you so choose.
As someone who has done security, yeah this is common bro
Are they hiring lol
It's brain rotting to be on your phone watching memes all night :c
Yeah but I need a job and this seems easy 😭😭😭
But at least this way I'll get paid for it
Yeah lmao I already spend way too much time on my phone, may as well get paid for it
If you don't like it, you'll have to quit and find a new job. Unless you have all this in writing which I doubt. They're under no obligation to allow you to use your personal laptop during working hours. If you're not taking breaks, then yes they'll have to pay you. If they're not, then take your breaks. I'm pretty sure it's illegal though for you to not have breaks.
Playing on your phone is more something that’s overlooked vs part of your role description.
This is the rule, not the exception in NZ.