Should People be paid for being "On Call?"

[Zkribbler]

A ruling just came down from our Court of Appeal, saying that employees who are "on call" are not entitlted to be paid.

A couple who managed a residential complex had to be "on call" during specified hours, "on call" meaning within earshot of alarm systems and the telephone. But for this one restriction, the couple was free to do what they liked while on call: post on Poly, dance naked in the livingroom, whatever. If they were called into service for some emergency, then they were paid.

I can see the employer's point of view, not wanting to pay them when no services were being performed.

But I can also see the employees' point of view, describing their "on call" times as being under house arrest.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

They shouldn't be paid for being on-call. But if called, they should either be paid overtime/shift differential wages.

[snoopy369]

If they are required to be in a particular location, then they should be paid. If they are not (can go anywhere and just keep the cell phone turned on), then they should not be paid. However, in general, on-call employees IMO should be salaried in some form so to make this moot. Certainly there should be compensation of some form for 'work' in any form.

[Proteus_MST]

IMHO they should be paid.

Being on call rstricts your freedom of actions/movement as you aren´t free to go everywhere or do anyting you want to do (you wouldn´t be able to drink too much alcohol for example, as this would keep you from performing proplery when called and, especially in the case of the couple mentioned in the couple mentioned in the OP, they wouldn´t be able to go out (into a cinema or shopping for example), as they would have to be near the alarm).

So, even though they shouldn´t get the full amount of money they would get when caled upon, they should at least get a certain percentasge of it when on call (for example anywhere between 10-50% of the hourly wages for every hour on call)

[SlowwHand]

They can't go anywhere, so essentially they're working. Another dumbass law.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
They can't go anywhere, so essentially they're working. Another dumbass law.

Yes so inmates are also working. Please. Being unable to booze up and go to Jamaca does not constitute working unless you are a communist.

[Ninot]

I think it would be nice, but it's only a dream to me

[Jaguar]

Shouldn't this just be up to individuals when they make decisions about hiring/taking jobs?

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


Yes so inmates are also working. Please. Being unable to booze up and go to Jamaca does not constitute working unless you are a communist.

You make some of the most retarded comparisons possible.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
They can't go anywhere, so essentially they're working. Another dumbass law.

I agree with Sloww.

[Ben Kenobi]

Don't see why they shouldn't get something, especially in emergency services when you might get calls at all times of the night.

[Richelieu]

I'm on call for a week every 4 weeks. I get paid 1.8 hours extra per day during the week and 2 hours extra over the weekend. It's good money and i rarely get called, but on the other hand i can't go out of town, have to be able to get back to my laptop and on the VPN within 30 minutes of getting paged and within 1 hour drive of the office.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
They can't go anywhere, so essentially they're working. Another dumbass law.

Based on Zkribbler's description, it's not a law; it's the absence of a law. There's a private contract to work between employer and employee which contains this condition; since both have entered into the contract freely, the court seems to have decided that government has no business sticking its nose in.

[SlowwHand]

Re: Should People be paid for being "On Call?"

Originally posted by Zkribbler
A ruling just came down from our Court of Appeal, saying that employees who are "on call" are not entitlted to be paid.

A couple who managed a residential complex had to be "on call" during specified hours, "on call" meaning within earshot of alarm systems and the telephone. But for this one restriction, the couple was free to do what they liked while on call: post on Poly, dance naked in the livingroom, whatever. If they were called into service for some emergency, then they were paid.

I can see the employer's point of view, not wanting to pay them when no services were being performed.

But I can also see the employees' point of view, describing their "on call" times as being under house arrest.

Maybe you should read it agan. I would assume that consumption of alcohol or other substances would be a mandated inftaction. On Call means means to be ready.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Re: Re: Should People be paid for being "On Call?"

Originally posted by SlowwHand


Maybe you should read it agan. I would assume that consumption of alcohol or other substances would be a mandated inftaction. On Call means means to be ready.

Right. But there's no law; it sounds like it's a private contract.