Re: Time to Pay Again, Dinks!

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Went through the same thing with my employees a few years ago...so we took
the trucks away from them...and then there were more tears. Oh, well...guess
you can't have it all your way.



--
Crash Gordon
-------ouch------

<I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe>
"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3294aa002b8040c57eb454132a5cd596@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| >What kind of Mickey Mouse stuff is this? If you're in a company vehicle,
| >driving to a job site why wouldn't you be getting paid? I bet the
customer
| >is getting billed for travel time. And what's this crap about letting the
| >employee drive a company vehicle just because Brink's is magnanimous
about
| >it and now it may have to stop? Please! If Brinks wasn't making or saving
a
| >buck for Brinks in some way by doing it, it wouldn't be done in the first
| >place.
|
| I looked up the court's opinion.  I think these Brink's employees screwed
| up a good thing for their co-workers.  This was a voluntary program.
|
| As Bob pointed out, there are definite advantages for employees who live
| some distance from the shop.  By driving directly to the first job of the
| day, and driving straight home from the last job, their commuting time is
| reduced, and they don't have to spend money on personal vehicle commuting
| expenses.  In exchange, Brink's gets more work out of them.  For an
| installer who lives two blocks from the shop, there's little benefit.  But
| for an installer who lives 25 miles from the shop, it's a real benefit.
|
| Anyway, according to the Washington Supreme Court, here's the story.
| Brink's gave their techs a choice.  Techs could drive their own cars to
the
| Brink's office on their own time, pick up a company truck, and get paid
for
| all the travel time in a Brink's truck.  Or, a tech could choose the home
| dispatch program:  take the company truck home at night, pick up their
| calls by voice mail or computer, and travel to their first job (and home
| from their last job) on their own time.  They got paid for all travel time
| between jobs during the day.  If the first or last job was over 45 minutes
| from the tech's home or Brink's, the tech got paid for the excess time.
|
| A group of techs sued back in 2002, claiming Brink's should have paid them
| for the travel time under Washington law, which says that 'hours worked"
| means all hours where the employee is required to be on duty at the
| employer's premises or at a prescribed work place.
|
| The court said the employees were on duty during the drive time because
| Brink's strictly controls their use of the company trucks.  Company policy
| says the trucks can only be used for company business, and may not be used
| to run personal errands.  Non-Brink's employees are not allowed in the
| trucks.   Techs must remain available to handle other calls while driving
| to and from jobs, plus they must spend time writing down the day's calls
| and planning their route.  Company policy also requires techs to do all
| their paperwork either at a customer's home or in a company truck.
|
| Based on all that, the court ruled that the truck is their "prescribed
work
| place" and that they were on duty, and deserved to be paid.  The court
also
| awarded attorney's fees and costs.
|