Employment contract questions

[mid_gen]

I've worked 37.5 hour weeks, with core hours of 1000-1600 for the past ten years or more, at various employers....I'd assumed it was pretty standard in the tech world these days.

I typically work 0800-1600. In my current job, core hours on a Friday are just 1000-1200, so you can do a few extra hours in the week and knock off early Friday.

 

[dowie]

I presume his old role only stipulated a 30 minute lunch break, so he's looking at it in the way of having to work an extra 2.5 hours a week, but also take an extra 2.5 hour break during the week.

But the break is irrelevant if he's working from home, he also gets a several-hour break after 6pm until the next day starts... even if he *has* to take a 1-hour break for lunch and he's worried about studying he can still just spend 30 minutes of that time having a break and the other 30 mins doing a bit of studying, it's not something he needs to negotiate. Why does it matter if he gets in 30 mins of study at lunch rather than say finishing at 5:30 instead of 6 to get 30 more minutes of study in the evening... it's trivial.

In reality, there will probably be deadlines and variable levels of busy-ness/pressure and the same tasks will be set/things expected of him regardless.

I can see negotiating for a day or two off per week for study and doing something as a job share if they can facilitate that - then you're officially "part time" and expectations may well change, but minor adjustments in working patterns when they're already specifying no overtime in advance is likely pointless as the official working hours are likely expected to be flexible in the first place.

 

[dowie]

I've worked 37.5 hour weeks, with core hours of 1000-1600 for the past ten years or more, at various employers....I'd assumed it was pretty standard in the tech world these days.

I typically work 0800-1600. In my current job, core hours on a Friday are just 1000-1200, so you can do a few extra hours in the week and knock off early Friday.

It is standard, on paper. Weren't you in Germany though? I've spent a few weeks at a time in European offices and it was a bit of a different culture where people did tend to clock off at exactly 5pm (France especially).

But surely you've heard of things like crunch time in the games industry?

Likewise finance - that can certainly have long hours though that can also depend on where you sit... some back-office IT function less so, something closer to the money perhaps more so.

 

[HangTime]

As for the contracted hours, I'm thinking of shooting off an email to try renegotiate it down to 9-5 (With a salary adjustment downwards of course) any advice on the best way to try approach this?

I missed this bit first time around. Negotiating down with a salary adjustment is a bad idea because it won't actually change the amount of work you are expected to do as a programmer. It will just mean you get paid less money for it. When I had a 35hr week I actually wanted to do this the other way round, change to a 40hr week with a salary adjustment as 35hrs wasn't enough time to get everything done, but obviously there's little in it for the employer.

One sentiment I've seen on threads here in the past is "i dOnT wORk FoR fReE".

I'm not quite sure why people carry over some hourly work mentality to it when there is a lot more $$$ on offer for a developer/software engineer

Yeah you have to weigh up what you are earning. It's arguably better to get paid £100k and work some 'free' hours every now and then rather than get paid £50k and finish at 5pm on the dot every day.
Some people might respond with "well I earn £100k and never work a minute past my allotted finish time" but that's missing the point, maybe there is a job paying £200k but they might be expected to put in the odd free hour.

 

[dowie]

Yeah you have to weigh up what you are earning. It's arguably better to get paid £100k and work some 'free' hours every now and then rather than get paid £50k and finish at 5pm on the dot every day.
Some people might respond with "well I earn £100k and never work a minute past my allotted finish time" but that's missing the point, maybe there is a job paying £200k but they might be expected to put in the odd free hour.

There are also things like perception and performance to consider. The former is probably more important in the office, if everyone tends to work a bit later and is quite busy then the new grad/new junior developer/analyst/whatever clocking off at exactly Xpm because he/she doesn't 'work for free" then the initial perception of that person could well be pretty poor.

The latter is also an issue, most people are going to be struggling when new and will probably be late with stuff but being a union guy type and leaving early on top of not meeting your deadlines or submitting stuff that's getting rejected and needs more work is going to lead to poor performance vs others who put a bit more effort in to get stuff finished properly.

It's not so much your pay at that time but your bonus, your pay rise and your potential for progression that need to be considered... also your general reputation with coworkers... they'll generally want to refer good people to their new employers.

Of course, if you turn out to be a rockstar at your job and you're always getting stuff done on time, always helping people and get a good rep then you don't need to worry (it works both ways, you're not paid by the hour so if you're getting the work done then... why not have a long lunch break on a Friday etc..), but it's probably better for a new employee to establish that first rather than start off clocking off at exactly 5pm or 6pm or whatever when they're just settling in.

 

[Lopéz]

I've worked 37.5 hour weeks, with core hours of 1000-1600 for the past ten years or more, at various employers....I'd assumed it was pretty standard in the tech world these days.

I typically work 0800-1600. In my current job, core hours on a Friday are just 1000-1200, so you can do a few extra hours in the week and knock off early Friday.

Here in Austria it's stipulated by a collective bargaining agreement (along with minimum salary). IT professional roles here are 38.5 hours under that agreement.

In the UK I worked 40 and then 37.5 and then back up to 40 following an acquisition and subsequent new terms.

 

[HangTime]

If you end up working somewhere where everyone is working later and that is necessary to get the work done then that's indicative of a workforce that is either underperforming, inefficient or overworked. I mean if I'm taking a job on X hours a week but the reality is it needs X+5 to get the normal workload done (never mind crunch workload) then I expect it to be paying well or the base hours are on the lower end (35). If I was taking a low paid role then I'd be a bit wary of this culture where presenteeism is expected because the people on 3x my salary are putting extra hours in. Sticking around late might improve my reputation but I'd want that to be tied to something tangible like a project deadline not just a standard day in the office. There's an element of toxicity that comes into it because if you have people pulling long hours on a regular basis then it can lead to others feeling guilty and also put pressure on managers to deal with that, address burnout issues etc.

Clocking off on time used to be quite a big deal for me due to commuting impacts. Leaving the office 5min late might mean getting home 40min later due to missing a train, sometimes compounded by missed connections/cancellations. Those just getting in a car or with good public transport don't really face this scenario, leaving 5min late probably means max 15min delay. When people are taking a job they are doing so on the basis that the contracted working hours fits with their schedule.

 

[dowie]

If you end up working somewhere where everyone is working later and that is necessary to get the work done then that's indicative of a workforce that is either underperforming, inefficient or overworked.

Not necessarily, it can simply be the standard in some industries... see for example law firms, banks etc. Overworked is rather subjective, why is finishing at say 6:30pm "overworked" vs 5pm?

It's a personal choice really re: what sort of work you want to do but there can be a difference between standard contracted hours on paper and general expectations.

When people are taking a job they are doing so on the basis that the contracted working hours fits with their schedule.

This would be a mistake/bad assumption that it's better to ask about during the hiring process if it is important. Many places where the culture is to work longer hours will have some boilerplate contract with some notional contracted hours and a similar disclaimer as the OP is querying re: not being paid for overtime.

Ditto to travel, working from home or hybrid working etc. these things may be mentioned in the contract but exactly how much travel will be required, what the arrangements for working from home are etc. could vary between teams.

 

[HangTime]

It's overworked because the contract stipulates finishing at 5pm. If 6:30pm is expected then just put 6:30 in the contact.

I think it's kind of an unfair situation if someone takes a job that says 5pm finish, and then they are looked down upon because they aren't working until 6:30pm. That's what I mean by overworked, you are giving them a workload that requires working 8.5hrs or whatever but on a contract that says 7hrs. Just be honest and say 8.5hrs if that's the case.

 

[jaybee]

Without clarification I wouldn't sign it. I cannot emphasize this enough. The amount of **** written into modern contracts that people just sign thinking "well if I don't, I won't get the job". No. Stop right there. If I sign another contract for example, I will refuse to sign anything that specifies a 3 month notice period. It's excessive in a non managerial role and designed to hamper ever leaving the company.

 

[dowie]

It's overworked because the contract stipulates finishing at 5pm. If 6:30pm is expected then just put 6:30 in the contact.

No, it doesn't, it says 6pm in this case and also states "The employee shall not be entitled to overtime for working in excess of 40hours a week." which is a pretty good indicator that OP isn't always going to be finishing at 6pm on the dot.

I think it's kind of an unfair situation if someone takes a job that says 5pm finish, and then they are looked down upon because they aren't working until 6:30pm. That's what I mean by overworked, you are giving them a workload that requires working 8.5hrs or whatever but on a contract that says 7hrs. Just be honest and say 8.5hrs if that's the case.

But you can ask about that sort of thing at the interview... why wilfully ignore the other parts of the contract that negate that it's just some set hours all the time and why not simply ask them what the usual scenario is. It can vary between teams or during busy periods depending on the line of work even.

Do you suppose accountants work the same hours regardless of whether it is month or year-end for example? Or would you assume a game developer works the same hours when just a few weeks away from the company's next big release?

Without clarification I wouldn't sign it. I cannot emphasize this enough. The amount of **** written into modern contracts that people just sign thinking "well if I don't, I won't get the job". No. Stop right there. If I sign another contract for example, I will refuse to sign anything that specifies a 3 month notice period. It's excessive in a non managerial role and designed to hamper ever leaving the company.

These are obvious things to ask about during the hiring process... when they ask you in an interview if you have any questions then (depending on the stage of the interview) that's exactly where you could bring up those sorts of things (or just ask the recruiter directly... what's the notice period, is there a non-compete? Is the non-compete period paid and how restrictive is it? etc..).

Ditto with the hours, if you're chatting to the potential direct manager or another team member then you can ask what the usual hours are for the team and what the situation is with hybrid working/working from home etc.

All of that is stuff that can be anticipated in advance, you shouldn't really be in a position where you've agreed verbally to accept a position without knowing that stuff.

I mean that sort of thing is potentially leverage for use in the salary negotiation too, if they want a longer notice period and non compete etc.. then are they going to pay more for that because your initial targeted range was based on one month notice and no non compete and so you'd actually like them to up their offer pls...

 

[HangTime]

No, it doesn't, it says 6pm in this case and also states "The employee shall not be entitled to overtime for working in excess of 40hours a week." which is a pretty good indicator that OP isn't always going to be finishing at 6pm on the dot.

Sorry I think we're talking cross purposes here - I was speaking in general by that point and I assumed you were too because you compared 5pm with 6:30pm not 6pm with 6:30pm, that's the only reason I mentioned 5pm. I agree that for this specific contract they won't always be finishing at 6pm on the dot, but I would be concerned if working to 6:30pm every day was expected.

Do you suppose accountants work the same hours regardless of whether it is month or year-end for example? Or would you assume a game developer works the same hours when just a few weeks away from the company's next big release?

No I don't, which is why I explicitly stated "the reality is it needs X+5 to get the normal workload done (never mind crunch workload)". I'm talking about a culture where someone has joined a company on a low wage and is frowned upon for leaving on time because the team is always having to pull longer hours than contracted. I'm saying if that team is always having to do long hours, rather than by exception, then there's an underlying issue to address around workload / efficiency and the newbie shouldn't be put at detriment because of that. Going back to my earlier post, I'm ok with 'working for free' if I'm paid well for the hours I'm supposed to work, but less so on the bottom rungs.

 

[dowie]

No I don't, which is why I explicitly stated "the reality is it needs X+5 to get the normal workload done (never mind crunch workload)". I'm talking about a culture where someone has joined a company on a low wage and is frowned upon for leaving on time because the team is always having to pull longer hours than contracted. I'm saying if that team is always having to do long hours, rather than by exception, then there's an underlying issue to address around workload / efficiency and the newbie shouldn't be put at detriment because of that. Going back to my earlier post, I'm ok with 'working for free' if I'm paid well for the hours I'm supposed to work, but less so on the bottom rungs.

That's both different and more specific, you've introduced low pay into the argument when the OP was about software development and my post you replied gave other examples I pointed out like law firms and banks:

Not necessarily, it can simply be the standard in some industries... see for example law firms, banks etc. Overworked is rather subjective, why is finishing at say 6:30pm "overworked" vs 5pm?

The point being that it's not uncommon in those industries and I don't see why someone is inherently "overworked".

If you're talking about low-paid roles (esp those with not much hope of significant progress) then I doubt the potential for a bonus or significant pay rise is there and also both national minimum wage and working hours rules apply too (you can voluntarily opt out of the working hours rules but you're not obliged to). It's a bit of a different scenario as there if there isn't really much of an incentive to work longer hours and technically no obligation to either.

The notion in a more general case though that a team working longer hours has an underlying issue seems iffy though, it may well be the case but I don't think it necessarily generalises. That's simply how some industries work... a consultant or salesperson might need to travel, a lawyer racks up billable hours and if they can bill a bit more then... These are people who often have their comp and/or future progression/promotions tied into what they bring in so the incentives are rather different.

You'll find self-employed people who work long hours too, it's not necessarily a sign that they've got some underlying issue they need to address, if they want to take on more work and they enjoy what they're doing then their business can be more successful that way and that sort of motivation overlaps somewhat with people who have a closer link to the revenue as salaried employees too.