Does your shop force you to take breaks?

Four options here:

1. Don't take a break
2. Take the mandated 20 consecutive minutes.
3. Take smaller breaks throughout the day and just figure out a 20-minute break for the timecard.
4. Tell your boss to f--- off and breaks won't be an issue.

I'd go for Nos. 2 or 3 and not get into a silly argument with the boss.

 

Interesting.

Here's what my state says about breaks

Of course things vary from state to state, but it is startling at times what people don't know. Particularly when it comes to labor law.

 

The only thing that matters is if company policy is followed, which can be an issue brought up in a lawsuit.

 

Just figure out how much time you spend each day reading SportsJournalists.com

There's your break.

 

Just googled the state law on where I think the original poster works.

If you work a six hour shift, you must be given 20 minutes for lunch or if it is eight hours worked, it must be 30 minutes for lunch. It isn't clear if that time is paid, or off the clock.

Those rules doesn't apply to healthcare facilities or places with less than three people on site, per shift, which, given most newsrooms now, only having one other person around seems like a luxury. My unskilled interpretation is if you're on assignment and the only person there working from your place, then you wouldn't have to take a break.

If you are on the desk, and working with others, then take the break like your boss said.

Most companies will gear work policy to state law but if the company is in clear violation of labor law, that's more trouble to them then not strictly following policy.

 

If we're at the desk, it's not an issue. You can easily find time to relax for a little bit while doing layout/writing. Heck, right now I'm catching up on a town council meeting online that I couldn't attend because I was at another meeting Monday night.

Where the issue would come into play is a day like today, for instance.

I got to the office at 1 p.m. today. Worked from then until I left to go to a school committee meeting at 7 p.m. The meeting lasted until 10 p.m.

Now, by the labor laws in my state, at 7 p.m. I was required to take a break because I had hit my six-hour mark. But at that point I was going to a meeting that would last three hours. It's not exactly like I can just stop what I'm doing because I've hit this mythical six-hour mark that makes me shut down like a robot.

But, if my boss had his/her way, in this instance I would have had to sit in my car from 7 p.m.-7:20 p.m. and go to the meeting late because "Big Brother" is watching my every movement.

It's stupid.

There's no reason why I can't take the time I need to take off after I get out of my meeting, which I did tonight when I sat down for a half-hour and cruised Facebook/ate.

Luckily, I'm salary so these rules don't apply to me directly but if I were a regular hourly reporter, I think I would like the freedom and responsibility to manage my own breaks when I need/want them.

 

Or, you could have stopped at 6:40 and taken the break then. Then you wouldn't have been late for the meeting.

These laws on breaks are for employees' benefit. People fought and died for these laws. Heck, I read somewhere that Massachusetts had to pass a law in the 1840s allowing workers to eat breakfast before going to work. Companies were firing workers for eating breakfast because they thought that people working on a full stomach made them work slower.

Granted, this is the 1840s we're talking about here. But still, these laws on on the books for a reason. And that reason is that companies will look for any way to screw over their employees.

 

At 6:40 I was driving to the meeting. I get what you're saying, that I could have taken a break prior to going to the meeting. That's a fair point but I didn't need one then and, if we want to get technical here, I wasn't required to take one at that point.

I understand how important it is for people who work 9-5 to get their lunch breaks. When I worked as a cashier, I would have killed if someone said I couldn't have had a break. But this isn't the normal job. I can spend 20 minutes sprinkled throughout the day and achieve the same thing I would have with a 20-minute break.

Again, the only real problem here is the boss' insistence in having everything documented without the usual wink-winks given in this field.

 

A lot of this is someone just rationalizing that their job is so so important that they can't take any time away from it or it can't be done.

 

Agreed. And a lot of it is the schedule.

If you work the copy desk, it's possible you have a slow couple hours while stories are coming in and games are wrapping up.

Later in the evening it gets busy. You're on deadline. You're hungry and you don't have time to eat away from your desk.

Doesn't mean you never had a free 20-30 minutes in your 8-hour shift.

 

Damn these people with a work ethic. They keep making the rest of us look bad!

 

This makes very little sense. Not taking a break does not mean you have a superior work etic.