Reasonable Overtime?

In Dh's work contract it says that his normal hours are 7.6hrs per day, with two days off. Then it says that reasonable overtime will be required at times and that it will not affect his pay (he doesnt get paid for overtime).
The average day that dh works is 12 to 15hr days, with up to 18 hr days on weekends.

So heres my question, what constitutes reasonable overtime? There is no explanation in his work contract, his work dont give answers to this sort of stuff (I wonder why ;) ). So does anyone have insight as to what is considered reasonable and what is not reasonable when it comes to overtime?

Tah

In his position, those hours would be considered reasonable. That is the standard for the industry and what is expected from his position within the brigade.

I don't know what his position is but wow I'd want to be getting paid squigabucks for that. My DH works those sort of hours but he is in a very senior position is paid well.

I don't know what he does or what level of seniority he has, but I think there is a huge difference between what is acceptable reasonable overtime "from time to time" as opposed to what you seem to be saying in that his contract is 7.5 hours per day but the ongoing day to day reality is effectively double that. That's not reasonable in my opinion.

In my former life I would never get paid overtime and while my hours were officially 8.30 to 5.30 pm with an hour for lunch, the reality was far more a sandwich at my desk while working and not leaving until more like 6.30 pm on a standard day, with much later finishes at particularly busy times.

My DP works similar unpaid hours overtime, as did I with my former employer. We both work in senior roles and it's expected.

Life of hospitality! Paid for 38 do more like 60+. With constant 'wages are to high'. Reasonable to me would be doing 45 hours a week and accruing time in lieu for overtime hours

he is 2ic at work and he's in hospitality. We expect the overtime and all that, and it never really bothers us. But at the moment things are a tad pear shaped there and well the boss wants more hours out of him. According to the boss there is to be no breaks except toilet breaks. No split shifts allowed, which splits alone would cut back on his hours yet the same amount of work would be achieved.
but as I said we expect the hours and are used to it, but its the term reasonable that we are unsure about. Today for instance he started at 6am that shift is meant to finish at 2pm, but he is working straight through because that is reasonable to the bosses. So after 2pm should be overtime, but is that reasonable?

I think it sounds like time he sat down and renegotiated his salary. If they need him to increase his hours and shoulder more responsibility than they have previously - a sudden and constant increase in his hours to save them the money it would cost them to employ the extra chef they obviously need - then I would be suggesting that he discusses the issue with his Head and the owner.

ETA: Do any of these extra hours go to time in lieu?

:

---

I think it sounds like time he sat down and renegotiated his salary. If they need him to increase his hours and shoulder more responsibility than they have previously - a sudden and constant increase in his hours to save them the money it would cost them to employ the extra chef they obviously need - then I would be suggesting that he discusses the issue with his Head and the owner.

ETA: Do any of these extra hours go to time in lieu?

---

he had a meeting with the powers to be last week where they talked about a pay rise. who knows if they will come through with that one. They have an ad running at the moment to fill a position, but they arent getting any bites that the powers to be like (wrong age, not enough experience etc)
Nah no overtime goes to time in lieu, that only happens for public holidays.

He isnt on the award, but if he pushed to get the award wage, then the base wage would be smaller but then he would have to be paid for every hour over the 7.6. So if they were to adhere to that then it would be worth while.

I don't know much about the hospitality industry, but I feel that if you agreed to get $x for 7.6hrs work with some reasonable overtime but were actually working close to double that on a regular basis then its not at all reasonable and he should either not do the overtime (or at least not so regularly), should be paid for the overtime or should have an increase in his wage.

Is he on a salary? I personally don't consider double the normal hours reasonable overtime.....maybe I am naive. It sounds to me like a good way to have people work twice as much as you have to pay for them to be there. So he doesn't get paid overtime rates or doesn't get paid at all for anything over 7.6hours?
You say he is on more than the award, but is he on double the award? Cause in reality that's what they are getting out of him.

And it is against the law to expect anyone to work above a six hour shift without at least 30 minutes (unpaid) break. You are also entitled to 2x10 min (paid) breaks if you work over those 6 hours. I don't believe it matters what industry you are in, as far as I am aware they are standard fairwork requirements.

You are right though LS that is the hours needed to complete the daily task at hand. And yep thats part of his role as 2ic. We were just talking about how there is no definition in his contract for the term reasonable overtime. We were talking about how saying 7.6hrs on the work contract sounds great, but the reality is working double that almost every day.
And yeah Chody, thats what we were thinking.

Also we know that if people were paid an hourly rate, then a lot of services would not be available, and thats not just hospitality, it happens in every industry.

I'd talk to fair work - that doesn't sound legal and they'll hopefully have some ideas how he can approach his boss about it.

Id get advice because it really does sound like they dont want to pay for the true hours so class it as overtime. I hope you get it sorted x

If he is in hospitality he is covered by an award and there national employment standards that need to be adhered to. He has to have a break, it's illegal to work those hours without a break. I would look at the contract, the award and talk to fair work.

:

---

You say he is on more than the award, but is he on double the award? Cause in reality that's what they are getting out of him.

---

Yes, this! If he's not on double the award, then I'd contact the fair work ombudsman. I don't know anyone who would consider working double the contract hours (on a day to day basis) to be reasonable.

haha, yeah its definitely not double the award thats for sure.

Well it looks like he is going to resign soon. They have lost two employees, and instead of hiring more, they have been told that they need to absorb the extra hours themselves. This will be including the casuals and the part timers. So the hours are just going to increase. They have already cancelled his holidays that he had already started. He got home last night at 11pm, and he started work this morning at 5:30, today he will more than likely work straight through and not get home til 10 tonight. Im not thinking that this is reasonable overtime? Regardless of the industry.

He sat down with the boss and well she is on the war path because she didnt get a promotion she went for, so the rest are copping the flack for her failure. So nothing has been discussed, nor changed. The plan is to put the resignation letter in later this week. And then hope he can find something somewhere before too long.

Good for him!
If this is their plan for the future, then they won't get very far - and it is certainly not reasonable to continue to increase the hours without remuneration.
I hope he can find something else really soon, I doubt he will have much trouble. ;)