Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-15-Speech-1-106"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081215.14.1-106"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The idea of drawing a distinction between active and inactive working time is a dangerous and dishonest approach. If part of the time spent at a workplace and devoted wholly or partially to carrying out duties for an employer is not used to undertake specific tasks, that period cannot be considered a rest period. After all, an employee cannot spend that time with his or her family, nor can the employee arrange to rest as he or she wishes. That time should be remunerated at the same rate.
Another issue concerns the possibility of extending on-call time without suitable remuneration, allegedly with the employee’s consent. This affects medical doctors in particular. I would be interested to know of any patient, ideally a Member of the European Council, who would happily agree to be operated on by a doctor who had already been on duty for 23 hours. Not only is this an infringement of the doctor’s employment rights, but it is also an infringement of the patient’s rights. Hospitals in Poland have refused to employ doctors refusing to sign the opt-out clause. I would remind the House that the right to an eight-hour working day was won before the Second World War."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples