Paid breaks?

[james0james]

The last significant project I embarked on the builder & labourers payment was for a 12 hour day and on a 50/50 basis.

50 % sterling

50 % zloty

I asked why you do a 12 hour day ? answer was I am so busy and the sun is hot.

Well that's my pounds worth.

 

[cozycats]

I've been in the building game 30 yrs, (Carpenter) and EVERY site I have ever worked on has given me 30min paid and 30min unpaid break per day
so 7.30-4.00=8hrs paid

 

[gregers]

im paye,i do 8hrs p/day and get 15 mins break in the morning paid,and half hr for lunch unpaid.

when i was a subby our breaks were all unpaid FULL STOP.

if he was on price then he could stop for as long as he wanted.but hes not hes on day work and hes goner rape your wallet for all its worth,grow a pair and tell he hes taking the wee wee,if he takes offense then tell him to do 1.

 

[cjard]

The only thing that really matters is whether he's putting value on the house. At the moment I'm getting paid for 10 grands worth of work and putting 35 grand on the value of the house. Who cares what breaks I choose to take?

If you want to get paid 35 grand for your work, it rather sounds like you should stop working for other people who pay you 10 grand, and instead buy a house, do 10 grand of work on it and sell it for a 35 k uplift, right?

But then, the more I think on it, the more I think your argument makes no sense at all. It's almost as if you feel you should be entitled upfront to some of the uplift in value an asset you've improved might make if it were ever to sell. How about we remove the upfront aspect and instead promise you 50% of the change in value when the asset is sold?

If the homeowner sells for 35 grand more then bully for you, you get 17.5K. If the market takes a dip and the owner sells at a loss, you have to shoulder some of the loss too (because payment for the job was effectively giving you a share in the asset to 50% of the value it is claimed to be improved by).
I highly doubt you'd take that risk, so instead your money comes from "safe" investment - you get paid X for the work you did, whatever the change in asset value, and the homeowner who takes the risk on the value of his home also takes a risk on getting a punch on the nose if there's a market crash. It's the homeowner who's entitled to the rewards, not the builder

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

The only thing that really matters is whether he's putting value on the house. At the moment I'm getting paid for 10 grands worth of work and putting 35 grand on the value of the house. Who cares what breaks I choose to take?

That's irrelevant here, this muppets on an hourly rate.

 

[jeds]

Don't pay day rate. Work out how long each section of work should take to complete and divide the overall cost by the hours. Pay them that amount. If they take 2 hours less they get the benefit - of they take two hours longer that's their problem. I also assume this is all skilled work is it? You're not paying them £160 a day for labouring work.

 

[Agile]

What is missing in all this discussion is what his skill level is.

I am sure all self employed builders would want to charge more than £20 per hour so this fellow is fairly cheap IF he has the skills to be classed as a multi skilled builder.

If not then still £20 per hour is very high and for a 40 hour week comes to £800.

That's £41,600 per annum and what a junior doctor or employed solicitor would be getting!

Skilled workers on building sites like carpenters, brick layers etc. seem to get about £17-£19 an hour at the moment and probably East European rather less.

Tony

 

[jeds]

What is missing in all this discussion is what his skill level is.

??

 

[Lower]

My builder dropped a comment today about his hourly rate and expectation to be paid to take breaks - his rate was 20 an hour, and his idea of £160 day was 8 til 430 with half an hour for lunch and 2 breaks of 15 minutes each. When I queried why I'm paying him to sit on his ass for half an hour he said it was legal stipulation that he's entitled to a paid break of 15 minutes for every 4 hour block he works..

..somewhat different to my office job, where I'm expected to work in 2 stints of 4 hours to make an 8 hour day and whatever I take as lunch (my only break) is completely unpaid. If I start at 8, take a 3 hour lunch then I must finish at 7 and I get paid for 8 hours work.

Is there something different about the building industry or is this guy just taking the mick, doing 7.5 hours and expecting to be paid for 8?

For manual labour it is normal to be paid for a 15 minute break every 4 hours. Eg, in my factory the shop floor staff get a paid 15 minute break in the morning and the afternoon, but stop work at lunch time for 30 minutes for which they don't get paid.

 

[joe-90]

The only thing that really matters is whether he's putting value on the house. At the moment I'm getting paid for 10 grands worth of work and putting 35 grand on the value of the house. Who cares what breaks I choose to take?

If you want to get paid 35 grand for your work, it rather sounds like you should stop working for other people who pay you 10 grand, and instead buy a house, do 10 grand of work on it and sell it for a 35 k uplift, right?

But then, the more I think on it, the more I think your argument makes no sense at all. It's almost as if you feel you should be entitled upfront to some of the uplift in value an asset you've improved might make if it were ever to sell. How about we remove the upfront aspect and instead promise you 50% of the change in value when the asset is sold?

If the homeowner sells for 35 grand more then bully for you, you get 17.5K. If the market takes a dip and the owner sells at a loss, you have to shoulder some of the loss too (because payment for the job was effectively giving you a share in the asset to 50% of the value it is claimed to be improved by).
I highly doubt you'd take that risk, so instead your money comes from "safe" investment - you get paid X for the work you did, whatever the change in asset value, and the homeowner who takes the risk on the value of his home also takes a risk on getting a punch on the nose if there's a market crash. It's the homeowner who's entitled to the rewards, not the builder

I do both. Buy and renovate but also take on other work too. I don't have unlimited cash to buy with. Do you? If the guy is putting money in your pocket - stop whining and pay him. If you don't like that idea - do it yourself or get someone else in. Simples.

 

[kazuya]

if I charge an hourly, this does include breaks, however if you class a break as stopping work at set times and sitting down then I rarely take a break, I don't stop if im made a cuppa I drink it while I work and tend not to eat much at work either, if I do I can eat on the go, id sooner get done and get home, there's more to life than working

simple fact is if you don't like his terms then find someone else

 

[cjard]

Don't pay day rate. Work out how long each section of work should take to complete and divide the overall cost by the hours. Pay them that amount. If they take 2 hours less they get the benefit - of they take two hours longer that's their problem. I also assume this is all skilled work is it? You're not paying them £160 a day for labouring work.

No, the labourer gets fifty quid a day, though the job list I left 2 days ago was essentially tidying the site. I reckoned it was about 5 hours worth of work if I was gonna do it, and so far he's been on it 2.5 days. I came to the same conclusion as you suggest, because currently it looks like I'm heading towards paying 150 for 3 ton bags to be filled with an mix of insulation, wood and sawdust, 10 barrow loads of rubble dumping outside and 12 barrow loads of sand being brought in for blindi.. Plus a bit of materials organising and tools tidying. I'm somewhat tied to paying him for time present rather than work achieved, because of a particular element of family politics. Over the past 8 years he's been stunningly adept at not getting out of bed, and right now the fact that he actually does, and manages to get to site before 11, 3 days a week is progress enough for those who have most of the say in how the lad is paid

 

[cjard]

What is missing in all this discussion is what his skill level is

The builder is incredibly skilled, his work's impeccable and when he's in the zone he works quickly and accurately. The only thing that he really defers to me on is electrics, electronics and other such "science bit", the rest of it.. He could start with a field and finish with a (dark) house, solo.