[jack_dangerous]

how many hours do you have to work or requirements do you need to be considered employed full time or part time?

would working 37.5 hours a week be considered part time?

[Jer3]

i believe a 40 hour work week is fulltime so your pretty much there.

[liu13]

i think 35 is full time

[tiger_handheld]

37.5 is full time if u DONT get paid lunches.

[liu13]

whats min wage again? is it 10 yet

[jtanner_]

Well... Is that 37.5 including your break time? When I worked at CRA 37.5 was considered full time as the remaining 2.5 hours went to my 5 30 minute breaks
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[jack_dangerous]

yea no paid lunch.. i don't get this 37.5 crap... it doesn't make sense to me, feels like i'm getting ripped off even tho i'm not. i thought 40 hours a week was the norm...

[bui95]

some companies have employees work 42.5hrs a week and minus the lunch each day, that equals 40hrs paid each week.

ask your boss if you can stay the extra 30mins each day if you feel like you're getting ripped off, or dont take lunch breaks.

[FerrariEnzo]

it depends the work

when i wored at Walmart in edmonton, 26hr+ is Fulltime!

[twitchyzero]

i thought in our province the defination by law of full-time is 32 hours +

[tiger_handheld]

how are you getting ripped off if you are NOT working for 30mins each day?

Law requires that each employer give each employee
1 - 30min break
2 - 2x 15 min paid breaks

your coffee breaks are suppose to be 2.5hrs apart

8am start
10am - coffee break #1
12pm - lunch break
2pm coffee break #2
4pm -go home

[JSALES]

is it the law for all employers to give out a part time break? because at my work, we only get 10 minute breaks and sometimes not even a break

[hc529]

^

My ex-employers only let us take 15minutes breaks, sometimes they say when its busy, i dont get a break. I was always wondering about that too.

and i worked 37+hours a week, and they keep me as "part-time".
i asked about being changed to "full-time" they said they can't... too much benefit.

[tiger_handheld]

is it the law for all employers to give out a part time break? because at my work, we only get 10 minute breaks and sometimes not even a break


if you work 4hrs consecutively you are entitled to one(1) 15min PAID break.

if you work 5 hours you are supposed to get one(1) 15 min paid break , one(1) 30 min UNPAID lunch break.

^

My ex-employers only let us take 15minutes breaks, sometimes they say when its busy, i dont get a break. I was always wondering about that too.

and i worked 37+hours a week, and they keep me as "part-time".
i asked about being changed to "full-time" they said they can't... too much benefit.

thats's usually the case. as long as you don't exceed 75 hours in a two week period you are considered "Part-time". what employers do is they milk you on week 1 , and take it easy on week 2 to balance it out , and not pay you benefits :).

[JSALES]

yeah, i would never get a break if it was busy and i was working a 4 or 5 hour shift. only breaks i would get was a 30 min because it was mandatory, can't i sue or anything? since my break isn't even a 15 min, it's a 10 min only haha

[quasi]

how are you getting ripped off if you are NOT working for 30mins each day?

Law requires that each employer give each employee
1 - 30min break
2 - 2x 15 min paid breaks

your coffee breaks are suppose to be 2.5hrs apart

8am start
10am - coffee break #1
12pm - lunch break
2pm coffee break #2
4pm -go home

In BC your employer is only required to give you one 30 minute break (unpaid) if working more then 5 hours. Coffee breaks are not required by law.

In the past we've taken coffee breaks away when employees abuse them, privelage not a right.

Me personally, I don't get a set out lunch or coffee break. Somedays I'll work 11 hours (paid for 8) with no breaks and other days I'll take a 90 minute lunch or leave early. I figure it all evens out in the end.

http://www.labour.gov.bc.ca/esb/esaguide/#3

[tiger_handheld]

In BC your employer is only required to give you one 30 minute break (unpaid) if working more then 5 hours. Coffee breaks are not required by law.

In the past we've taken coffee breaks away when employees abuse them, privelage not a right.

Me personally, I don't get a set out lunch or coffee break. Somedays I'll work 11 hours (paid for 8) with no breaks and other days I'll take a 90 minute lunch or leave early. I figure it all evens out in the end.

http://www.labour.gov.bc.ca/esb/esaguide/#3

when did this law change. i looked this up in like 2006ish. My then HR manager told me the same thing.


non set lunch hours/breaks = FTW!
and yes , it does equal out in the end...

[quasi]

when did this law change. i looked this up in like 2006ish. My then HR manager told me the same thing.


non set lunch hours/breaks = FTW!
and yes , it does equal out in the end...


It could be the policy of your company to give those breaks. Most companies do give coffee breaks but they aren't required by law.

[StealthFighter]

nobody have a definitive answer to OP's question?

[quasi]

nobody have a definitive answer to OP's question?

Is there an answer? At some jobs you could be classified casual part time and working full time hours for a long period of time. If you worked with me 40 hours a week would be considered full time. If you worked with my wife 37.5 hours would be considered full time hours but you might not be classified a full time employee.

[hc529]

thats's usually the case. as long as you don't exceed 75 hours in a two week period you are considered "Part-time". what employers do is they milk you on week 1 , and take it easy on week 2 to balance it out , and not pay you benefits :).


In couple of months, i worked over 160hrs a month. (that would be over 75hours /2weeks.) In my 12months working there, half of the time..... i work way over FT hours. and yet, they dont pay me benefit.