Missed meal breaks detrimental
As staffing problems continue to plague SAPOL, many police officers
find it increasingly difficult to take the meal breaks to which they
are entitled. We all understand that, owing to emergencies, or even
plain urgency, officers cannot always take meal breaks. But when they
continuously miss out on them – because of inadequate staffing – a
morale issue arises.
A meal break is provided to all workers, throughout all industries.
Clearly, from a physiological perspective, we require food intake
to replenish spent energies. This enables us to conduct our physical
duties. Not so obvious is the effect that sustenance deprivation has
on one’s mind under the pressure of problem-solving, or as one simply
processes day-to-day information to comply with policies and procedures.
As well, hunger creates irritability, which might, in some people,
bring about irrational, short-tempered, or simply less compassionate
behaviour with others.
For police officers, this is nothing short of a recipe for occupational
disaster. Their need for complete and proper nourishment must be met,
so as to enable them to think clearly and respond to all situations
in an effective and efficient manner.
They need to look and act the crucial part they are paid to play
in the community.
They do not need to increase the risk of complaints that might well
stem from hunger-induced aggravation.
And one should never overlook the social aspect of meal breaks. Workers
need to down tools, break away from workplace pressures, and socially
interact with workmates to mentally recharge.
Workers need to know that their employers care for them, and that
they are truly valued. To provide sufficient resources that allow
for meal breaks at appropriate times is to reaffirm that care and
value.
Police officers who do not take meal breaks and continue to work
their full shifts are entitled to overtime. They should not succumb
to the practice of, nor be conditioned into, not claiming legitimate
entitlements.
It breaches regulations to falsify timesheets. By doing so, one
might well leave oneself open to face a charge of such a breach.
On your timesheet, you should record the actual hours you have worked.
If you choose to take time off in lieu, and your manager agrees, this
should also be recorded accurately. If this is not the work practice
in your area, you should contact the Police Association.
There exists a good reason to record accurately all hours
of work: it allows SAPOL to monitor and assess human resource needs
and, therefore, budget accordingly.
Members’ entitlements in respect of meal breaks are outlined
in clause 10 (e) and (f) under Meal Breaks in the Police Officers
Award. They read:
• (e) Meal breaks occurring during ordinary time, as specified by
the approved roster, shall not be considered hours worked and shall
be of not less than 30 minutes and not more than one hour’s duration.
• (f) When an employee is interrupted during a meal break by a call
to duty, such meal break shall be counted as time worked and the employee
shall be allowed a meal break as soon as practicable. Should it be
impracticable for the employee to have a meal break during the remainder
of his ordinary working hours, he shall receive overtime pay for the
interrupted meal break.
SAPOL’s instructions to the award read:
When a member is unable to take a meal break, that member may
be permitted to complete the shift at a time earlier than the rostered
finishing time equivalent to the period of the meal without loss of
pay after eight hours work.
In the police workplace, there exists a number of means – such as
patrol logs and computers – for recording the timing of officers’
movements. These recordings should coincide with and corroborate meal
times recorded on your timesheet.
Be mindful of these issues in the workplace.
