An acquaintance tells me that his daughter volunteered to be a first aider for her workplace (a supermarket), and attended a 3 day course. Subsequently, her manager has decreed that she does not get paid anything for those three days because she was not working.

This seems obviously wrong, bad and despicable etc.

However, I was looking for a nice simple black-and-white declaration that this is illegal.

There's INDG345 which covers traing, but it's pitched more about induction training.

The first aid ACOP specifies that first aiders need an official course, but does not specifically and explicitly state that you need to pay employees you send on the course.

Does anyone have a reference to a sufficiently oifficial document that it will persuade a manager to publicly change his mind? I must admit I'm at a bit of a loss, it never having occurred to me that you could send someone on a three day training course and then claim they did that in their own time.

It is Section 9 of HASAWA, i.e. Duty of employer not to levy a charge on employees

Many relevant statutory provisions require employers to do or provide certain specified things, for example PPE, statutory training etc Section 9 of HASAWA lays down that employers must not charge their employees for anything done or provided to comply with such specific legal requirements.

The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations state that any work related training (including First Aid training) shall under regulation 13 (3) (c) ... "take place during working hours" ie you get paid for it...
No one can be forced to be a first aider so if see has not been paid for this training she is perfectly entitled to refuse to carry out these duties.
If it is in her contract that she must carry out these duties then she should get paid.

If this is the attitude, no matter whether it is local or central management, what are the chances of this poor lass keeping her job after this.

Her cards will be marked, they will get rid of her somehow.

FWIW, I think that the companies attitude is appalling, and she should be paid, and again FWIW I feel that she should follow this up, as DNW says, to the letter.

Shocking state of affairs in this day and age.

http://www.hrbullets.co....me-off-for-training.html

'employees have right not to suffer detriment.'

That said, during my brief trawl, I came across another thread discussing the non-payment of new recruits for the initial 3 days of familiarisation training - this for a very well known High St Sandwich shop (with underground trains).
It may be wrong, we may be outraged, but it does seem to happen.........

Many years ago after passing the application and interview stage with a very well known holiday company I was invited to attend a weeks training course which was unpaid, at the end of the week we found out if they thought we were suitable or not, it wasn't a great shock to find out nobody failed!