Being paid below minimum wage?

I've had a conversation with a family member recently which leads us both to believe she is being paid below minimum wage. I'd appreciate somebody confirming our thoughts before it's taken any further.
She is over 25 and is being paid £20 per day for a 3.5 hour working day. The job ties in with school holidays so she actually works 41 weeks per year. When she questioned the amount she is being paid the boss said it's because she is being paid equally every month, over 12 months, despite working 41 weeks.
By our calculation she is still being underpaid. Our calculation is as follows

3.5 hrs x 5 days x £7.50 = £131.25 per week
£131.25 x 41 weeks = £5381.25 per year
£5381.25 / 12 = £448.43 per calendar month

She actually receives approx £350 per month. If she takes any time off during term this is unpaid. She has no other income so doesn't pay tax or NI.

If our calculations are correct there is a large underpayment. The employer is notorious for paying wages late and isn't open to discussion about the situation beyond what they have already said.
Presumably the next step is to report it to HMRC is that correct?
«134

Comments

  • Comms69
    Comms69 Posts: 14,229 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Think you've missed off paid holiday too
  • nicechap
    nicechap Posts: 2,852 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    edited 22 February 2018 at 1:01PM
    Where does the £20 a day come from? Original advert? Contract?

    £20 / 3.5 hours = £5.71 an hour.

    Working it out annually, £350 x 12 = £4,200. 41 weeks x 5 days = 205 days. 205 days x 3.5 hrs = 717.5 hrs annually. £4,200 / 717.5 hrs = £5.85 an hour.

    Are there pension contributions or salary sacrifices? Does 3.5 hours include unpaid break. If not it appears below min wage.
    Originally Posted by shortcrust
    "Contact the Ministry of Fairness....If sufficient evidence of unfairness is discovered you’ll get an apology, a permanent contract with backdated benefits, a ‘Let’s Make it Fair!’ tshirt and mug, and those guilty of unfairness will be sent on a Fairness Awareness course."
  • lakes17
    lakes17 Posts: 283 Forumite
    Before doing any calculation you need to know the full time annual salary then multiply by number of hours worked per week and divide by the full time hours. AS she is working 41 weeks then multiply that answer to 45/52 . This is because she is entitled to 5.3 weeks paid holiday. This will give her annual salary / 12 for monthly
    The Chances are she is being paid correctly even though it looks as though hourly rate is lower due to term time element.
  • Comms69
    Comms69 Posts: 14,229 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    lakes17 wrote: »
    Before doing any calculation you need to know the full time annual salary then multiply by number of hours worked per week and divide by the full time hours. AS she is working 41 weeks then multiply that answer to 45/52 . This is because she is entitled to 5.3 weeks paid holiday. This will give her annual salary / 12 for monthly
    The Chances are she is being paid correctly even though it looks as though hourly rate is lower due to term time element.
    No you don't. The FT salary has no impact on the calculation.


    She's entitled to 5.6 weeks holiday.
  • Comms69
    Comms69 Posts: 14,229 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    OP is it definitely a 3.5 hour contract?


    Not 3 hours with 30 minute lunch break?
  • TELLIT01
    TELLIT01 Posts: 16,469 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper PPI Party Pooper
    edited 22 February 2018 at 2:00PM
    Comms69 wrote: »
    OP is it definitely a 3.5 hour contract?


    Not 3 hours with 30 minute lunch break?

    Comms 69. Definitely 3.5 working hours per day. 2 hours each morning and 1.5 hours in the afternoon. No opportunity for a break. The job is chaperoning children with learning difficulties to and from school. As you said in a previous reply - holiday entitlement hasn't been factored in to the calculation.

    Nicechap. The £20 per day is what she has been paid since she started working for them several years ago. The amount has never increased! I hadn't even considered pension contribution, but there is nothing on the payslip about pension contribution, either hers or employers. The employer is so utterly incompetent at paying staff on time I can't believe they have instituted the required pension scheme.

    lakes17. She has never seen a contract or anything about full time annual salary.

    Edited to add: She earns under £10k per year so isn't eligible for the workplace pension scheme.
  • Pricivius
    Pricivius Posts: 651 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    edited 22 February 2018 at 2:22PM
    I'm confused! If she receives £20 per day and works 5 days a week, how is she only receiving £350 per month? She should be getting £433 per month or thereabouts (£20 X 5 days = £100, £100 X 52 weeks = £5,200, £5,200 / 12 months = £433.33).


    How is the £350 broken down on her payslip?


    Edited to add: that might explain where they have gone wrong. If they calculate £20 X 5 days = £100, £100 X 41 weeks = ££4,100, £4,100 / 12 months = £341.66 - is this what she is receiving? If so, it looks as though they have made a mistake by only paying her for 41 weeks when they are supposed to be spreading it out over 52 weeks.
  • pmlindyloo
    pmlindyloo Posts: 13,049 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    One possibility is that she is actually self employed rather than an employee and has a contract for providing services.

    Is she allowed to substitute another person to work in her place? (as long as they have the relevant checks in place)
  • getmore4less
    getmore4less Posts: 46,882 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post I've helped Parliament
    edited 22 February 2018 at 2:47PM
    Working 41 weeks they are due 4.95 weeks holiday pay

    The calculation is 5.6*(41/46.4)
  • TELLIT01
    TELLIT01 Posts: 16,469 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper PPI Party Pooper
    pmlindyloo wrote: »
    One possibility is that she is actually self employed rather than an employee and has a contract for providing services.

    Is she allowed to substitute another person to work in her place? (as long as they have the relevant checks in place)

    No she's not s/e. She is definitely an employee.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards