Do I have to work for free?

liam92_2

Also, I've just been looking on the direct.gov website and apparently all employees are entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid holiday per year.

My contract states that holiday is 4.3 days per year (I am only contracted to work 1 day per week.)

Is this legal??

KiKi

20 days annual leave per year, pro rata for you would be 4 days (so I assume your bank offers more than the 20 statutory days, to come up with 4.3).

You should also get another 1.6 days for the BHs (8 pro rata) - however, I assume that this is the same for Saturday jobs (ie, those still in education). If it's not, I'm sure someone will correct me.

Now I really am going to bed.
KiKi

Mistral001

liam92 wrote: »

I'm aiming to become a barrister and hence be salaried and work as cases require.

I thought barristers were not salaried, but work as self-employed and get paid on a case-by-case basis.

an9i77

OP you really need to get a job somewhere that does flexi time (before you become a barrister of course), that way you can carry any extra hours forward as a credit and then use your credits to either leave a little earlier /come a little later or build them up until you have enough to take a day's holiday. I used to work in a job that had flexi time and oh! how I miss it! the joy of flex!
Does depend on the type of sector you work in though, a lot of call centres use them but I think a lot of employers are against them because let's face it, they are losing the free labour that fifteen mins here and there all adds up to.
I think in principle you are absolutely right and people shouldn't in an ideal world do unpaid overtime (excepting the odd 5 mins here and there, I'm talking about 20-30 mins plus per day), unless they are in highly paid, managerial positions where you work as many hours as the job needs. However in the real world the fact remains that employers can do this because they can. People are desperate to work and who, offered a job, has the guts to leave because of issues such as these? Which brings me to trade unions. Why are you so fiercely opposed to them? This is exactly the sort of issue that a trade union could influence! Modern trade unions are (should be) about partnership working with the employer and not antagonism. Perhaps you need to reappraise your views on TUs, they seem a bit 70s.

liam92_2

KiKi wrote: »

20 days annual leave per year, pro rata for you would be 4 days (so I assume your bank offers more than the 20 statutory days, to come up with 4.3).

You should also get another 1.6 days for the BHs (8 pro rata) - however, I assume that this is the same for Saturday jobs (ie, those still in education). If it's not, I'm sure someone will correct me.

Now I really am going to bed.
KiKi

I believe full timers get 31 days paid holiday per year, including the 8 annual bank holidays. However, without the 8 BHs, it's just 23 days.

However, I'm only contracted to work Saturdays and my contract says I have just 4.3 days. And, as it's rare for a Bank Holiday to fall on a Saturday, there are years when I only have 4.3 days to take off.

The direct.gov site states very clearly that all employees must have a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid holiday per annum:-

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/Timeoffandholidays/DG_10029788


This is illegal, yes?

bodmil

Ahhh I just love the enthusiasm of youth!

DVardysShadow

liam92 wrote: »

Lol, no...I'm staunchly anti-TU and am grateful to Mrs Thatcher for breaking them up in the 80s!

I'm much more in favour of 'rocking the boat' on a small-scale without the bureacracy of TUs and the need to involve useless 'fat-cat' union bosses, such as Bob Crow.

IMO, unions were a great asset to a large number of employees when working conditions were truly appauling and wages did little to appease poverty (such as Victorian Times.) However in recent years, as working safety conditions are now regulated and the NMW exists, many unions' sole ambitions have been to push wages up above their equilibrium, and hence by the laws of labour economics, cause a rise in unemployment!

Well good luck with that. If you want to rock the boat without getting tipped out yourself, and do it without a Union, you may find yourself inventing a union.

Looking back at the time since Thatcher, I think conditions for workers have been regressing. Plainly it has not occurred to you that the main ambitions of the boss class have been to push wages below their equilibrium, by the simple device of claiming that where they push them down to is equilibrium.

Humphrey10

liam92 wrote: »

useless 'fat-cat' union bosses, such as Bob Crow.

He is many things, but useless is not one of them.

Re: annual leave, it explains how to work it out on Directgov. 5.6 x the number of days a week you work. 5.6 x 5 = 28 days for full time (which can include bank holidays so an employer can offer 20 days + the 8 bank holidays).

5.6 x your 1 day a week = 5.6 days so I'd assume you were entitled to 5.6 days off a year.

SarEl

liam92 wrote: »

Lol, no...I'm staunchly anti-TU and am grateful to Mrs Thatcher for breaking them up in the 80s!

I'm much more in favour of 'rocking the boat' on a small-scale without the bureacracy of TUs and the need to involve useless 'fat-cat' union bosses, such as Bob Crow.

IMO, unions were a great asset to a large number of employees when working conditions were truly appauling and wages did little to appease poverty (such as Victorian Times.) However in recent years, as working safety conditions are now regulated and the NMW exists, many unions' sole ambitions have been to push wages up above their equilibrium, and hence by the laws of labour economics, cause a rise in unemployment!

And this comes from someone not even old enough to recall the days of Mrs Thatcher? Quite apart from your inability to recall this, your history lessons appear to also be somewhat remiss. I don't suppose you recall BA and UNITE. And only a year ago. You must have been too busy with your Saturday job in the bank to see the news.

How the hell do you think you got the luxuries of NMW and health and safety legislation? Where do you think the laws for unfair dismissal come from? And just how long do you think that any of these will last without the unions? If you thinki there is not genuine and real poverty still then you live in a deluded world of your own. I suggest you stop posting therads and read some - you might get an inkling that the world is not as you see it with your vast experience of working every Saturday in a bank. Your, frankly, piddling complaints about 15 minutes here and there, or a few miles here and there, are nothing when you compare them to people who have given 30 or so years of their lives, 40+ hours every week, to make a pittance that just about kept the roof over their heads and are now on the scrapheap because their employer doesn;t want them because they are too old / redundant / pregnant / sick... and now face loosing everything they have ever had through no fault of their own.

Oh, by the way young man - if and when you become a barrister - I am wildly guessing that if and when this happens you have no intention of going into anything so common as employment law (unless it is on the side of employers)? But I do have to say that you will be deeply disappointed by the working hours. If you balk at 15 minutes unpaid to prepare, you will never survive the interviews, never mind pupillage.

charleyroo

liam92 wrote: »

I believe full timers get 31 days paid holiday per year, including the 8 annual bank holidays. However, without the 8 BHs, it's just 23 days.

However, I'm only contracted to work Saturdays and my contract says I have just 4.3 days. And, as it's rare for a Bank Holiday to fall on a Saturday, there are years when I only have 4.3 days to take off.

The direct.gov site states very clearly that all employees must have a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid holiday per annum:-

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/Timeoffandholidays/DG_10029788


This is illegal, yes?

No, these figures are for full time. I think yours is pro-rata.