Employer cancelling your holiday leave

SarEl

agrinnall wrote: »

SarEl, there's no way I'd want to disagree with you, but can you explain why it's the employees job to find a replacement? The employer knows that they have to allow holidays to be taken so surely it's their responsibility to ensure there are enough people to run their business.

There is a line in job descriptions - and if you don't have one it is implied in law - to comply with any reasonable request made by the employer. So if the employer asks you to ensure that there is cover for the dates you want holiday then there is nothing unreasonable in asking you to comply. In principle I agree - as would most employers - that the employer could do this, and personally I would want to do it to ensure that I am satisfied as to the leave arrangements meeting my business needs. But there is nothing at all unlawful about an employer asking the member of staff to do this, and that is the point - the employer can lawfully do this because there is nothing that says they can't!

Personally, I think I would suggest that over a matter which is relatively unimportant, if I wanted the leave I would do as the employer asked rather than stand on the principle of "holidays are my right and it's not my job to arrange cover" - otherwise you may get what you wish for (in the short term at least), and find that the employer arranges your holiday dates and stipulates when you can take them. In the longer term, of course - well I wouldn't expect you to have one. Nitpicking works two ways, and when nitpicking starts, employers always win.

MessyMare

ceridwen wrote: »

Hindsight is a wonderful thing - but, in those circumstances, I would personally have "forgotten" about the fact that I had flicked through that annual leave diary. If they complained about the fact that I had gone on that pre-booked leave - I would respond with sheer puzzlement of "How was I supposed to know my leave had been cancelled by the firm? No-one told me...". I doubt they would have had a leg to stand on - as they wouldnt have been able to produce written proof (or even the memory of a conversation with you in which they mentioned this) to confirm that they had told you.

Unfortunately I'm painfully honest!

agrinnall

SarEl wrote: »

There is a line in job descriptions - and if you don't have one it is implied in law - to comply with any reasonable request made by the employer. So if the employer asks you to ensure that there is cover for the dates you want holiday then there is nothing unreasonable in asking you to comply. In principle I agree - as would most employers - that the employer could do this, and personally I would want to do it to ensure that I am satisfied as to the leave arrangements meeting my business needs. But there is nothing at all unlawful about an employer asking the member of staff to do this, and that is the point - the employer can lawfully do this because there is nothing that says they can't!

Personally, I think I would suggest that over a matter which is relatively unimportant, if I wanted the leave I would do as the employer asked rather than stand on the principle of "holidays are my right and it's not my job to arrange cover" - otherwise you may get what you wish for (in the short term at least), and find that the employer arranges your holiday dates and stipulates when you can take them. In the longer term, of course - well I wouldn't expect you to have one. Nitpicking works two ways, and when nitpicking starts, employers always win.

So if the OP goes to their employer and says "I've arranged for Fred Bloggs to provide cover when I'm on holiday, he doesn't work for the company, he's banned from driving, is an alcoholic and wants £5000 a week to do the job" how could the employer argue against it unless the OP's contract of employment states exactly what cover they are required to provide? The whole concept seems ridiculous both from the employer's and employee's perspective.

SarEl

agrinnall wrote: »

So if the OP goes to their employer and says "I've arranged for Fred Bloggs to provide cover when I'm on holiday, he doesn't work for the company, he's banned from driving, is an alcoholic and wants £5000 a week to do the job" how could the employer argue against it unless the OP's contract of employment states exactly what cover they are required to provide? The whole concept seems ridiculous both from the employer's and employee's perspective.

I think we are getting into hypothetical realms of the ridiculous now.

C_Mababejive

SarEl wrote: »

Hypothetically speaking - if the employer says that it is your job to find cover, then it actually is your job.

Do you mean he says or do you mean,its specified in my T&C's of employment? If for example,you have a contract of employment with clearly defined T&Cs and there is a section which only mentions minimum notice periods then thats it so they can say as they like and may be committing an offence under the WTR if they do not allow your holidays. What about if you spend the next month asking round and everyone is washing their hair or doing something else?

SarEl

C_Mababejive wrote: »

Do you mean he says or do you mean,its specified in my T&C's of employment? If for example,you have a contract of employment with clearly defined T&Cs and there is a section which only mentions minimum notice periods then thats it so they can say as they like and may be committing an offence under the WTR if they do not allow your holidays. What about if you spend the next month asking round and everyone is washing their hair or doing something else?

I should have known better than to start answering hypothetical questions.

I have already answered this point - hypothetically. If, in reality, you are refused permission to take leave because everyone is washing their hair, please let us know.

Bev._2

I know we are playing a bit of "what if" here, and silly what if's CAN happen, but ... drifting AWAY from the silliness......

If my employer told me to arrange cover - i would have nobody to ask. Literally. The other members of staff would already be working. My only other option would be to draft in someone from outside the business - but then i can't employ anyone. Not touching on the alcoholic 5k demanding person, even if i got in a responsible person, i couldn't do it - as i can't employ anyone.

However, they have in the past said we are to arrange cover, but this ONLY ever falls on weekend rota systems. We work until dinner time on Saturdays & we work Saturdays on a rota basis. Let's say i'm working this weekend & you're not, yet next weekend it's the other way about. I want this weekend off. They would tell me to arrange cover, which basically means asking you if you'd mind working my Saturday. This is the ONLY time we've ever been told this.

getmore4less wrote: »

With statutory minimum after BH being 4 weeks that's 16 weeks(30%) of the year they opperate with 3 people unless there are block closures.

There are no block closures, but yes, for the vast majority of this year, with holidays & people on SSP, we have operated on 3 members of staff (& still been able to get holidays in).

Savvy_Sue

SarEl wrote: »

I should have known better than to start answering hypothetical questions.

I have already answered this point - hypothetically. If, in reality, you are refused permission to take leave because everyone is washing their hair, please let us know.

I think this poster has mentioned elsewhere that her partner's company have changed rotas radically, AND said that if you want leave you need to arrange cover for the 'on call' and weekend hours you'd normally be doing.

Which I can see becoming problematic, unless EVERYONE is willing to do more 'on call' than the rotas actually say when they are there, so that they can actually take leave.

eg rota says 1 weekend per month, BUT in practice you end up doing 3 weekends every 2 months except when you're actually on leave.

Bev._2

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

I think this poster has mentioned elsewhere that her partner's company have changed rotas radically, AND said that if you want leave you need to arrange cover for the 'on call' and weekend hours you'd normally be doing.

Which I can see becoming problematic, unless EVERYONE is willing to do more 'on call' than the rotas actually say when they are there, so that they can actually take leave.

eg rota says 1 weekend per month, BUT in practice you end up doing 3 weekends every 2 months except when you're actually on leave.

If you're referring to C_Mababejive then i can't comment.

If to me, then i'd prefer we stuck to the matter at hand & not based off previous threads.


Wasn't sure who you were referring to.

Savvy_Sue

C_Mab - who's getting us more into the hypothetical side.