"Fines" in pay packet!

anamenottaken

catieeb06 wrote: »

Hi Guys,

This is on behalf of my OH. He works for a company and let's call them ABC Security who provide security services on behalf of several large organisations and the one that my OH works for is a well known supermarket.

In his induction he was told that if he didn't give more than 5 hours notice that he was unable to attend work that day then not only would they not pay him for that (that's fine, I don't get paid if I am ill and don't attend work) but they also "fine" him £50.

He's never actually phoned in sick in the 7 months and even phoned work when all the snow hit to let them know there was a chance he wouldn't make it to work the next day- he did, managed to grab a taxi.

Just wondering- is this "fine" something that can be challenged or is it simply because it's in his contract so it's something that he has to live with?

All help much appreciated!!

Catie x

As he has worked for this company for 7 months he should have received a written statement of his terms of employment. What does it say there about such a deduction?

HappyMJ

vax2002 wrote: »

no contract can over rule law, if the fine is a penalty which it is, then only an act of parliament can administer a penalty and anything in the contract to the contrary is illegal.

"Fine", "Penalty". They are terms many people and organisations get mixed up. You are right real "fines" are only issued by a court for a criminal matter. "Penalties" are issued for a civil wrong. Whatever they called it it is essentially a deduction from pay and whether it's authorized or not depends on his contract but minimum wage laws do override that.

vax2002

A contractual deduction is what a penalty is.
They are legal deductions an employer is allowed to make in Law.
Contractual deductions are penalties which are unlawful, it makes no difference signed or not.
The contract will be unlawful if it allows contractual penalties.
Employment law states an employer shares in the profits of labour they also share in the losses and an employer can not pass losses on to an employee.
So any contract is irrelevant, the employer has no legal right to charge losses to an employee.

HappyMJ

vax2002 wrote: »

A contractual deduction is what a penalty is.
They are legal deductions an employer is allowed to make in Law.
Contractual deductions are penalties which are unlawful, it makes no difference signed or not.
The contract will be unlawful if it allows contractual penalties.
Employment law states an employer shares in the profits of labour they also share in the losses and an employer can not pass losses on to an employee.
So any contract is irrelevant, the employer has no legal right to charge losses to an employee.

Are you saying the direct.gov website is wrong in saying that an employer can make deductions if an employee agrees to it by being in the contract of employment? The website even details till shortages and explains an employer can keep on deducting 10% every week until the till shortgage is repaid.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/Pay/DG_175878

vax2002

No I am saying the contract has to be lawful.
any more questions ?

DVardysShadow

HappyMJ wrote: »

Are you saying the direct.gov website is wrong in saying that an employer can make deductions if an employee agrees to it by being in the contract of employment? The website even details till shortages and explains an employer can keep on deducting 10% every week until the till shortgage is repaid.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/Pay/DG_175878

Government websites are not always right ...

In the case of till shortages, this is a clearly identifiable loss which is recovered, which plainly sets the deduction apart from a penalty. In the OP's OH's case, if it costs an extra £20 to get short notice cover, then £30 is a penalty.

catieeb06

His contract says that it is down to managers discretion whether the deduction is taken.

I thought my maths was wrong but it was a late night last night and my befuddled mind wouldn't work!

HappyMJ

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Government websites are not always right ...

In the case of till shortages, this is a clearly identifiable loss which is recovered, which plainly sets the deduction apart from a penalty. In the OP's OH's case, if it costs an extra £20 to get short notice cover, then £30 is a penalty.

£6.50 multiplied by 7.7 hours is £50.05 that they would have to pay for another security person to cover his shift then add employer national insurance contributions on the payment and an additional amount for hoildays. They may have got this person from an agency for which they would have to pay agency fees. They may have had to pay for travel for them to get to the right location. They would have had to spend some time on the phone organising someone at the last minute. They don't have to justify why it's £50 but if they did it would not be hard to get to £50 worth of additional expenses.

patman99

Even till deductions are illegal these days.

hcb42

I am interested in this, as I hear deductions all the time in my industry.

If a till is down, or someone breaks something, or loses their name badge say, are companies allowed to deduct pay - assuming the charge would not take anyone under minimum wage?