Is this legal? Made to lose a day's work and pay

swingaloo

Regardless of the rights and wrongs about the way the company are acting, Im just wondering why all these workers did not query why they had all been paid for more hours than they had worked for the last 5 weeks.

If they had worked 4 days and been paid for 5 then did none of them consider that they had been overpaid?

AP007

swingaloo wrote: »

Regardless of the rights and wrongs about the way the company are acting, Im just wondering why all these workers did not query why they had all been paid for more hours than they had worked for the last 5 weeks.

If they had worked 4 days and been paid for 5 then did none of them consider that they had been overpaid?

'There is a general right at common law to tell most employees not to turn up for work but no general right not to pay them.'

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1639

marywooyeah

dawyldthing wrote: »

How long have they been there as if it is less than 2 years anyone can be gotten rid of for no reason at all

No, thats only since april 2012.

swingaloo

AP007 wrote: »

'There is a general right at common law to tell most employees not to turn up for work but no general right not to pay them.'

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1639

But that's not what I was saying. I was querying why the workers were accepting 5 days pay for 4 days work over a period of 5 weeks. They must have known they had not worked the hours they had been paid for.

patman99

When working for a major HVAC company we used to have a shortfall system in place. This meant if work was low, we would still get paid 5 days even though we only worked 4. We had to pay it back when work picked up by working 1 hour a day o/t for no pay.

LittleVoice

swingaloo wrote: »

But that's not what I was saying. I was querying why the workers were accepting 5 days pay for 4 days work over a period of 5 weeks. They must have known they had not worked the hours they had been paid for.

The post you were responding to
would suggest that
if the employer did not already have the right to withhold pay
then the fact that they were not actually working
would not mean they would not be paid.

So knowing you have not actually worked the hours
does not mean you will not be paid.

Mulder00

Just to check my assumption that she is working here legally is correct? I am asking that as I had a friend who complained about being paid less than minimum wage and it eventually transpired that he didn't have the right to work here in the first place and was therefore at the mercy of his employer!!

bundly

Mulder00 wrote: »

Just to check my assumption that she is working here legally is correct? I am asking that as I had a friend who complained about being paid less than minimum wage and it eventually transpired that he didn't have the right to work here in the first place and was therefore at the mercy of his employer!!

Yes she is legal. Her country is part of the E.U. and she has a proper contract, NI number, everything.

Takeaway_Addict

bundly wrote: »

Yes she is legal. Her country is part of the E.U. and she has a proper contract, NI number, everything.

So what happened in the end?

bundly

Hi Takeaway

Things have moved on since I posted - for the worst!

At first, the workers were all paid their usual 39-hour (5-day) wage but only worked 4 days. Then after five weeks they had to work a whole 39 hour week without pay.

Then a new practice was inaugurated in November. Instead of overpaying them, then clawing it back later by making them work for free, they are now making them work without pay, and owing them the hours.

They now have to work 55 hours a week. That's 11 hours a day, 5 days a week, but they only get paid for normal hours. They start at 7am and work till 6pm. Every week the company "banks" 16 hours in each worker's name. They have been told that after Xmas is usually a very quiet time and they will probably be either sent home early on some days, or told not to come in for one, two or three days. This time off will be deducted from these "banked" hours, so they will still receive their normal 39 hours pay.

I've told her these practices are almost certainly illegal but she is just too scared to do anything, though she HAS been in the office and whinged a few times. None of her workmates will take any action, though privately in the break room they agree that they are exhausted and worried and unhappy.

I just don't know what to do. I suggested that she get a GP certificate saying that she must not work more than 39 hours, but she is too scared even to do that.

I'm really ashamed that this kind of thing is happening in the UK in 2013... and 14.

They don't have HR... it's a really small company. They make luxury sofas and armchairs, top of the range, but the workforce consists of less than 20 people, 90% of them Polish, Latvian women with poor language skills, and a small handful of retired British working part time. There is no union and the workforce sound cowed from her description.

Can anyone tell me, is this new practice of forcing them to work 55 hours and paying them for 39 legal? I thought nobody had to work more than 48 hours, anyway?

I'd like to do something, but I don't know what.

B.