Bitter/sweet job offer :(

paulineb_2

bestpud wrote: »

Holiday entitlement is based on contracted hours, not overtime hours.

You had a very generous employer when they calculated your holiday entitlement that way paulineb!

They actually weren't generous at all. The relationship broke down entirely due to my boss, who had been bullying me and a few other of us since I started. I went into work one day to get a letter telling me to come back in the following day to be dismissed for reasons I wasnt to be told, without representation and when I went off ill with the stress of it all, they refused to pay me SSP so I had to claim ESA for the duration. She was as tight as a ducks backside, our hourly rate was also pants

They'd have paid me nothing if they could have got away with it, my boss had no HR department, she had a franchise and a parent company who could step in when it came to hiring and firing and other issues but I had to fight them to pay me anything, she knew nothing about wages, sick pay, our wages were frequently late and wrong. I was on 6.50 an hour so the overtime I did wasn't going to make me rich, I just wanted what I was due and the overtime was done in the first place to help her out as she was ridiculously short staffed, I wasn't trying to accrue extra holidays or holiday pay, I actually took one days leave in a 10 month period because we we so short staffed they couldnt get anyone to cover me.

Before this turns into the is Pauline right or wrong thread, I just want to say that I posted what I posted initially in response to someone who said the job was a scam. I was actually trying to encourage the OP to take the job. I then got facepalmed by a very new user when I responded back and I woke up this morning to someone who decided to troll me by PM, having trolled me in various guises over the site during the last week, including making personal comments about my appearance, making near identical usernames to mine, starting threads about me and then you get people who pop up on threads having made a few posts and are immediately rude about you. I've no issue with anyone on this thread disagreeing with me, at all. But its now getting to the stage where you post anything and someone is lining up to have a pop, because PPR them and they just make a new user name and now they've taken their issue with me to PM having been PPR'd again. Just a bit strange that after the events of the last week, another new user name pops up and can't be civil even if you disagree.

I was trying in the first instance to say to the OP, take the job if you really want to take it. And if I am wrong about the holiday pay issue, fair enough, but a google search will show that there are many companies who actually do pay holiday pay in line with overtime, Ive worked for several and Ive managed two projects where part time staff got paid according to every hour they worked, not just their contracted hours, and we used european working time regulations to work out what they were due.

But from the tribunal case listed by ACAS that I quoted (Sept 13), it seems that different employers will apply working time directives in different ways.

Its fine to disagree, Ive got no problem with people on here saying I was wrong and if I am wrong, Ive got no problem holding my hands up and saying so.

Sorry if I derailed the thread, I hope it all works out for you OP and that you find a way to move forward with this.

zzzLazyDaisy

mel-gibson wrote: »

OP will be entitled to 26 hours pay for every week off they take, even if they do 15 hours a week overtime.

Employer only pays pension contributions on contractual hours, not overtime hours.

They only get sick pay pro rated to their contractual hours, not overtime hours.

paulineb wrote: »

Where did I get that idea from? Working time regulations. I worked part time in a job a couple of years ago and I accrued holiday pay for every hour I worked, not just my contracted hours. When I was leaving the job I still had holidays to take and my holiday pay entitlement was calculated on every hour I had worked, overtime, not just the contracted hours I did..

Just to clarify -

There is a world of difference between the strict legal provision and the arrangements made by the public sector and some larger employers.

Some employers choose to make more generous provision than the strict statutory provision, usually larger employers, and this is also common in the public sector, such as the NHS. However they are not legally obliged to do this.

For less generous employers, the holiday pay will be paid on contractual hours only - Mel Gibson is right, for employees with contracted hours, overtime is not taken into account when calculating holidays - nor redundancy or notice pay either. Their only obligation re sick pay is SSP if the employee qualifies and many small to medium employers are still not obliged to contribute towards a pension (and are unlikely to do so).

EDIT - cross posted with the post about the ET ruling. The thing to remember about ET decisions is that they are decisions of first instance and cannot bind any other court or tribunal, so do not set a precedent. The employee can appeal an ET decision on a point of law, and this decision - if reported correctly - should be appealled, though that may depend on how deep the employee's pockets are, or whether they are backed by a union or other organisation.

applebite

Have you looked into the bank? Most trusts/boards will take on staff that already work there, although funding for that goes through peaks as well. If you weren't able to get bank work and your department weren't able to offer you more shifts, would you be ale to survive on 26 hours?

I'm a nurse as well and had one department from the start that I had my heart set on, ended up in the same position as you, I got offered the post after someone else so it was only pt hours they could offer me with the promise of overtime shifts. I took it as life is too short to work in a job I dont want to. I'd work damn hard to get that job and I can sustain only working part time.

I would say if you and your family can afford it, go for it. You dont want to regret a chance, as it might not come along again.

lavandergirl_2

Sacha, is it a permanent post? If it is and if it is your dream job, go for it! Better to regret something that you have done than something you have not done.

The NHS is always changing and it needs people who are passionate in what they are doing.

Congratulations btw!

GedlingRed

lavandergirl wrote: »

Sacha, is it a permanent post? If it is and if it is your dream job, go for it! Better to regret something that you have done than something you have not done.

The NHS is always changing and it needs people who are passionate in what they are doing.

Congratulations btw!

I was going to post the same thing

Richard53

So you need 40 hours but are only being offered 26?

If the promised overtime doesn't materialise, can you find a part-time job locally to mop up the other 14 hours? That would keep you financially stable (or something like it) and you still have your foot in the door when other opportunities become available.

My step-daughter works in the NHS. She always wanted to move closer to home and kept her eyes on the internal job postings. Then, in the same week, her husband was made redundant from a well-paid job and a position was advertised for her role in a hospital a couple of miles from here. She was desperate to get the job and applied, only for the job to go to an internal candidate. However, they were prepared to offer her a position, full-time but at a lower grade.

She went for it, the person appointed to the original job moved on in a few months, and she is now senior to all her colleagues, and living and working in the area she wants.

To quote lavendergirl (and also I think Oscar Wilde), you always regret the things you didn't do more than the things you did.

getmore4less

hazyjo wrote: »

At least there'll be some redundancy with permanent - a contract would just end (correct me if I'm wrong!). And if the OP needs a mortgage, it might cause probs there too - although not sure that'll be the case from what I can gather from the posts here.

Jx

failure to renew a fixed term contract is a redundancy

getmore4less

paulineb wrote: »

Heres a tribunal case from the ACAS website on the holiday pay and overtime issue. Im aware from the paragraph at the bottom that it may be appealed because at the moment it only relates to the 4 weeks statutory leave under EU law and not additional leave that workers in the UK get, but it looks like it could have implications for employers and employees with reference to overtime and accrued leave/holiday pay. Case was from september 2013.

Sorry about the bold type, just did a copy and paste
Tribunal ruling links holiday pay to overtime

An employment tribunal recently ruled in favour of an employee who argued that his holiday pay should reflect his overtime pay as well as his basic wages. The case has implications for how employers apply the rules under the Working Time Regulations and has moved the UK closer to EU law.
According to a report on the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) website, the case moves holiday pay calculations towards workers' average earnings in the 12 weeks leading up to their holiday - including overtime.
The tribunal heard that the employee worked a 35-hour week, plus overtime when necessary, as determined by a roster system. He regularly worked up to nine hours each day and occasionally up to 12 hours to cover for his colleagues.
The employee felt his holiday pay should reflect the actual pay he received rather than his basic salary alone, while the employer maintained that his overtime work was voluntary and his holiday pay should only take account of his basic pay, which was how it had always calculated his holiday pay entitlement.
The tribunal held that hours worked over and above the employee's contractual seven hours were 'intrinsically linked' to his performance of his role, and it was irrelevant whether the overtime was voluntary or not.
The tribunal found the employee had been underpaid in respect of his holiday pay entitlement and the parties arranged an out of court settlement.
This decision could be tested by the higher courts but, for the time being, any paid overtime (whether voluntary or not) should now be considered alongside other premiums in employers' holiday pay calculations, says the CIPD report.
As an added complication, this decision relates to the four weeks' holiday pay that workers are entitled to under European law. It does not apply to the additional 1.6 weeks' holiday that workers receive under UK law. It seems likely that the judgement will be appealed to clear up the confusion and avoid a situation where there are different rules for different weeks of a worker's holiday, says the report.

You have confused holiday accrual and holiday pay,
(from your early post...
You build up holiday entitlement on every hour you work in a job, not just your contracted hours)

that case is holiday pay so you don't accrue more holiday by doing overtime you get a higher rate for the holiday you take

The holiday accrual is still based on the contractual hours,

Holiday pay on the average hourly rate over the 12week period
I thought this was already in the WTD and employment act, but that may be only for variable pay, this will be including overtime to calculate the average. what is missing is how this is implemented within the WTD and employment act definition of a "weeks pay".

sacha28

Hi peeps, yesterday was very busy so didn't have time to add anything!!

Just to clarify, this is a permanent position, not fixed term.

I am still to'ing and fro'ing!! I'm fully aware that we are nearing a new financial year so that could swing in my favour with regards to finding the funding to increase the hours they have offered. It will probably, from previous trust to trust transfers experience, take nearly 3/4 months to even start the job :eek: so this gives us, as a family,time to do much more financial research (this is a teaching post so there may be childcare grants available etc).

I guess it rides on that, 26 hours will earn me half of what I earn now (that's basic with no enhancements) so is in no way viable

cheeswright

if the job came up full time in 6 months you'd take it yes....?
but
this department have already proven that they are more likely to recruit from within...so if you dont take it..and now they have funding for someone working 0.6 (ish)
they will have to recruit for that post so as not to loose the funding
the new recruit may well want to work full time too..so job gone
or they may offer the other half of the job part time too
so you could have an even lower offer say 0.4...

Why not get back to them and say you are not really sure if you can work it - you are looking at the figures and you with 0.8 permanent contract you would sign today ! but are finding it challenging to make your finances work at quite these numbers and is there any room for negotiation.
nothing lost...
and good luck