MSE News: Overtime should count towards holiday pay, rules tribunal

specialboy

It's only applicable to workers who are made to work overtime week in week out not to everyone who does a few hours here and there. All employers will need do is to pay overtime at standard rate, what they save in one hand can then be paid out in the other.

Consumerist

This may be more of an incentive for employers to employ more staff rather than force (in some cases) current employees to do overtime on a zero-hours contract..

SnowMan

lulu_92 wrote: »

For a long period of time I was working 6 or 7 days a week but only got holidays for 25 days a year

There is an anomaly in the rules which adversely affects those who work 6 or 7 days per week best explained with an example covering different ways to work a 30 hour week.


If you are contracted to work 7.5 hours per day for each of 4 days per week at say £7 per hour.

Then your statutory holiday entitlement is 22.4 days (= 5.6 x 4) days

Which is 168 hours (= 22.4 x 7.5) off work for which you should be paid holiday pay of 22.4 x 7.5 x 7 =£1,176pa



If you are contracted to work 6 hours per day for each of 5 days per week at say £7 per hour.

Then your statutory holiday entitlement is 28 days (= 5.6 x 5)

Which is still 168 hours (= 28 x 6) off work for which you should be paid holiday pay of 28 x 6 x 7 =£1,176pa



But if you are contracted to work 5 hours per day for each of 6 days per week at say £7 per hour.

Then your statutory holiday entitlement is still 28 days (=5.6 x 5)

Which is only 140 hours (= 28 x 5) off work and for which you should be paid holiday pay of 140 x 7 =£980pa


In all 3 cases cases you are working a 30 hour week at £7 per hour and are paid the same total amount over the year (i.e. pay for hours worked + holiday pay) of £10,920 = 30 x 52 x 7

But by working the 30 weekly hours in 6 days rather than 4 or 5 days, you have to work an extra 28 extra hours to get that £10,920, because you get 28 hours less paid holiday.

If that doesn't make logical sense then you've probably understood it :beer::T

chrisjtilbury

RedDwarf82 wrote: »

They need the work done, don't they?

Sure.

But it might now be that instead of offering overtime to current employees to do the extra work, companies decide to employ casual staff on zero hours contracts.

Sadly there will be ways around this for the unscrupulous employers who have been taking advantage and it'll the ones which take the pain will be the well-intentioned ones who weren't taking advantage in the first place.

lulu_92

SnowMan wrote: »

There is an anomaly in the rules which adversely affects those who work 6 or 7 days per week best explained with an example covering different ways to work a 30 hour week.


If you are contracted to work 7.5 hours per day for each of 4 days per week at say £7 per hour.

Then your statutory holiday entitlement is 22.4 days (= 5.6 x 4) days

Which is 168 hours off work for which you should be paid holiday pay of 22.4 x 7.5 x 7 =£1,176pa



If you are contracted to work 6 hours per day for each of 5 days per week at say £7 per hour.

Then your statutory holiday entitlement is 28 days (= 5.6 x 5)

Which is 168 hours off work for which you should be paid holiday pay of 28 x 6 x 7 =£1,176pa



But if you are contracted to work 5 hours per day for each of 6 days per week at say £7 per hour.

Then your statutory holiday entitlement is still 28 days (=5.6 x 5)

Which is 140 hours (= 28 x 5) off work for which you should be paid holiday pay of 140 x 7 =£980pa


In all 3 cases cases you are working a 30 hour week at £7 per hour and are paid the same total amount over the year (i.e. pay for hours worked + holiday pay) of £10,920 = 30 x 52 x 7

But by working the 30 weekly hours in 6 days rather than 4 or 5 days, you increase the number of hours you have to work in a year (28 extra hours in the example) to get that £10,920, because you get less hours of holiday, while receiving the same total pay overall (pay for hours worked + holiday pay).

Fair enough, but in my case I wasn't working my contracted hours over more days, in fact I was working double my contract over 1 or 2 days (so some weeks I would work 12 hours on a friday instead of six, plus my other 24 hours.)

One week OH and I counted our hours and I did 65 and he did 72 over 7 days. Our contracts were 30 and 39 hours

Viberduo

My last employer used to hire people on full time contracts then suddenly changed all new employess to part time, however they gave you full time work in the sense that during training it was meant to last no more than 2 weeks, but training was full time, but apart from about 2 days actual training the rest was doing the same work as the regular staff (and just so happened the "training" was in the busiest part of year) then when training finished it was quiet time of year, then a month later it was a busier part again so everyone was given full time hours, I remember being "asked" if I wanted to work 20 days straight without a break(i.e wanting to work on days off and for 10 hours a day)

This was the norm with them, part of the reason was they knew certain times of the year custom would be slow so a part time member of staff wouldnt get paid for just sitting around, other was that any "overtime" was paid in arrears by 4-6 weeks i.e payroll cut off date was about the 12th so if you worked full time 13th to the 30th you wouldnt get paid for that overtime till the 30th of the following month.

Also as it was part time they messed around with breaks i.e used to tell us we were not entitled to a break for a 4 hour shift, and if they did give us one it was 3 hours into a 4 hour shift! or sometimes they gave you a break 3 and a half hours into a 4 hour shift knowing by time you got back from break and got a call the call would likely take over 15 minutes.

Anyway back to the holiday time, doesnt part time workers get less allowance?

anamenottaken

chrisjtilbury wrote: »

Sure.

But it might now be that instead of offering overtime to current employees to do the extra work, companies decide to employ casual staff on zero hours contracts.

Sadly there will be ways around this for the unscrupulous employers who have been taking advantage and it'll the ones which take the pain will be the well-intentioned ones who weren't taking advantage in the first place.

If they employ someone on a zero hours contract, the employee is already entitled to holiday in relation to time actually worked - at whatever rate of pay the worked hours were paid. How does that change the cost to the employer? What am I missing?

short_cake

surely its not gonna be that easy getting an employer to pay the extra anyway , If you like my mrs does work for a company where she has a 20hr a week contract , but will often do 30 hrs a week - how would she go about saying , excuse me mr employer can u pls pay me when i go on holiday 30 hrs and the employer says no - isn't it gonna cost us a fair whack in getting the employer to pay up with having to take them to a tribunal then causing bad feeling ?

anamenottaken

Vince Cable has announced he is setting up a new taskforce to assess the impact of the ruling.

However, it appears this taskforce will consist of members from seven employer organisations and there's an absence it seems of anyone from a TU or other employee organisation or from a law centre.

Their conclusion will surely be that this is going to bring the British economy to its knees.[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

bugslet

As an employer, I'm not bothered if they say going forward, you average up overtime and pay it as part of holiday pay.

What doesn't work is paying it retrospectivelyover several years, there was no provision made in original charges to customers. If it's limited to three months, then that's something companies can cope with.