Payment for holidays

ayrforce1

I have worked for the same company for over 18 years. Over that period when stopping for 2 weeks holiday I was always been paid my 2 weeks holiday pay, plus my weeks pay for the week worked, on the day I stopped . Without consultation my employer has decided to now pay my holidays as a weekly wage each week during the holiday period. I stopped for my holidays today and was only informed of this by a fellow employee , who was told in a phone call from the employer about an hour before I was due to finish for the day. A few weeks ago my employer informed me that my wages were to be paid through my bank , I was paid in cash , legal and above board, previous to this. I was not consulted on these changes and believe that he has breached the implied terms of my contract, as I have no written statement or written contract to consult.
Any input or advise would be welcome , I leave for my holidays early tomorrow so my contact with the forum will be limited.
So it will now cost me to withdraw my wages by debit card whilst abroad as I didn`t even have time to visit a bank when I was hit with this.

sangie595

Sorry, but regardless of what may have happened before, there is no legal right to be paid in advance. And there is only an entitlement to be paid - not to be paid in cash.

Passing by bank transfer is generally a relatively automated process- irregular payments such as you describe are not impossible, but it does complicate the system. You should also consider the fact that most employers have moved to monthly pay now as it is cheaper to process monthly, and this may well be the next move. So having a buffer would be a good idea for the future.

I hope you have a nice holiday regardless of this disappointment.

jobbingmusician

This all sounds very odd to me. Probably my lack of experience, but I haven't heard of anyone being paid in cash for a very long time - the odd arrangements for paying you for your holiday obviously relate to this.

There are quite a few things to unpick, here.

1. Are you actually being paid 4.6 weeks holiday each year? This is not pay on top of your normal weekly pay. You are entitled to be paid for 52.14 weeks each year, but 28 days of this (minimum) should be paid leave.

2. You should have been given a statement of your main T & C of employment within 2 months of starting work. (Except that I have no idea what the law about this was 18 years ago! ) Given that you've never had a statement of T & C, I think you have a strong case for claiming custom and practice, and reclaiming from your employers any costs which you incur as a result of their sudden change in payment method. I stress that I am not an expert, however.

My first action, if this were me, would be to raise a grievance under the company's grievance procedure (if they don't have one, just send a fairly friendly letter but head it GRIEVANCE) pointing out that you understand that they may need to modernise their payments to staff, but this change without notice has had a financial cost to you, which you expect them to reimburse.

(Please note that it took me ages to write the post above, as life kept getting in the way. It's not intended to contradict Sangie - I hadn't seen her reply when I posted this.)

ayrforce1

I work for a small company , and cash payment probably suited them because some customers still pay by cash and it cuts down on banking. I get 30 days holiday a year. I refer to enforced changes to what I consider my employment terms, and monthly pay is not normal in my line of work. I did not request to be paid by bank transfer nor was I consulted on this , I was told it was happening

jobbingmusician

I don't think the failure to consult is relevant. The employers have no obligation to consult of which I am aware, and in any case it would be incredibly simple to demonstrate a business case for paying through non-cash methods in this day and age. What is more relevant, to my mind, is their sudden change to custom and practice which has led you into unforeseen expenditure and extra costs. Do be aware of your responsibility to minimise these extra costs, BTW!

sangie595

jobbingmusician wrote: »

This all sounds very odd to me. Probably my lack of experience, but I haven't heard of anyone being paid in cash for a very long time - the odd arrangements for paying you for your holiday obviously relate to this.

There are quite a few things to unpick, here.

1. Are you actually being paid 4.6 weeks holiday each year? This is not pay on top of your normal weekly pay. You are entitled to be paid for 52.14 weeks each year, but 28 days of this (minimum) should be paid leave. It is 5.6 not 4.6, which may include public holidays.

2. You should have been given a statement of your main T & C of employment within 2 months of starting work. (Except that I have no idea what the law about this was 18 years ago! ) Given that you've never had a statement of T & C, I think you have a strong case for claiming custom and practice, and reclaiming from your employers any costs which you incur as a result of their sudden change in payment method. I stress that I am not an expert, however. I do know what the law was 18 years ago - it was 13 weeks. That is irrelevant however. A strong case of what? The OP cannot prove that they were not given a contract 18 years ago. They could have lost it by now. Few people would still have a contract from 18 years ago. And "custom and practice" does not imbue any right to legally claim against an employer for costs you claim to be a result of a change in payment method. How does the OP reclaim these costs from the employer - under which law? Because the truth be told, if the employer isn't willing to do this as a goodwill gesture, it would be exceedingly difficult to proceed in such a basis in law. There is no right, regardless of previous practice, to be paid in advance! Depending on payment in advance is therefore an unreliable method of budgeting. That is not the employers problem.

My first action, if this were me, would be to raise a grievance under the company's grievance procedure (if they don't have one, just send a fairly friendly letter but head it GRIEVANCE) pointing out that you understand that they may need to modernise their payments to staff, but this change without notice has had a financial cost to you, which you expect them to reimburse.

(Please note that it took me ages to write the post above, as life kept getting in the way. It's not intended to contradict Sangie - I hadn't seen her reply when I posted this.)

I would certainly not be heading down a grievance route - after 18 years, entering into dispute with an employer is best kept for something which has a strong legal basis. Much stronger than complaining about a right that you don't have. Telling an employer that you "expect" them to reimburse you is going to put their backs up, and it's an expectation you can't enforce.

It would be far better, if you do anything at all, to have a friendly chat and explain that this did make things a bit more complex for you, and you hadn't had time to plan for this so you incurred costs. And is there any way that they'd see their way to making this right for you?

18 years is a long time, and hopefully there is goodwill on both sides here. But if there is or there isn't, I wouldn't want to blow a mutually peaceful co-existence over a few £s. I'd save disputes for something bigger and a lot more important, and which I had a good chance of winning.

sangie595

Ps @ jobbing
Yes, cash payment is unusual these days, although it does still happen.i must be older than you - payment before a holiday is because with cash, you can't pay on pay day of the person is on holiday. And whilst there is no right to payment in advance, the employer also can't say that they won't pay on pay day because you aren't there! Hence why holiday pay would be paid in the wage packet before holiday is taken.

Banking changed things. My parents- and I may be old, but not that old! - couldn't get a bank account. They didn't earn enough. Building societies were where many working class people kept their savings. Or post office accounts. It wasn't until the 80s (perversely, it was a byproduct of Thatcher), that most people began to have access to mainstream banking products. I was the first person in my family to have a "real" bank account, and I had to have that to pay my grant into for university!

I still recall the disbelief I had when I was first told that I wouldn't be getting a cheque on pay day, and my wages were going straight into the bank. I think I spent about three days wondering if they would ever turn up!

Savvy_Sue

I can't remember ever being paid in cash personally, although I do remember brown wages envelopes (and used them myself when I ran a small payroll!) which served as payslips.

My current employer was paying by cheque long after I felt it was 'normal', and it's left us with an annoying 'custom and practice' issue. We were always given our cheques on or before 25th of the month, so that we could pay them in and see them 'clear' before the end of the month. when we moved over to BACS payments, we carried on paying on 25th. And we still do, although again to ensure it 'clears', we put the payments through on the 24th. So this month the money was almost certainly in my account on Thursday 22nd, to ensure it was there on Friday 23rd, because it was due in by 25th.

Which is all fine except it complicates payroll for RTI - the salary paid covers to the end of the month, but SMP and SSP can only be paid up to 25th. and so on.

I've suggested that over the course of a year we could push it back a day at a time until we are paying on the last working day of the month, but I've met some resistance!