How much notice must be given by an employer to cancel my holiday?

Comms69

gwapenut wrote: »

Actually, it is different. The employer is only morally, not legally, obliged to pay.

No, it's not that simple.


if it was purely morally, you would not succeed in court action.


It is not a statutory requirement, so there is no specific act covering this. Though there is plenty of case law where employees have successfully reclaimed their costs in court.






Rent may not be the best example, but I was simply trying to illustrate a common example of when small claims is used.

sangie595

gwapenut wrote: »

Actually, it is different. The employer is only morally, not legally, obliged to pay.

Exactly. Morals are something that courts don't do well. So avoiding the necessity is better!

You asked about what counts as notice. Verbal counts. But in all cases the notice starts from the next day. So if you receive (or give) notice on a Wednesday, the first day of notice is the. Thursday.

I'm not sure what you do for a living, but it strikes me that if this is so likely to be a potential problem (and presumably for your colleagues too?) then maybe looking to negotiate with the employer for a reasonable policy would be a good idea! Whilst I understand your reluctance to mentioning approved leave if it might get cancelled, the other side of that is that it's neither good for your job nor for the employers business if adequate and planned cover isn't in place. In negotiating a policy, you could then address things like compensation etc. Are you in a union?

unforeseen

Comms69 wrote: »

It is not a statutory requirement, so there is no specific act covering this. Though there is plenty of case law where employees have successfully reclaimed their costs in court.

I doubt there is very much case law as this would be dealt via MCOL which doesn't create case law unless you appeal.

Comms69

unforeseen wrote: »

I doubt there is very much case law as this would be dealt via MCOL which doesn't create case law unless you appeal.

It doesn't create binding case law, but it does still create a precedent which can be taken into account at a judge's discretion

sangie595

Comms69 wrote: »

It doesn't create binding case law, but it does still create a precedent which can be taken into account at a judge's discretion

You mean, like any court case, it's up to the judge? If so then yes - it could go either way. Of course, none of that takes into account the immense fun and games, of taking your current employer to court. It may well be that morals and public opinion are on your side, but neither put food on the table after you've painted a target on your back.

Far better, if possible, to negotiate policy with the employer for such eventualities. If it's their policy they are less likely to "forget " anything, and good planning should ensure that such eventualities don't occur. But if they do, a written policy dictates what must happen, not chance.

Comms69

sangie595 wrote: »

You mean, like any court case, it's up to the judge? If so then yes - it could go either way. Of course, none of that takes into account the immense fun and games, of taking your current employer to court. It may well be that morals and public opinion are on your side, but neither put food on the table after you've painted a target on your back.

Far better, if possible, to negotiate policy with the employer for such eventualities. If it's their policy they are less likely to "forget " anything, and good planning should ensure that such eventualities don't occur. But if they do, a written policy dictates what must happen, not chance.

Yes that's what I was saying.


Whilst I take on your point of painting a target on your own back; I suspect we both wouldn't want to continue working for an employer who routinely cancels or threatens to cancel annual leave, leaving employees out of pocket.

sangie595

Comms69 wrote: »

Yes that's what I was saying.


Whilst I take on your point of painting a target on your own back; I suspect we both wouldn't want to continue working for an employer who routinely cancels or threatens to cancel annual leave, leaving employees out of pocket.

No I wouldn't. But a lot can depend on certain types of work, it seems to be more of a fear than a reality, and I'm also not in need of a job! People make decisions for their own circumstances, and the OP had presumably done that.

That said, I'm also in the union, so I'd have been on to them!