Annual Leave entitlement.

Masomnia

Comms69 wrote: »

None of that changes the legal position of use it or lose it. The OP has saved up 75% of their leave to use in the last 12.5% of their employment...

Use it or lose doesn't apply on termination. So how much there is depends on the annual leave year. If it's January - December then arguably OP will have lost what they accrued from August to December, but will be at least eligible for what they accrue from January to termination.

OP, maybe you should post what your leave year is and what your annual leave entitlement is from your contract and we can maybe work out what you're entitled to?

The case I think you're referring to was a German one that went to the ECJ, where the ECJ held that employers need to take steps to inform employees that they are going to lose holidays if they don't take it, and suggested that the onus was on the employer to make sure that employees were taking their leave. So it caused a bit of a stir because it casts doubt on how valid use it or lose it really is. It looks like use it or lose it is lawful, provided that the employer warned the employee that they were going to lose leave. I'm not aware of any major cases in the UK since then. OP wouldn't need to bring the claim to the European Courts as UK tribunals are bound by their decisions.

Masomnia

TELLIT01 wrote: »

That is totally irrelevant. It is often possible to reclaim any holiday booked if you are then signed off sick. You also continue to accumulate annual leave when you are off sick. That is simply down to employment law and nothing the OP should feel guilty about.

Agreed, there's no way a tribunal would take a view that OP was on good terms otherwise so should suck it up! The way all these annual leave cases are interpreted is along the lines that employees have the right to proper restful time off, hence why if you're sick during your leave you can claim your leave back.

Masomnia

For those taking notes the case was Kreuziger v Land-Berlin and Max-Planck-Gesellschaft

Comms69

Masomnia wrote: »

Use it or lose doesn't apply on termination. So how much there is depends on the annual leave year. If it's January - December then arguably OP will have lost what they accrued from August to December, but will be at least eligible for what they accrue from January to termination.

OP, maybe you should post what your leave year is and what your annual leave entitlement is from your contract and we can maybe work out what you're entitled to?

The case I think you're referring to was a German one that went to the ECJ, where the ECJ held that employers need to take steps to inform employees that they are going to lose holidays if they don't take it, and suggested that the onus was on the employer to make sure that employees were taking their leave. So it caused a bit of a stir because it casts doubt on how valid use it or lose it really is. It looks like use it or lose it is lawful, provided that the employer warned the employee that they were going to lose leave. I'm not aware of any major cases in the UK since then. OP wouldn't need to bring the claim to the European Courts as UK tribunals are bound by their decisions.

Clearly the year runs apr - mar...

Masomnia

Comms69 wrote: »

Clearly the year runs apr - mar...

Assuming that's the case they should write to their employer and state that they attempted to take their statutory leave, and since i was denied it should carry over into the next leave year, and if it cannot be taken then it should be paid for. That last case I referred to was all about whether the responsibility fell on the employer to make sure that the employee takes their leave, or is at least aware of it, in this case the employee has attempted to take their leave and it has been denied. I don't see why it shouldn't carry over where the employee has attempted to take the leave. I can't imagine 3 weeks would carry over though, that needs to be checked.

Savvy_Sue

If this new role is for a new company, then you are entitled to be paid for any leave which you haven't been able to take. Your employer can tell you they'd like you to use (some of) it during your notice period, or they can pay it with your final salary.

If you're just changing role within the same company, then that's different.

System

TELLIT01 wrote: »

That is totally irrelevant. It is often possible to reclaim any holiday booked if you are then signed off sick. You also continue to accumulate annual leave when you are off sick. That is simply down to employment law and nothing the OP should feel guilty about.

Yeah, you try that after a couple of months employment and then two months off sick and then banging in a resignation a couple of months after that...unfortunately for OP, the real world is not like that.

Comms69

Masomnia wrote: »

Assuming that's the case they should write to their employer and state that they attempted to take their statutory leave - Sorry are we looking at two different cases? the OPs statutory allowance for this period of time is 14 - 16 days approx. When you discount the bank holidays and the leave already taken they're entitled to what seems like 5 -6 days leave. They're claiming an extra 10. , and since i was denied it should carry over into the next leave year - plenty of time for the employer to say take the leave on next Wednesday Friday, Monday Wednesday and Friday , and if it cannot be taken then it should be paid for. That last case I referred to was all about whether the responsibility fell on the employer to make sure that the employee takes their leave, or is at least aware of it, in this case the employee has attempted to take their leave and it has been denied. - And? The OP can be paid for the statutory leave, but this isn't really what people are discussing. It's the massive (and I suspect incorrect) over the odds leave. I don't see why it shouldn't carry over where the employee has attempted to take the leave. I can't imagine 3 weeks would carry over though, that needs to be checked.

Obviously not as there is no way the leave is statutory.

General_Grant

pelirocco wrote: »

It is a legal requitrement that you take your statutory leave entitlement , you are not allowed to carry it over ( unless you have been on long term sick leave ) , nor are they allowed to pay you in lieu . You may have to remind them there are employment laws

It is not a legal requirement that people take their statutory leave entitlement. You do not have to take any leave if you don't want to and your employer does not insist on it.