I’m on minimum wage, should I be paid overtime?

Thrugelmir

katel98 said:

Thrugelmir said:

katel98 said:

I often work 2-3 hours overtime with no extra pay or time reimbursed. 

Why do you work more than your contracted hours?  Are you asked to, or is this voluntary. 

The employer expects us to work unpaid overtime as it says in our contract that ‘overtime is unpaid as the time has been taken account in your salary’. However I don’t believe this would count in my case as they are only paying minimum wage. 

Then raise the issue with your line manager and HR. Point out the that the company is breaching employment law. Hefty fines and back pay are the penalties. 

Marcon

katel98 said:

Thrugelmir said:

katel98 said:

I often work 2-3 hours overtime with no extra pay or time reimbursed. 

Why do you work more than your contracted hours?  Are you asked to, or is this voluntary. 

The employer expects us to work unpaid overtime as it says in our contract that ‘overtime is unpaid as the time has been taken account in your salary’. 

So what they actually mean is that contracted hours are meaningless unless and until it comes to working out benefits/entitlements which are based on contracted hours.

But in your case, as you say, your are on MW so they need to pay you for overtime.

sammyjammy

Are you paid an hourly rate or a salary?  If salary what is it?  I only ask as you say you are paid the same amount each month which if you were paid an hourly rate would not be true.

Do you have evidence of the hours you've worked over and above the contracted hours?

Savvy_Sue

sammyjammy said:

Are you paid an hourly rate or a salary?  If salary what is it?  I only ask as you say you are paid the same amount each month which if you were paid an hourly rate would not be true.

Do you have evidence of the hours you've worked over and above the contracted hours?

At one point, I believe it was difficult to pay anyone on NMW the same every month, because in longer months there were more working days and therefore hours than in shorter working months, which gave a technical breach in the long months, and a technical overpayment in the short months. 

However, I have a feeling this has recently (within the last 12 months?) been amended, so that you CAN take the no. of hours worked pw, multiply it by 52 and divide it by 12 to give a fixed monthly salary which does not breach the NMW regs. 

I'm basing this on the colleague we USED to have on NMW: we used to work out how many hours they would work in each month and pay them that, but we spotted something which gave some sanity to the situation. 

Savvy_Sue

Savvy_Sue said:

sammyjammy said:

Are you paid an hourly rate or a salary?  If salary what is it?  I only ask as you say you are paid the same amount each month which if you were paid an hourly rate would not be true.

Do you have evidence of the hours you've worked over and above the contracted hours?

At one point, I believe it was difficult to pay anyone on NMW the same every month, because in longer months there were more working days and therefore hours than in shorter working months, which gave a technical breach in the long months, and a technical overpayment in the short months. 

However, I have a feeling this has recently (within the last 12 months?) been amended, so that you CAN take the no. of hours worked pw, multiply it by 52 and divide it by 12 to give a fixed monthly salary which does not breach the NMW regs. 

I'm basing this on the colleague we USED to have on NMW: we used to work out how many hours they would work in each month and pay them that, but we spotted something which gave some sanity to the situation. 

BTW I perhaps need to add that I can't give chapter and verse to this because our colleague is no longer NMW so it's no longer an issue. It may become an issue again before too long, if / when we start someone new on NMW ... and at that point I will have to check my memory!

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Savvy_Sue said:

sammyjammy said:

Are you paid an hourly rate or a salary?  If salary what is it?  I only ask as you say you are paid the same amount each month which if you were paid an hourly rate would not be true.

Do you have evidence of the hours you've worked over and above the contracted hours?

At one point, I believe it was difficult to pay anyone on NMW the same every month, because in longer months there were more working days and therefore hours than in shorter working months, which gave a technical breach in the long months, and a technical overpayment in the short months. 

However, I have a feeling this has recently (within the last 12 months?) been amended, so that you CAN take the no. of hours worked pw, multiply it by 52 and divide it by 12 to give a fixed monthly salary which does not breach the NMW regs. 

I'm basing this on the colleague we USED to have on NMW: we used to work out how many hours they would work in each month and pay them that, but we spotted something which gave some sanity to the situation. 

Could that not lead to a situation where, depending on what point of the year they left,  you might have to pay them extra as it wouldn't balance over the year to date?  Might be more trouble to payroll than it saved.

Savvy_Sue

ScorpiondeRooftrouser said:

Savvy_Sue said:

sammyjammy said:

Are you paid an hourly rate or a salary?  If salary what is it?  I only ask as you say you are paid the same amount each month which if you were paid an hourly rate would not be true.

Do you have evidence of the hours you've worked over and above the contracted hours?

At one point, I believe it was difficult to pay anyone on NMW the same every month, because in longer months there were more working days and therefore hours than in shorter working months, which gave a technical breach in the long months, and a technical overpayment in the short months. 

However, I have a feeling this has recently (within the last 12 months?) been amended, so that you CAN take the no. of hours worked pw, multiply it by 52 and divide it by 12 to give a fixed monthly salary which does not breach the NMW regs. 

I'm basing this on the colleague we USED to have on NMW: we used to work out how many hours they would work in each month and pay them that, but we spotted something which gave some sanity to the situation. 

Could that not lead to a situation where, depending on what point of the year they left,  you might have to pay them extra as it wouldn't balance over the year to date?  Might be more trouble to payroll than it saved.

Yes, I guess that is possible. It is usually a FTC, which people tend not to leave early (university sponsorship scheme), so probably not something to worry about - but in any case I shall only worry about it next time we have someone on the scheme, and I shan't worry very much because it's not really my responsibility any more ...