Holiday entitlement zero hours

moonraker907

Hi I hope someone can help clear some light on a friend’s situation at their work.

They are on a zero hour contract but works and guaranteed 25hrs per week, their work has told them that they can only take holiday once they have built it up over a year, which basically means that they cannot use or take any holiday until they have enough hours/days to be able to use them. This basically means the business holiday starts in April the would not able to get paid holiday until at least the September as it builds up at a very slow rate. Since April they have only built up 11.9 days out of the 22 days it states on their payslip.

 

Please can someone shed some light on this if this well-known company is doing this legally as myself have always had the full entitlement given to me at the beginning of the financial or company year which means you can use it when you want, but if you left early and used the holiday you would pay it back..

 

I feel to me that this company is breaking workers’ rights by not allowing the employees to actually take holiday when they need it i.e. school holidays etc.... but instead forcing them to build up hours over the year and when then get to book it they get denied because there are too many people off.

 

Please can someone shed some light on this please?

 

Thanks

 

elsien

If it’s a guaranteed 25 hours a week then surely it’s not a zero hours contract? 

kimwp

When you say they would not be able to get a paid
 holiday until September, do you mean a full week paid holiday?

I guess the advantage of a zero hours contract is that if you want holiday, you just don't work. It sounds like the company are trying to do a hybrid of a zero hours contract and a part time contract

Brie

I can't say whether this is illegal or not.

An employer can refuse a holiday request but they cannot outright not let someone take holidays at all.  I do know that many employers will say no holidays can be booked during the first 3 or 6 months so perhaps this is actually what is happening with your friend.  This initial ban on holidays is normally viewed as it being an interruption to someone's training in a new job.  

Here's the official view though it doesn't actually answer your question.

Holiday entitlement: Booking time off - GOV.UK

moonraker907

What the empolyer has said is that untill they build up enough hours or holiday days they cannot take any paid holiday, anything taken without having enough would be unpaid. I was to the understanding you was allocated your full years holiday at the beginning of the financial or company year then up to you to use it or loose it like in most retailers.To clear things up my friend has been with this company for 8 years but the changes only happened this year with no consultation to its staff it was just implemented, when the company is confronted the response is tough deal with it.

moonraker907

elsien said:

If it’s a guaranteed 25 hours a week then surely it’s not a zero hours contract? 

The contract is still zero hours but the company managers has given them verbally 25hrs per week, which they know could be taken away at anypoint to suit the business needs.

ButterCheese

moonraker907 said:

The contract is still zero hours but the company managers has given them verbally 25hrs per week

The contract is binding; the verbal offer is irrelevant really.  So there should be clear rights/law regarding zero hours contracts and the company, of not following them, would be non-compliant.  And when we say "company", remember that it is probbaly only 1 or a small number of managers who are interpreting this rule, it might be wrong

itsthelittlethings

If they have built up 11 days since April that is two weeks so they should have been able to take a week around July. It does seem a bit unreasonable but I can also see where they’re coming from.

elsien

I presume that what your friend wants is paid holiday for the week they’re not in work because otherwise, they could just take a week off. 

I’m still a bit confused though, because if they’ve built up (just as an example) five days holiday up to now then are they being prevented from taking those five days?
Or are you saying that they want to take 10 days when they’ve only built up five? Because I can see why the employer is saying no to that last one. On a zero hour contract they can decline to work at any time, so the employer couldn’t claw back any overpaid holiday from someone working their notice period because they don’t have to give notice.

That I think is the main difference between employees with a certain number of hours and people like your friend. 

It may also be that if there is a downturn in work and your friend no longer gets their verbally guaranteed 25 hours, again there is no way for the employer to take back any overpayment overpayment. 

Either way the company potentially lose money if they allow zero hours staff  to take too much leave too soon. 

EnPointe

workign on an accruals basis  is entirely legal, even when people have contracted hours  ( although it is uncommon after the first year  when peopel have contracted hours ) 

for  anyone on a  ZHC or  casual engagement an  accruals basis  the the normal pattern for paid leave 
 

EnPointe

kimwp said:

When you say they would not be able to get a paid
 holiday until September, do you mean a full week paid holiday?

I guess the advantage of a zero hours contract is that if you want holiday, you just don't work. It sounds like the company are trying to do a hybrid of a zero hours contract and a part time contract

there are some organisations who  give people indicative amounts of hours  but engage on a ZHC this is one  of the topics  which  reform to employment legislation seeks to address. 

there are some organisations who have contracted hours but allow people  relatively  easily to take unpaid leave    
there are some  organisaTIONS who have contractds  which  guarantee an offer of hours   per pay period but  don;t hold you to the hours ( i.e.  you won;t be paid for and then 'owe' any early finish etc )