Annual Leave

[mezzyd]

Queried my situation wrt to this and received this response:

Your holiday allowance is calculated as follows:
Holiday allowance for full time employee working 52 weeks with less than 5 years’ service= 32 days = 6.4 weeks
Working weeks for full time employee working 52 weeks = 228 days = 45.6 weeks
Pro-rated holiday allowance for 42 week worker – (42/45.6 x 6.4) = 5.89 weeks
Total weeks paid to you including annual leave = 42 + 5.89 = 47.89 weeks

So, seems that since my pro-rated holiday allowance is greater than the new statutory minimum of 5.6 weeks then I'm not entitled to any rebalance given the recent court case

Quite surprised LA replied so quickly and with decent clarity

Been looking into this a bit as I'm not sure I am paid correctly.

The judgment actually says, "in short, the amount of leave to which a part-year worker under a permanent contract is entitled is not required by EU law to be, and under domestic law is not, pro rated to that of a full-time worker".

The answer you were given talks about a pro-rated holiday allowance for a 42 week worker, which doesn't seem to be in accordance with the judgment as I read it.

Part-time workers are not allowed to be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers, so if they get 32 days, you should also get 32 days, no?

Share your thoughts wise ones, as I want to know as much as I can before I go asking!

 

[Paul]

Been looking into this a bit as I'm not sure I am paid correctly.

The judgment actually says, "in short, the amount of leave to which a part-year worker under a permanent contract is entitled is not required by EU law to be, and under domestic law is not, pro rated to that of a full-time worker".

The answer you were given talks about a pro-rated holiday allowance for a 42 week worker, which doesn't seem to be in accordance with the judgment as I read it.

Part-time workers are not allowed to be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers, so if they get 32 days, you should also get 32 days, no?

Share your thoughts wise ones, as I want to know as much as I can before I go asking!

the NEU support staff newsletter mentions this.

Support staff eBulletin Autumn 2022 - Support staff eBulletin Autumn 2022

nationaleducationunion.foleon.com

 

[Mirage]

the NEU support staff newsletter mentions this.

Support staff eBulletin Autumn 2022 - Support staff eBulletin Autumn 2022

nationaleducationunion.foleon.com

This also mentions a minimum 5.6 week paid holiday entitlement & since, in my case, I'm paid for 5.89 then I'm not entitled to further.

 

[Baldilocks]

I asked our finance manager about it, and it came back that we already get a more generous pay/holiday structure than they need to give us. I was pretty happy with that bit of info.

 

[Nick Mitchener]

the NEU support staff newsletter mentions this.

Support staff eBulletin Autumn 2022 - Support staff eBulletin Autumn 2022

nationaleducationunion.foleon.com

So according to this

>>However, the law is now entirely settled, and this means that all permanent employees/workers (with limited exceptions in the first and final year of employment) are entitled to be paid for at least 5.6 weeks’ leave each year regardless of how many weeks they work each year<<

You could have a permanent post of 10 weeks per year and still get 5.6 weeks of paid holiday? That doesn't make any sort of sense.

I thought the worked example from the council made a lot of sense.

 

[Golem]

So according to this

>>However, the law is now entirely settled, and this means that all permanent employees/workers (with limited exceptions in the first and final year of employment) are entitled to be paid for at least 5.6 weeks’ leave each year regardless of how many weeks they work each year<<

You could have a permanent post of 10 weeks per year and still get 5.6 weeks of paid holiday? That doesn't make any sort of sense.

I thought the worked example from the council made a lot of sense.

I was wondering if everyone moved onto the same amount of days holiday, then perhaps those who had received extra, for years of service, would lose them.

 

[LAJ392]

Im really confused about this, I am term time only and my pay is pro rata for this. I presumed that term time only doesnt get paid for any holidays at all?
I havent heard from our HR yet on this, has anyone who is term time only found that their pay has been changed since the ruling?

confused.com here

 

[Mirage]

Im really confused about this, I am term time only and my pay is pro rata for this. I presumed that term time only doesnt get paid for any holidays at all?
I havent heard from our HR yet on this, has anyone who is term time only found that their pay has been changed since the ruling?

confused.com here

You are absolutely entitled to paid holidays and always have been...as i understand post recent ruling your are entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks

My pay was unchanged as I already received more than 5.6 weeks paid holidays...I'm TTO + 3

 

[CovTech]

Im really confused about this, I am term time only and my pay is pro rata for this. I presumed that term time only doesnt get paid for any holidays at all?
I havent heard from our HR yet on this, has anyone who is term time only found that their pay has been changed since the ruling?

confused.com here

You should be paid the term time - 190 days/38 weeks for schools in England and Wales plus any extra weeks you're contracted for
You are then paid for your holiday allowance
It is assumed that your holiday days are taken during the school holidays

The whole lot is then added to a single pot and split 12 ways to be paid over the 12 pay packets you get a year

 

[Fallout_Girl]

Im really confused about this, I am term time only and my pay is pro rata for this. I presumed that term time only doesnt get paid for any holidays at all?
I havent heard from our HR yet on this, has anyone who is term time only found that their pay has been changed since the ruling?

confused.com here

You need to talk to your HR department and they should be able to tell you the calculation for holiday pay and how much you're paid. Here for example we work 41 weeks a year, but we're paid for 45.2 which includes our holiday pay.

 

[Rock Chick]

You are absolutely entitled to paid holidays and always have been...as i understand post recent ruling your are entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks

My pay was unchanged as I already received more than 5.6 weeks paid holidays...I'm TTO + 3

So, I've just checked my contract and I get 5.7 weeks (28.5 days) holiday including 8 bank holidays which exceeds the minimum legal requirement. However, in a discussion with HR they advised me that full-time support staff get 25 days holiday plus 8 bank holidays totaling 33 days. It is my understanding (www.acas.org.uk/checking-holiday-entitlement) that TTO staff cannot be treated less favourably than full-time staff so should TTO staff also be getting 33 days holiday?

 

[CovTech]

So, I've just checked my contract and I get 5.7 weeks (28.5 days) holiday including 8 bank holidays which exceeds the minimum legal requirement. However, in a discussion with HR they advised me that full-time support staff get 25 days holiday plus 8 bank holidays totaling 33 days. It is my understanding (www.acas.org.uk/checking-holiday-entitlement) that TTO staff cannot be treated less favourably than full-time staff so should TTO staff also be getting 33 days holiday?

Correct - that's what the ruling from the courts at the start of the thread was about
Someone argued and won exactly that point

 

[Paul]

So according to this

>>However, the law is now entirely settled, and this means that all permanent employees/workers (with limited exceptions in the first and final year of employment) are entitled to be paid for at least 5.6 weeks’ leave each year regardless of how many weeks they work each year<<

You could have a permanent post of 10 weeks per year and still get 5.6 weeks of paid holiday? That doesn't make any sort of sense.

I thought the worked example from the council made a lot of sense.

I don't understand it but I have 2 part timers working 2 and 3 days per week, the payroll company say they get the 23 days holidays as other staff plus the 8 bank holidays, then it is prorated for the days they work and they need to take leave if there is a bank holiday on a day they work.

Nice if you don't work Mondays.

 

[seebee]

I have been at my current school since 2003.
I have received back pay from April 2021 from our Academy trust - this is stage 1.
Our LA is currently working on our back pay - this is stage 2 and 3.

 

[Rock Chick]

I'm resurrecting this thread as I have a further question. It turns out that I get more than the statutory minimum holiday entitlement (6.2 weeks/31 days) because I've been here over 10 years BUT a full-time member of staff who has been here as long gets 7.2 weeks/36 days. This seems to be treating me less favourably than a full-time colleague. Should I also be entitled to 36 days, or because I am already getting more than the statutory minimum is that it?

Also, the calculation from HR says I'm only actually paid for 29.59 days because I work 35 hours a week, 5 days a week for 39 weeks of the year which they work out as 0.822FTE. I thought the Supreme Court in Harpur Trust v. Brazel says that holiday entitlement must not be pro-rated so I should receive my whole 31 days?

Every article or solicitor review I read seems to suggest that HR are not doing the holiday calculations correctly but I am worried I may have missed a crucial clause.

Any thoughts? I am in discussion with my union rep as I don't think this is right.

 

[mezzyd]

I'm resurrecting this thread as I have a further question. It turns out that I get more than the statutory minimum holiday entitlement (6.2 weeks/31 days) because I've been here over 10 years BUT a full-time member of staff who has been here as long gets 7.2 weeks/36 days. This seems to be treating me less favourably than a full-time colleague. Should I also be entitled to 36 days, or because I am already getting more than the statutory minimum is that it?

Also, the calculation from HR says I'm only actually paid for 29.59 days because I work 35 hours a week, 5 days a week for 39 weeks of the year which they work out as 0.822FTE. I thought the Supreme Court in Harpur Trust v. Brazel says that holiday entitlement must not be pro-rated so I should receive my whole 31 days?

Every article or solicitor review I read seems to suggest that HR are not doing the holiday calculations correctly but I am worried I may have missed a crucial clause.

Any thoughts? I am in discussion with my union rep as I don't think this is right.

I think your interpretation is correct - holiday pay can no longer be pro-rata for part-year workers (Harpur Trust v Brazel) & part-time workers should not be treated less favourably than full-time workers (The Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000)

Please post your eventual outcome as this would be helpful to me plus others potentially. I have asked about this but think it could be a while before I get any sort of answer, let alone a good answer!

 

[Mirage]

I'm resurrecting this thread as I have a further question. It turns out that I get more than the statutory minimum holiday entitlement (6.2 weeks/31 days) because I've been here over 10 years BUT a full-time member of staff who has been here as long gets 7.2 weeks/36 days. This seems to be treating me less favourably than a full-time colleague. Should I also be entitled to 36 days, or because I am already getting more than the statutory minimum is that it?

Also, the calculation from HR says I'm only actually paid for 29.59 days because I work 35 hours a week, 5 days a week for 39 weeks of the year which they work out as 0.822FTE. I thought the Supreme Court in Harpur Trust v. Brazel says that holiday entitlement must not be pro-rated so I should receive my whole 31 days?

Every article or solicitor review I read seems to suggest that HR are not doing the holiday calculations correctly but I am worried I may have missed a crucial clause.

Any thoughts? I am in discussion with my union rep as I don't think this is right.

Such a grey area shrouded in vague language

My union (Unison): "The law says that someone working a full year is entitled to at least 5.6 weeks of annual leave (28 days for anyone working full-time hours in a week and this can include the eight bank holidays). The judgment means that an employee working all year, but say, for just two days a week is entitled to 11.2 days a year (2 x 5.6 weeks, so 2.24 weeks or 11.2 days)".

Entitlement is still pro-rated

 

[mezzyd]

Such a grey area shrouded in vague language

My union (Unison): "The law says that someone working a full year is entitled to at least 5.6 weeks of annual leave (28 days for anyone working full-time hours in a week and this can include the eight bank holidays). The judgment means that an employee working all year, but say, for just two days a week is entitled to 11.2 days a year (2 x 5.6 weeks, so 2.24 weeks or 11.2 days)".

Entitlement is still pro-rated

That is correct when less than full-time hours worked each week, but no longer for part-year workers (less than 52 week contract) since the Supreme Court judgment of Harpur Trust v Brazel

 

[Mirage]

That is correct when less than full-time hours worked each week, but no longer for part-year workers (less than 52 week contract) since the Supreme Court judgment of Harpur Trust v Brazel

Work 35 hrs/week but for 1week/year and still get 28 days holidays/year?

Doesn't make any sense.

 

[CovTech]

Work 35 hrs/week but for 1week/year and still get 28 days holidays/year?

Doesn't make any sense.

Reductio ad absurdum
That's a nonsensical example that would never happen so why bring it up?