Overtime counting towards holidays

[Nitefly]

Working long hours is just mandatory in some professions. You're paid well to be there and delivery. Half the reward is the salary, the other hard is working in a thoroughly engaging and challenging job. Providing you aren't forced to cancel social plans, it's not so bad.

Edit - what a glorious unintentional misspelling

 

[D.P.]

The other thing with people that work long hours they aren't working every minute of every hour on their main tasks. E.g, i'm a lead developer and I certainly can't program more than 6-7 hours day but there are many hours of other tasks that fill the working week: daily scrums, weekly meetings, emergency meetings, discussions with colleagues emailing/calling clients, sys admin, documentation, brainstorming, chats at the coffee machine, spending time on OCUK, learning about new techniques, supporting the intern, etc.

the 40hr limit for highest productivity is based on a single task and doesn't consider that you might spend several hours a day on less taxing things.

 

[Pigeon_Killer]

I also get £50 a day on call and while on call 1.5x pay for any time worked over and up to 1 whole hour at a time.

I get £50 per month and am required to do two full weeks of out of hours support unpaid

 

[big_white_dog84]

This is pretty interesting for me. My employer offers pretty much unlimited overtime at good rates and most of us see this as a perk. We don 't expect holiday pay for it and in fact it could cause us problems if it results in the employer changing his approach to OT.

On the other hand we also do standby duties on a 1:10 basis. The mployer expects us to swap so that holidays are covered and we still do 36.5 nights per year. I suppose this ruling will mean we should be paid extra to ensure the holidays are covered rather than having to swap - we'll end up doing something like 32 nights per year for the current payment and being paid for an additional 4.5-ish nights to cover holidays.

 

[D.P.]

I get £50 per month and am required to do two full weeks of out of hours support unpaid

Both my sisters are vets and they are on call typically 1-2 weekends a month and 2 evens a week without a penny etc. Really can't be fun getting up at 2am because someone's cat got hit by a car, although worse still are the people that ignore their pet when it is ill all week but when it looks like it is about to die at 11pm Saturday night they call up for an emergency visit!

Still, they knew that was the deal before they even sat their A levels!

 

[estebanrey]

This is pretty interesting for me. My employer offers pretty much unlimited overtime at good rates and most of us see this as a perk. We don 't expect holiday pay for it and in fact it could cause us problems if it results in the employer changing his approach to OT.

I'm in a similar position. If I choose to come in on a Saturday I get paid it as overtime but it is completely down to me whether I come in or not. This has helped me out quite a bit on months where I needed a bit of extra money but this ruling will almost certainly mean that will be taken away.

I'm office staff but our manual workers currently get paid for working a Saturday. The thing is they are all on '5 in 7' contracts which means we can tell them what 5 days they work. Currently they all work Mon-Fri and get Saturday as overtime but today one of the bosses has already said that this ruling may mean those guys will be forced to have a day off in the week and do the Saturday as part of their contract instead.

In short, it is bad for our employees.

 

[Woogie]

None of which are contractually tied to you doing unpaid overtime though. Ergo, you'd still get all those things whether you went home on time or not.

Which is why I never used them as anything to do with the OP or the thread as a whole but in response to the rant about how people working unpaid overtime are essentially mugs.

 

[estebanrey]

Which is why I never used them as anything to do with the OP or the thread as a whole but in response to the rant about how people working unpaid overtime are essentially mugs.

Well you are in a way because all of those entitlements you have have nothing to do with you working overtime.

Where I work (local authority) everyone gets either overtime or TOIL, only the guys on £50k plus are salaried and seldom do they work more hours than they have to. My boss' boss for example is on £65k plus benefits and you rarely see him past half 4.

 

[Mr Jack]

I don't disagree but that is what it is like in many industries. As I said, you know that before you likely ever go to university to study a degree that will land you that kind of job, you certainly know it when you go for an interview.

It's certainly true that it is the norm in far too many places. I'm less sure that the degree of excess, or its consequences, are well communicated to potential applicants.

Although you already proved that 60hours weeks can be beneficial but not when they are consistent, which tend to be the case. I don't work 60 hours a week every week,, more like 40-50 (and that excludes any lunch break) but there are times when 60-70 are needed.

Even at 40-50 hours a week it's doubtful you're getting more done than you would in a 40 hour week. The problem with 60-70 hour weeks is that while more can be done in them, it's rare that (a) enough more is done with them and (b) companies are well managed enough to ensure the occasional sprint doesn't morph into regular death-march projects. Still, it's certainly the case that short periods of extra work can pay off.

 

[HangTime]

Not convinced by this myself. IMO if you choose to work overtime then you do so because you are happy with the terms offered, no additional bonus holiday required.

Could maybe tolerate it moving forward but I can't fathom it being backdated.

 

[Nitefly]

Even at 40-50 hours a week it's doubtful you're getting more done than you would in a 40 hour week.

I seriously disagree. Bernard's watch please!

 

[esoteric]

I'm really not sure what to make of this issue.

It stops the exploitation of some employee's but at what cost. As the old saying goes, give with 1 hand but take with the other.

In this situation the few who were abused has potentially caused a motion that effects everyone, even those who were cool with what they got, but suddenly find they have no more over time because their company is cutting back due to expenses.

 

[estebanrey]

Not convinced by this myself. IMO if you choose to work overtime then you do so because you are happy with the terms offered, no additional bonus holiday required.

Could maybe tolerate it moving forward but I can't fathom it being backdated.

The problem is employers will just remove optional overtime from people like myself. It may force the bad ones who use zero/low hour contracts to reduce employee entitlements to put more hours on the contracts of their employees; but it will also make the better ones (like mine) think very carefully now about their open OT policies.

There are better ways to defeat the bad employers without harming the good ones. How about enforcing a law that all overtime has to be paid at time and half at the least for example? This would force employers to offer more hours as standard (and therefore holiday entitlement).

 

[Angilion]

That's not true though, people on zero hour, irregular hours or on a casual basis are already covered by legislation to ensure they get the correct amount of Holiday Pay.

There seems to be some confusion about what compulsory overtime is, but someone on a zero hour contract who then works 30 hours in that week - that isn't 'overtime' it's just normal working hours and they will accrue the correct amount of holiday pay.
[..]

Can you tell me what legislation you're referring to and when it was passed? I know quite a few people in the situation I described, so I think it is true and you're mistaken.

 

[Surveyor]

Can you tell me what legislation you're referring to and when it was passed? I know quite a few people in the situation I described, so I think it is true and you're mistaken.

The Working Time Regulations 1998, Regulation 16:

(2) Sections 221 to 224 of the 1996 Act shall apply for the purpose of determining the amount of a week’s pay for the purposes of this regulation, subject to the modifications set out in paragraph (3).

Employment Rights Act 1996 (the 1996 Act)

224 Employments with no normal working hours.

(1)This section applies where there are no normal working hours for the employee when employed under the contract of employment in force on the calculation date.

(2)The amount of a week’s pay is the amount of the employee’s average weekly remuneration in the period of twelve weeks ending—

(a)where the calculation date is the last day of a week, with that week, and

(b)otherwise, with the last complete week before the calculation date.​

(3)In arriving at the average weekly remuneration no account shall be taken of a week in which no remuneration was payable by the employer to the employee and remuneration in earlier weeks shall be brought in so as to bring up to twelve the number of weeks of which account is taken.

Holiday pay is the average of the preceding 12 weeks where remuneration was paid.

 

[D.P.]

It's certainly true that it is the norm in far too many places. I'm less sure that the degree of excess, or its consequences, are well communicated to potential applicants.



Even at 40-50 hours a week it's doubtful you're getting more done than you would in a 40 hour week. The problem with 60-70 hour weeks is that while more can be done in them, it's rare that (a) enough more is done with them and (b) companies are well managed enough to ensure the occasional sprint doesn't morph into regular death-march projects. Still, it's certainly the case that short periods of extra work can pay off.

There isn't a need to communicate it, it is just known to everyone that works in those professions.

In a 50hr week I expect to get about 20-25% more done than a 50hr week.


Yes, employers could try to abuse workers and then suffer poor productivity if they are pushed at 60-70hr weeks for months at a time with no end in site but a few weeks to ensure a project meets its deadlines is going to improve productivity in the short term.

 

[Angilion]

The Working Time Regulations 1998, Regulation 16:

Employment Rights Act 1996 (the 1996 Act)

Holiday pay is the average of the preceding 12 weeks where remuneration was paid.

But it isn't. I don't know anyone for whom that is the case. Maybe some employers work that way, but I know for a fact that it definitely isn't always what happens.

From the section of the law that you quoted:

224 Employments with no normal working hours.

(1)This section applies where there are no normal working hours for the employee when employed under the contract of employment in force on the calculation date.

So an employee on an x hour contract is deemed to have x normal working hours and thus that law isn't applicable and they get x hours of holiday pay regardless of how many hours they worked. Even if their contract is for 8 hours and they work 38 hours every week. The biggest mismatch that I know of personally is someone who usually did 40 hours a week more than their contracted hours.

 

[Woogie]

Well you are in a way because all of those entitlements you have have nothing to do with you working overtime.

Where I work (local authority) everyone gets either overtime or TOIL, only the guys on £50k plus are salaried and seldom do they work more hours than they have to. My boss' boss for example is on £65k plus benefits and you rarely see him past half 4.

No I am really not, I have literally quoted the person I wanted to reply to and aimed the comment at. I am well aware they have very little to do with the original topic.

 

[Freakbro]

Can you tell me what legislation you're referring to and when it was passed? I know quite a few people in the situation I described, so I think it is true and you're mistaken.

I know quite a few companies who don't follow employment law in various issues, doesn't mean I'm wrong on how it should be done

I do various payrolls, and one of them has zero hour contracted employees, bank staff, part time & term time only employees! So I have looked into the holiday pay issue in depth over the last few years, its a nightmare with this company!

Anyway, zero hour contracted people are just treated as irregular hour employees and in the first year of employment they accrue holiday pay at 12.07% of actual hours worked (I calculate it on a monthly basis). After 1 year of continuous employment (A break of 1 week of 7 days breaks the continuity) they no longer need to accrue holiday before taking it - though it is calculated the same way.

http://www.cipd.co.uk/binaries/zero-hours-contracts_2013-understanding-the-law.pdf

Page 11 of the Document -

Section 4

How holiday and holiday pay will be dealt with

Zero-hours employees and workers have the right to paid holidays. Full-time employees and workers are entitled to a statutory minimum of 28 days’ holiday per year. Zero-hours employees and workers are treated as part-time workers, and so will usually be entitled to a pro-rated amount of holiday (see Section 6 Difficult issues for more information). However, because zero-hours workers work irregular hours, it can be difficult to calculate their holiday entitlement. The difficulty arises from the fact that the legislation calculates holiday in terms of ‘weeks’, providing for accrual of holiday in the first year as being at a rate of 1/12 of the annual entitlement each month. However, where hours worked are irregular and the annual entitlement cannot be predicted with certainty, this formula is of little assistance.

4.1

Working out holiday accrual

It is important to deal with the accrual of holiday in the contract itself. For employees or workers
with irregular hours, it is usually easiest to calculate holiday entitlement based on the number of hours worked. On this basis, employees and workers accrue holiday at the rate of 12.07% per hour worked. This percentage is reached by taking the 5.6 week
statutory holiday entitlement and dividing it by 46.4 weeks (46.4 being the sum of 52 weeks in a year minus the 5.6 week statutory holiday entitlement). This means that the amount of holiday accrued by an employee or a worker can be calculated at any
time by multiplying the number of hours they have worked up to that point by 12.07%.

The problem is people on low contracted hours who then work regularly a lot more than that, as in examples you quoted, do fall into a loophole where Holiday Pay can and will be paid from the contracted hours, and not using the 12 week avg or 12.07% accrual method. Hopefully this directive will address this.

 

[Mr Jack]

I seriously disagree. Bernard's watch please!

That's what the collected evidence of some seventy years or more of research in productivity at work indicates.