And this is REALLY nitpicking, with a fine-tooth comb
I’m almost sort of coming to the conclusion that the law makers have missed something. There’s a surprise then
We’re having a few disputes and discussions at work about Holiday Entitlements.
Now, it’s a given that we’re entitled to x amount of days paid annual leave per year (Or is it ■■?) It’s also accepted that employers do indeed have the right to stipulate when we can, when we can’t, and notice periods for applying and refusal.
So I’ve been asked to do some digging . . . . . . . .
Annual leave entitlement is covered under the Working Time “Regulations”. That encompasses both the WTD and the RT(WT)R (■■?) Both sets of regulations/S.I.s refer back and forth to each other. It’s not strictly correct, I believe, to just simply say that we’re exempt the standard WTD - if that makes sense.
In my diggings of both sets of regulations, I’ve almost convinced myself that we - road transport workers, are in actual fact, NOT entitled to annual leave
Discuss
*Disclaimer
I haven’t yet finished reading through the whole raft of “amendments” though
5.6 weeks annual leave per year
4 weeks MUST be used for the RT(WTD)R - 48 hours ( for RT(WTD)R ) for a whole week or 8 hours ( for RT(WTD)R ) per day if not a whole week.
As to when you can or cannot take them is entirely a company issue and not legislated for.
The 5.6 weeks is the recent increase. Sadly that is pretty much null and void as an actual increase because there is no entitlement to Bank Holidays off or pay in lieu or even an increased/enhanced pay rate if you do work one. In the real world where I live and work, many companies have just simply rolled the statutory holidays into “Annual Leave Entitlement”
The “When you can or can’t take holidays” is in fact legislated for. As is the carrying over of unused days, and/or payment in lieu for unused days.
Please Rog, refer to LEGISLATION rather than guidebooks and guidelines. As grateful as I am to guides, guidebooks, and the occasional synopsis; there is always the very real possibility of those things not being amended and kept “up to date”
dambuster:
Please Rog, refer to LEGISLATION rather than guidebooks and guidelines.
They the real “horse’s mouth” as it were.
If you have a link to where you are referring to please post it
The problem with that Rog is in the way European Directives, Statutory Instruments and other “bits of legislation” are written. Most pieces of legislation, of whatever colour are often amended over time. An amendement is just that - an additional piece of legislation which changes, adds or removes the meaning of the original.
So asking for “a link” doesn’t really provide the full picture because you need to see the original, in this case the WT and the RT(WT) plus the susbequent amendments to both.
As I said in my first post - “I haven’t finished reading the raft of amendments yet”
The starting point is the WT where annual leave is defined (Item 13) The fly in the ointment at the moment is that the paragraph dealing with the “Exemptions” (Item 18 *edit) it seems to state that as “Road Tranport” workers, Item 13 does not apply, even though WT(RT) refers back to Item 13 of the WT.
Of course I’m already of the opinion that I/it can’t be right. Surely we are as entitled to Annual Leave just the same as other workers. It’s more a question of finding the reasons, in print, that we are
The main purpose is for me to find a “reasonable argument” against our company’s policy of not allowing (in our opinion) enough people off at any given time.
And of course, in a perfect world, I’d be able to Google search for a simple list of all the amendments to which ever piece of legislation I happen to be “researching” at any given time
dambuster:
The 5.6 weeks is the recent increase. Sadly that is pretty much null and void as an actual increase because there is no entitlement to Bank Holidays off…
It’s not really null and void because of that.
5.6 weeks for most people is 28 days and those 28 days can include the 8 Bank and Public Holidays. so you will either get 20 days plus the 8 Bank and Public Holidays or if you don’t get them of you get 28 days. If the Bank and Public Holidays re included and you work one you have to be given nother day off in lieu otherwise you will fall short of the 5.6 weeks. That is a lot better than the old way when there was no minimum entitlement and if a company did give you say 4 weeks holiday it could include the holidays meaning you only got 12 days annual leave.
You won’t find any legislation preventing companies from saying when and if you can take your annual leave. If there was it could leave companies with no work force at certain times of the year and there would never be legislation made that could leave a company in that situation.
Coffeeholic:
You won’t find any legislation preventing companies from saying when and if you can take your annual leave.
Agreed, in fact section 15 (2) of the Working time regulation 1998 makes it quite clear that an employer can stipulate on what days the annual leave entitlement should or should not be taken
You may restrict the taking of leave. Restrictions could:
be stated in the employment contract
have built up via custom and practice, or
be negotiated with a trade union or employee representatives
Examples include:
specifying periods when leave may or may not be taken
capping the amount of leave that can be taken at any one time
shutting down for certain periods, eg between Christmas and New Year or for two weeks in August
If you don’t have an agreement for taking leave and you want workers to take all or part of their holiday entitlement on certain dates, you must give notice of at least twice as long as the leave period.
Resolve clashes between requests for leave by considering the needs of the business, eg peak season or a quieter period, the individual circumstances or by setting out clear rules for booking leave. It may be helpful to formalise cover for key staff on annual leave.
If you set restrictions on when holiday can be taken, bear in mind the need to avoid indirect discrimination - see our guide on how to prevent discrimination and value diversity.
If you prevent a worker from taking their 5.6 weeks of paid annual leave in a leave year, they can complain to an employment tribunal.
Coffeeholic:
5.6 weeks for most people is 28 days and those 28 days can include the 8 Bank and Public Holidays. so you will either get 20 days plus the 8 Bank and Public Holidays or if you don’t get them of you get 28 days. If the Bank and Public Holidays re included and you work one you have to be given nother day off in lieu otherwise you will fall short of the 5.6 weeks. That is a lot better than the old way when there was no minimum entitlement and if a company did give you say 4 weeks holiday it could include the holidays meaning you only got 12 days annual leave.
.
I’m not sure I understand what it is you’re saying. If I do, I’m not sure I would agree.
My own case, for example — Like many, I had 20 days plus Statutory. 20 plus 8. Now I have the entitlement to 28 days. Whichever way it’s worded it still adds up to the same amount. That’s why to me, and many others the increase is pretty much null and void I don’t think my case is at all unusual.
There’s no doubt in my mind about the lack of entitlement to time off for (specifically) Bank/Public Holidays or enhanced pay if you work one. But I see what you’re saying about the inference of one piece of legislation against the other in regard to the day off in lieu.
(I’m fully aware of the difference “Contractual Entitlement” makes to all of this )
More research needed methinks
But . . . . . . . . . . WTF is the amendment I need ■■?
The more I look into this whole WTRRTWTR ■■■■■■■■, over and above the breaks/max hours crap, the more I see it as worse than just an inconvenience interfering with my normal run of the mill day and the Buffoons of Brussels trying to cap the amount I can earn
*Disclaimer
Clearly, I can see the protection it provides to those needing such
Coffeeholic:
5.6 weeks for most people is 28 days and those 28 days can include the 8 Bank and Public Holidays. so you will either get 20 days plus the 8 Bank and Public Holidays or if you don’t get them of you get 28 days. If the Bank and Public Holidays re included and you work one you have to be given nother day off in lieu otherwise you will fall short of the 5.6 weeks. That is a lot better than the old way when there was no minimum entitlement and if a company did give you say 4 weeks holiday it could include the holidays meaning you only got 12 days annual leave.
.
I’m not sure I understand what it is you’re saying. If I do, I’m not sure I would agree.
My own case, for example — Like many, I had 20 days plus Statutory. 20 plus 8. Now I have the entitlement to 28 days. Whichever way it’s worded it still adds up to the same amount. That’s why to me, and many others the increase is pretty much null and void I don’t think my case is at all unusual.
Agreed, but previously you had no guarantees you would get the Public and Bank Holidays in addition to your 20 days, now there is. It was brought in for people who worked for employers who gave 20 days including Public and Bank Holidays so where in effect only getting 12 days annual leave.
dambuster:
There’s no doubt in my mind about the lack of entitlement to time off for (specifically) Bank/Public Holidays or enhanced pay if you work one. But I see what you’re saying about the inference of one piece of legislation against the other in regard to the day off in lieu.
Agreed there is no right to enhanced pay for Public and Bank Holidays but if they are included in your 28 day holiday entitlement you are entitled to the time off, or if you work one you must have another day given in lieu, otherwise you would only be getting 27 days holiday and that wouldn’t meet your entitlement.
If you are lucky enough to get 28 days not including the Public and Bank Holidays then you are not entitled to them off and if you worked one you would not be entitled to another day in lieu as you will still be getting the required 28 days.
dambuster:
the more I see it as worse than just an inconvenience interfering with my normal run of the mill day
In what way because in the majority of cases the tacho breaks cover the requirements for the RT(WTD)R ?
I’m not sure which part of the full paragraph it is that you’re questioning because you’ve altered the context by snipping it.
Are you questioning my opinion that it interferes “with my normal run of the mill day” ? (1)
Or are you questioning my opinion that the deeper I look at it, I see as worse than that ? (2)
(1) It interferes because, as you said, “in the majority of cases” To me, that means tacho breaks don’t always cover the requirements for WT. To be clear - If I can have an infringement notice for not complying with WT but not have an infringement under Drivers Hours, then the WT becomes an inconvenience. Mainly because it means WT is something else I have to consider and comply with.
(2) Well, the subject of this thread. What I’ve read, so far suggests that we have been “left out” of the protection afforded other industries/sectors with regard to legal entitlement to holidays. Cleary, I assume, if that is the case, then it’s by omission rather than intent.
So the question remains, or has become - Can anyone show me the legislation, that isn’t effectively cancelled by exclusion or exemption from that legislation, giving me and you legal entitlement to paid annual leave ?
ROG:
I was referring to your normal working day and the RT(WTD)R breaks required in that day.
Therfore . . . . . . . . . . (1)
I was trying to work out how it could affect your normal working day which is what I read here -
dambuster:
The more I look into this whole WTRRTWTR ■■■■■■■■, over and above the breaks/max hours crap, the more I see it as worse than just an inconvenience interfering with my normal run of the mill day
How do you figure that the RT(WTD)R breaks go over & above the tacho ones which would then affect your run-of-the-mill day ■■?
