Employer doesn't let me take annual leave for more than 2 days in a row

[Acidburn]

Posting here for traffic.
I work for a very small company, there are 2 other employees and director. We sre crazy busy, the business is doing great. The problem is - my boss (the director) doesn't allow me to take annual leave for more than 2 consecutive days. He is not oppose the idea of me going on annual leave (that would be against the law), but his idea is that I should be taking long weekends, take odd days here and there and this way to cover my annual leave allowance. He doesnt let me take 5 days off because the workload is crazy.
Is what he is doing legal? Technically he allows me to take my days, its just my days are spread... Does anyone know anything about the legal side of this?
Thanks

It's legal but really unfair. There must be quieter periods when you could take a week. Surely you are not this busy all year round.

It’s not legal. The law states: ‘Some restrictions are not unreasonable, but they should not be operated in a way that discriminates unfairly or that makes it too difficult for workers to take their holiday. The law expects employers to make the rules as clear as possible, to have a clear justification for them, and to operate them consistently and fairly.
The legal right to take holiday is based on the need to protect workers' health, safety and welfare. It is unlawful for employers to make it too difficult for workers to take their holiday. In addition, the law requires employers to actively encourage workers to take their holiday.’

The employer has the right to restrict annual leave in this way to cover short term operational difficulties such as busy times and to cover temporary staff shortages. It’s also OK to restrict too many staff from taking leave at the same time. But that’s not what this employer is doing. He’s trying to operate the business with as few staff as possible - to the point where if anyone takes time off it causes problems. He’s not being consistent or fair, because he’s not including himself in this policy and he has no real justification for this as an operating policy, beyond trying to save money on his wage bill. If the OP or any of his other employees end up with mental health problems due to the stress of all this, the employer could find himself on the wrong end of a Tribunal hearing.

That’s a bit rubbish especially through the Summer time and school holidays when it’s reasonable to want at minimum a week.

If his company can’t operate sufficiently with one person off for a week in the Sumner then he needs to be taking on another member of staff not restricting everyone’s holiday leave to two days.

I suggest he is thinking he can reap the financial benefits of being particularly busy without increasing his overheads (wage bill). That doesn’t make for a good working environment and could well come back to bite him.

I’d be certainly very pro active in looking for something else.

I once worked for a care home where the person responsible for all the incoming and outgoing money never took more than 2 days off at a time. She said it suited her lifestyle. She then got sick and had to have a few weeks off. The person brought in to do her job uncovered the fact that she was paying her daughter who also worked there on a part time basis an extra 15 hours pay per week. More digging and it transpired that she had embezzled more than £80,000 over a number of years, some of which was from vulnerable residents. It would never have come to light if she didnt get sick as she was covering her tracks. So yes it doesn't make sense to only let staff have a couple of days off at a time.

@moreloosee well known warning sign in finance. Often the quiet ones too!