Forced to take annual leave - ok?

[hairylemon]

A friend has asked me to garner the knowledge of MNetters on the Employment boards.

She is currently on mat leave due to return to work in July and so has built up a number of days holiday. Her work sent her a letter last week saying they have changed the policies while she has been on mat leave regarding holidays accrued while on mat leave, and they are now going to add on all of her accrued holidays onto the end of her mat leave.

She had basically accounted for most of the accrued holidays (CM going away, christmas, maybe leaving a few for emergencies etc etc) and was in the process of getting the dates together to request them, but if she is forced to take her accrued AL before she returns, she wont accrue enough in the rest of the year when she returns to cover the time she needs off and is getting herself all worked up and panicking. I said shes entitled to unpaid time off for emergencies (parental leave??) that should cover the CM going away but that got her even more upset as she is on her arse as it is.

She asked them if she could keep back some of the days as a bit of a compromise and they have refused. Can they force her to take AL?

When does her leave run from?

Many more knowledgeable MNers will be along shortly I'm sure but this seems utterly bizarre. Does it relate to annual leave accrued in the previous leave year, rather than this one?

i am not an employment expert but I do seem to recall reading quite often that you can tell your staff when to take AL

some info here

here

AL year runs from Jan - Dec with no option to carry any over, she started mat leave last year.

I can kind of see why they would WANT do this as she will have a good number of days to use up in the 5 months until the end of the year, but I would have thought they couldnt force her, maybe just ask if she wanted to take any before she came back and she would have to understand that she might have to be a bit flexible about when she takes the time off but forcing seems a bit.......I dunno.....shite

My employer does this as standard. My manager overruled ruled it and asked me to return a month early. I got pregnant almost straight away and will only be back for 8 months. I have 40 days of leave to use over the next 5 months which is causing huge problems with managing my workload.

Seems like the employer hasn't thought this through, at least if she has accrued leave she can use it for CM hols and times of her child's illness (there's alway some!). Are they perhaps trying to make it difficult for her to return to work on purpose so as not to have to pay redundancy by any chance?

Perhaps the conditions only refers to leave accrued in the last leave period and wires are crossed (my employer won't allow more than 3 days to be carried forward frome one year to the next as a matter of course - we have to get HR agreement if it's more than that, and if it's more than 5 days they get a bit sticky). Having said that when my DD was small they were very flexible (outside the written terms of the condition) as they knew that allowing me a bit of leeway would mean they wouldnt't have to work out unpaid leave for me - v family friendly employer I have to say.

If the employer isn't making people not on mat leave take their hols accrued this year, it's really unfair on her if she has to take hers.

Thanks Hecate, however they dont tell any other staff members when they have to take holidays, only the ones on maternity leave (and only very recently it seems) which also seems a bit shite, not to mention discriminatory surely?

X posted hairylemon - so it's only the leave from the last period that she has to tack on to her mat leave?

Can kinda see the employer's point - they've made arrangements to cover for her while on leave, and it's probably easier to continue those arrangements for a week or two more, rather than put them in place again when she takes the accrued leave from last year.

Also it's the same condition applying to her as to other employees not on mat leave - so fair in comparison to them.

Plus she would only have 5 mths to take 12 mths accrued leave from this year, and whatever was accrued from last year - so would have to take a much higher amt of leave in the last 5 mths of the year compared to another employee.

Not hugely family friendly but her employer may not be in a position to go above and beyond given the current employment climate?

oh well, that's different then. If they are treating her differently because she's on maternity leave, surely she could argue discrimination?

onthebottom she is wondering that (about the redundancy)

Everyone has to use up their AL this year as the AL year runs from jan - Dec with no option to carry over, its just they arent stipulating to anyone else when they have to take them, just the one(s) on ML and that they have to take what they have accrued whilst on ML straight after ML.

Like I say I can see why from an employer POV they want to do it, Id do the same if I was a manager, but we didnt think it was 'allowed' to actually force it, cajoleingly request yes with a bit of arm twisting, but not force.

Onthebottom sorry x posted, I did say to her that from their perspective she has basically a years worth of AL to take in 5 months but, and again I can see her POV, she said she was going to ask if she could add a good chunk of that onto her ML anyway, and after her time needed at Christmas (callcentre is dead at Christmas and they are apparantly grateful for people booking the time off as otherwise they are being paid to do FA) then that would leave her with only about 10 days to take, which apart from the odd 'child sick day' she would work around whats best for her manager.

Sorry if this is a bit waffly, she is literally sat on my shoulder wittering on at me as I type (that cracked a smile out of her atleast)

and yes agree about the current climate comment. Seems totallt wrong that employers have people by the balls atm. Im in a similar situation (have posted about my place before under various guises) and havent bothered to speak out as dont want to be seen as a trouble causer

Mate says she wouldnt bother either if it wasnt for the fact that she will be up shit creek

No idea what the rules are, but I sold back the unused 2011 holiday, am using the bank holidays acrued (are they factoring these into the calculations) to work 4 day weeks for the first few months, and then have my full holiday allowance for 2012 to take between May and Dec. I'm using some of this to extend a 4 day week for another few months.

Could she keep the 5 months of holiday left for this year, and the bank holidays she's acrued (assuming she normally gets bank holidays off) for the rest of this year - effectivly giving her an extra 2 weeks, but agreeing to taking all the holidays?

Hi Next, yes the bank holidays have just been added on to her accrued AL. They want her to take everything she has accrued while on ML, including the bank hols.

She is saying she does want to query it and is willing to compromise (eg. maybe add more of the holidays on to her ML than she was going to), but just needs to know what the 'legal' position is ie. if they can legally force her then no point in her taking it further

I can understand them forcing her to take any annual leave that she's accrued up until the end of December 2011, but I really doubt they can force her to take all of the AL she's accrued from Jan 2012 to July 2012 before she returns. Legally I think a company can tell you when you have your annual leave, but they would have to apply this to all staff.

Has your friend been given a written copy of the new policy? Has she been told when the policy came into effect? If it's only recent she could argue that it doesn't apply to AL accrued before that date. And as Hecate said, if they are not forcing the other staff not on ML to take AL then it sounds a lot like discrimination. Some companies have a rule that you have to take a certain percent by a certain time. In my old job we had to use up 25% of AL each quarter. Again, this would have to apply to everyone.

If she hasn't already I would suggest your friend contacts her HR department to check with them where she stands. At my work we get a fair few managers trying to push things through, or let things go, that aren't strictly legal, so our HR have to keep re-educating them.

Yes they can, for the accrued leave only. Not for leave allowance going forward and only if it is in the maternity policy. I'm certain about this because I work for a big blue chip company with the same policy. She can check her contract but it will probably say something along the lines of "annual leave must be requested in advance and can be cancelled and altered according to business requirements". This is a reasonable demand based on business and operational reasons so it isn't discriminatory. It would be if they tried to apply it to non-accrued leave.

She's just rang acas and its legal what they are doing, booooo hisssss

Going to need something stronger than coffee I think

I don't know about the legal position re 'forcing' someone to take leave in the UK (am in ROI) but I'd say your friend should get her terms and conditions of work, and any HR handbooks, and read them with a magnifying glass.

MrsMango sounds spot on re both the written policies and managers trying to impose their own terms.

(my manager tried to tell one of the dept to keep her scan appointments outside of work time - she had read the HR handbook and was able to tell him nicely to eff off!)

From the Directgov site.

You must give your employer advance notice that you want to take holiday. This notice should be at least twice as long as the amount of holiday you want to take. For example, you should give two weeks' notice for one week's holiday.

Your employer can decide when some or all of your holidays must be taken. For instance, they may require you to take some of your holiday to cover the bank holidays, or may require the whole company to take holiday during a Christmas shutdown.

This may be in your contract of employment, or it may be normal practice built up over time. An employer has to give the same amount of notice as you do.

So if your friend has the standard 28 days of annual leave per year (5.6 weeks) and they want to take half of it (2.8 weeks) they would have to give her 5.6 weeks notice. From today, that would be the beginning of August.

No new policy sent out just a letter saying this is what's happening. Doesn't matter now anyway, if its all above board then there's no point in her querying it. But as someone alluded to at least she has got a job, another of our mates has been looking for months

I think it is worth querying it. It's the equivalent of notifying everyone who hasn't yet taken half their leave allowance for the year that they now have to do so, whether it is convenient or not.

I can see that it would not be convenient to have her hoard it all and then take December off with little warning, but surely unless all employees have to use up their leave allocation proportionately throughout the year, she is being discriminated against?