Can someone in the know clarify something Re changes to Statutory Holiday entitlement?

[VeniVidiVickiQV]

I'm aware that the changes have come about entitling employees to 24 days per year including bank holidays. (Rather than 20 days including bank holidays as before). I know that those who were already giving 24 days could absorb the changes without actually giving anyone any more days off.

However....

What I wanted to clarify is that if your contract of employment said "statutory/20 days holiday per annum plus bank holidays, and office closure over Christmas" can it be argued that if the statutory has gone up, then your entitlement goes up too, even if the employer has been quite generous in the first place?

Hi VVVQV

If the contract says 20 days plus bank holidays etc, entitlement does not go up.

If contract says something like 'current statutory entitlement plus bank holidays', you might have an argument, but I would expect the employer in that instance to put through a change to the wording of everyone's contract.

Could they do that? I mean, change the contracts to include bank holidays into holiday entitlement to swallow up the increase?

Yes. To change terms and conditions you must consult and technically you can't without consent but

There's an argument you are not changing terms and conditions you are just not improving them.

Even if you are, see here about what happens if as an employee you don't consent to a change. Imagine that process relating to what is effectively an adjustment of wording, nothing actually detrimental happening....

I'd personally be advising an employer to take the risk that no one is going to claim unfair dismissal about a non-increase in an already generous holiday entitlement, and use the opportunity to word their holiday entitlement better.

Right. That is pretty much the conclusion I have come to. Thank you.

My current employers are doing just that, my colleague (who also happens to be my mother!) thinks its grossly unfair, and a case of them "moving the goalposts" to suit themselves. Which it kinda is, but they were pretty generous in the first place and so I have no problem, personally.

Although, it could be said that the whole remuneration 'package' isnt as attractive/good as it was, and therefore there is a loss of incentive to stay. Again, I'm not particularly bothered by this.

Thank you again

No worries

Sometimes helps to think about the spirit and intention of the law rather than the technicalities of it- really the intention isn't to catch out employers who haven't worded their contracts badly, it's to help those poor individuals who were previously on 20 days including bank holidays.