Is this ok? holiday allowance

[smurfgirl]

dp has 28 days holiday a year + bank holidays (he works for an FE college so its very generous).

They used to run holidays april to april, but from next year are changing it to september to september. So this means that this year he is expected to make his normal holiday allowance last from april (2008) until next september (2009).

Its very annoying because he is having to take a fair bit of time off for our wedding and honeymoon in October which means that next year he will probably have very little holiday left over.

Can they do this? Make him stretch a years worth of holiday allowance out an extra 5 months because they are changing the holiday system?

in short - no.
They will need to give a pro-rata allowance for the period april to september.

Thanks, thats what I thought, but he said because its over the minimum allowance given anyway he is not entitled to anymore.

He is speaking to HR tomorrow to beg ask for a days unpaid leave before the wedding so maybe will sort it out then.

What is in his contract for holiday entitlement?
If it is the 28 + bank holidays per april - april as per your op - they cannot change that without issuing new contracts and ensuring that there has been consultation on the change and everyone agreeing.

Are you absolutely sure that's what he's been told smurfgirl? Has he had a letter confirming the change and does it definitely say that? It would be extremely unusual!

If that is definitely what's been said, legally as long as he has the minimum legal requirement for annual leave in any given year, that's ok, but that would be a change in his terms and conditions (rather than just an administrative change which moving the holiday year is), and they would need to jump through hoops here to do that and here is what he can do if he doesn't agree.

Is he not in a union? If the proposal really is to take away some of the contractual holiday entitlement they would have to consult the union on that if there is one, and I can't imagine for one moment they'd be happy about it.

My initial reaction is this is a mistake or misunderstanding somewhere along the line - I can't see why an employer would do this.