Unused Holidays

Schism · 10-12-2011 12:21am #1

Hi, I've yet to use any holidays this year where I work. Would I be right in saying I get paid for the value of the unused holidays if I don't take them?

novarock · 10-12-2011 12:23am

Schism wrote: »

Hi, I've yet to use any holidays this year where I work. Would I be right in saying I get paid for the value of the unused holidays if I don't take them?

Everywhere is different, we are only carry over 5 days to the new year, and cant get money for them. Talk to you HR people..

bbam · 10-12-2011 10:20am

Schism wrote: »

Hi, I've yet to use any holidays this year where I work. Would I be right in saying I get paid for the value of the unused holidays if I don't take them?

This is a crazy situation for an employer to let happen. If there were an accident you could claim you haddent received adequate rest periods. There was a similar case a number of years ago.
Employer should insist Holidays are used.

You aren't entitled to be paid nor is your employer able to take them from you.
Some companies will pay and others don't I'd say less are paying now.

Mrs OBumble · 10-12-2011 10:22am

Schism wrote: »

Hi, I've yet to use any holidays this year where I work. Would I be right in saying I get paid for the value of the unused holidays if I don't take them?

In my experience, only if you quit.

sambuka41 · 10-12-2011 12:58pm

Its illegal to get paid for holidays instead of taking them. Its as much your responsibility to take holidays as your employers. They shouldn't have let you get to 2 weeks before the end of the year without taking them though.

Some will let you carry them over and take them before a certain time, say end of February.

tenchi-fan · 10-12-2011 2:07pm

You can't get paid instead of taking holidays, however you can carry holidays forward (employer and employee must agree)- generally the days carried forward must be used within the first 6 months of the following year.

The annual leave year does not necessarily have to correspond to the calendar year.

One more thing, yes your employer made a mistake by not making sure you took enough annual leave during the year, but you had to have been aware you were hoarding annual leave.

gpjordanf1 · 10-12-2011 7:04pm

Depends on your employer. We can take cash or holidays, but my holiday time with my family is more valuable to me, so I always take the holidays!

tenchi-fan · 10-12-2011 7:15pm

gpjordanf1 wrote: »

Depends on your employer. We can take cash or holidays, but my holiday time with my family is more valuable to me, so I always take the holidays!

Not true, it's against the law for employers to pay cash instead of giving annual leave.

gpjordanf1 · 10-12-2011 7:31pm

tenchi-fan wrote: »

Not true, it's against the law for employers to pay cash instead of giving annual leave.

How do you make out its not true? Who cares if its against the law, the law means jack in these hard times. This is a fact! We have a choice, we are a very busy private sector company.

tenchi-fan · 10-12-2011 8:39pm

gpjordanf1 wrote: »

How do you make out its not true? Who cares if its against the law, the law means jack in these hard times. This is a fact! We have a choice, we are a very busy private sector company.

:rolleyes:

At least if you're giving dud advice, put a disclaimer at the end of your posts.
Op is clearly looking for advice on his/her rights.

gpjordanf1 · 10-12-2011 8:44pm

tenchi-fan wrote: »

:rolleyes:

At least if you're giving dud advice, put a disclaimer at the end of your posts.
Op is clearly looking for advice on his/her rights.

Jesus H on a bike! Its not Dud advice.

Unlike you the OP might have a pair and ask his employer for cash in return for his holidays, if that suits him/her!

The OP was clearly asking could he/she get cash instead. And the answer is yes a resounding yes. So get your facts straight! If it suits both parties then screw the rules!

CricketDude · 10-12-2011 8:49pm

They cant just take your holidays from you, even if your contract says they can. They can either let you carry them over or they can pay you for them.
They can decide which of the two they want, but taking time owed to you is stealing from you.

So companies who write a "use them or lose them" policy into your contract havent got a leg to stand on. If you "lose them" they must pay you for them.

tenchi-fan · 11-12-2011 3:53am

gpjordanf1 wrote: »

Jesus H on a bike! Its not Dud advice.

Unlike you the OP might have a pair and ask his employer for cash in return for his holidays, if that suits him/her!

The OP was clearly asking could he/she get cash instead. And the answer is yes a resounding yes. So get your facts straight!

It's completely dud advice.

Any asshole can ask for anything under the sun. But you can't demand it.

Why not encourage your employer to pay cash in hand so you can claim the dole too?? Win-win, right??

gpjordanf1, well done that your employer is breaking the law. I'm delighted for anyone who can come to an arrangement where tax is evaded or the law is broken in an arrangement that benefits both the employer or employee.

But it you intend to break the law, why bother posting here? people are asking on advice.

You're encouraging people to make a fool of themselves by demanding something they have no entitlement to demand.

People certainly are not entitled to ask for cash in lieu of annual leave. If you can come to some arrangement with an employer, go right ahead. But to say "Uh, oh yes, i get paid extra" put the disclaimer that you have no legal entitlement to this arrangement.

pow wow · 11-12-2011 9:57am

Irrespective of the legalities some employers do do it, but they're very much in the minority.

Mrs OBumble · 11-12-2011 1:52pm

A reminder that we do not advise people to break the law on boards.ie: it's not worth the risk to boards.

Saying "some employers break the law" is fine.

Saying "you should do it too, like this" is not.

/moderation

gpjordanf1 · 11-12-2011 7:40pm

JustMary wrote: »

A reminder that we do not advise people to break the law on boards.ie: it's not worth the risk to boards.

Saying "some employers break the law" is fine.

Saying "you should do it too, like this" is not.

/moderation

Who exactly said to break the law?? Some less than intelegent post earlier said it was against the law to pay an employee for holidays they have not taken. This is incorrect!

My contract states holidays must be taken between January & december of current year. Holidays will not be carried over. Again this is not against the law, like stated earlier.

A post using abusive & insulting language earlier also stated the company I work for is breaking the law. This is complete rubbish and an insult!

An example:
An employee has taken 15 of his 20 days holidays, now it middle of December, he asks to tak the last week of December. This is the companies busiest period and cannot afford to give the employee the time off, also holidays dont carry over as per contract. Then the employee is paid for the weeks holiday by mutual consent. All taxes are also paid as normal!

Nothing in this senario is against the law!

Perhaps people around here should read the OP's original question and not just the last couple of posts.

amen · 11-12-2011 7:48pm

Some less than intelegent post earlier said it was against the law to pay an employee for holidays they have not taken. This is incorrect

You are so just wrong.

Go look up the Working Time Act 1997.

It is illegal under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 for an employer to pay an allowance in lieu of the minimum statutory holiday entitlement of an employee unless the employment relationship is terminated. In general, your annual leave is calculated on the basis of hours worked.

If you are leaving a job you are entitled to receive payment for any outstanding annual leave and public holidays due to you.

gpjordanf1 · 11-12-2011 8:03pm

amen wrote: »

You are so just wrong.

Go look up the Working Time Act 1997.

I did and 5 seconds in and guess what??? You are "SO" wrong in you interpertation of the law & my post!

Working Time Act 1997

"Nothing in this section shall prevent an employer and employee from entering into arrangements that are more favourable to the employee with regard to the times of, and the pay in respect of, his or her annual leave."

amen · 11-12-2011 8:17pm

"Nothing in this section shall prevent an employer and employee from entering into arrangements that are more favourable to the employee with regard to the times of, and the pay in respect of, his or her annual leave."

Yes that is true but it also states you must take your statutory holidays in the year in which they are given.

If you don't believe me, ring NERA, IBEC, contact any large multinational in Ireland, barrister specialising in employment law etc

gpjordanf1 · 11-12-2011 8:28pm

amen wrote: »

Yes that is true but it also states you must take your statutory holidays in the year in which they are given.

Exactly, and if this suits the OP like they stated if "they" as in the OP decide to take their anual pay instead of time off then thats fine as long as its agreed by both parties before hand!

amen wrote: »

If you don't believe me, ring NERA, IBEC, contact any large multinational in Ireland, barrister specialising in employment law etc

I dont need to ring anyone and yes you have to take you anual leave in the current year, (I never said anything different) or whatever is in your contract, some employers will let you take a few day's into next year, but thats between both parties!

Schism · 11-12-2011 10:49pm

Well it seems I've created quite a discussion!

To be clear, I work part-time at the moment so in my view I don't really need holidays since I'm only working two or three days a week. Ideally I'd sacrifice my holiday days for monetary compensation but it seems that's not possible unless by mutual consent (which isn't going to happen).

I wonder is it possible to get the entire value of my holidays due paid over maybe 3 or 4 days? Or am I back to square one thinking like that?

mdebets · 12-12-2011 8:16pm

gpjordanf1 wrote: »

I did and 5 seconds in and guess what??? You are "SO" wrong in you interpertation of the law & my post!

Working Time Act 1997

"Nothing in this section shall prevent an employer and employee from entering into arrangements that are more favourable to the employee with regard to the times of, and the pay in respect of, his or her annual leave."

You should have read the act for more than 5 seconds. Then you would have seen that you are wrong.
The subsection you were quoting comes from section 20, which is concerned about how it is determined, when an employee can take his holiday and how much the employer has to pay the employee during his holiday (as it is a paid leave).

So, your quotation from above just says, that the employer is allowed to pay the employee more during his holiday than the minimum laid out in the act.

To be fair, amen didn't get t 100% right either.
It's only illegal to trade your minimum holiday allowance for money, not any holiday that goes over it.
If the employee has a legal minimum of 20 days, but his employer gives him 23 days, then it is not illegal, to trade 3 days for money, but not the first 20 days.

Unused Holidays

Comments