Annual Leave Lost?

coffeeteame

I work for a US company with an Irish office. Due to a busy 2020, i finished the year with a few days leave I was unable to take. It now seems the company has decided that all leave not used in 2020 is simply lost. Is that allowed in ireland?

Minier81

Unfortunately I think it is allowed. Did they not warn you to use it or loose it? They really should have been encouraging staff to use their leave. It is really bad form if you were not forewarned.

coffeeteame

There was a general encouragement to take it but no specific mention of it being lost if not taken

Snotty

Slight grey area, have you taken your 20 days in 2020 and the days you lost are over the 20 days? If they are under the 20 days then no they cannot taken them off you, it is the companies obligation to ensure you have taken your statutory annual leave, over and above that comes down to your contract.

Fol20

Is it though? I work for a large mnc and it’s a use it or loose it at a certain point.

Minier81

coffeeteame wrote: »

There was a general encouragement to take it but no specific mention of it being lost if not taken

For good will and stand morale it's an awful move by the company. There should have been specific warning.

Interesting point about the 20 days minimum.

Thoie

It's usually in your contract/employee handbook. Where I work there's a use it or lose it policy, but with the agreement of your manager in advance you can carry over a few days. That's usually where someone has something big planned for the following year, like a wedding. If you haven't booked your statutory minimum by a certain time, you can be told you have to take specific days off, but I've never seen it happen.

coffeeteame

Have not taken the full 20 though so I'm technically below that threshold

Snotty

Companies can and do make up their own rules around holidays but that does not take away your statutory entitlements. Many cases of this have come to the employment tribunals and when it comes to statutory leave, they take a very dim view against companies that say the leave is now gone because you did not use it, the only time they won't is were the company has records of the employee being asked to take leave during the year but refusing.
Most companies allow a certain amount to be carried over and should be used within 6 months of the following year, but again this is only a suggestion and no where in employment legislation does it say leave is lost after a time period of not used.
However it is completely understandable that companies want leave used when accrued and put polices in place like use it or lose it, but it is their responsibility to ensure you take annual leave, not the employee.

dennyk

The law says that your leave may be used during the leave year to which it relates, or within six months after the end of that leave year with your consent. Your employer cannot take away your unused statutory leave at the end of the leave year; you are still entitled to use that leave during the first six months of the next leave year (in addition to the full amount of statutory leave you are ordinarily entitled to during that subsequent year). If you don't use it within those next six months by your own choice (or your own inaction in failing to actually request any leave from your employer), though, you'd generally lose your entitlement to that leftover leave.

Note that this applies only to your statutory leave, however (which is four working weeks for full-time employees, or calculated as per the law for part-timers). If your employer grants you additional annual leave over and above those four weeks, they can generally set the terms for that additional leave as they see fit in your contract (though they would have to abide by those contract terms), including specifying that unused extra leave expires at the end of the leave year. Your contract cannot override the law regarding those four weeks of statutory leave, however.

_Brian

Your statutory entitlement of annual leave cannot be taken from you.

You have 6 months to take this leave.

Misguided1

dennyk wrote: »

The law says that your leave may be used during the leave year to which it relates, or within six months after the end of that leave year with your consent. Your employer cannot take away your unused statutory leave at the end of the leave year; you are still entitled to use that leave during the first six months of the next leave year (in addition to the full amount of statutory leave you are ordinarily entitled to during that subsequent year). If you don't use it within those next six months by your own choice (or your own inaction in failing to actually request any leave from your employer), though, you'd generally lose your entitlement to that leftover leave.

Note that this applies only to your statutory leave, however (which is four working weeks for full-time employees, or calculated as per the law for part-timers). If your employer grants you additional annual leave over and above those four weeks, they can generally set the terms for that additional leave as they see fit in your contract (though they would have to abide by those contract terms), including specifying that unused extra leave expires at the end of the leave year. Your contract cannot override the law regarding those four weeks of statutory leave, however.

Also - the statutory leave year is from 1 April to 31 March (which is not widely known) so you have until 31 March to take the statutory leave

Strumms

I was in a similar situation.. a new management team decided that they would change the parameters of leave from two allowed off at one time from our shift to one.. this in a team of seven people... this was mainly due to another clown who in addition to annual leave shenanigans was calling in sick with absolute regularity....

This made using holidays in the use them or loose them situation we had impossible.

This guy too who had all 6am starts, used to come in first day of the new holiday year, do nothing for the first hour but block book all or most of the school holidays and a day here and there.

Same fella would bemoan somebody else getting a jump on HIM for holidays or a training date etc.... “ no it has to be fair now, people with families need priority “

One year, me and a colleague who had company phones, logged in from home, booked the October and Easter mid terms. The other decent colleague had kids himself, but I was just sick of be BS of having done this twat a few good favors.. shift swaps and having got zilch back... fûck him..

Strumms

Strumms wrote: »

Same fella would bemoan somebody else getting a jump on HIM for holidays or a training date etc.... “ no it has to be fair now, people with families need priority “

There were some with a similar attitude where I used to work too, (that as they had children they should have priority or first pick of holidays over anyone who was childless).

Whenever it comes up the answer they get is that to give those with children preferential treatement may constitute discrimination on the grounds of family status so it is first come, first served.

Strumms

Deleted User wrote: »

There were some with a similar attitude where I used to work too, (that as they had children they should have priority or first pick of holidays over anyone who was childless).

Whenever it comes up the answer they get is that to give those with children preferential treatement may constitute discrimination on the grounds of family status so it is first come, first served.

It’s weird how certain people, by virtue of their choice to procreate, decide that it entitles them to be in receipt of preferential treatment. You have a child / children... not a passport to own and dictate everyone’s lives.
This one even came up behind me in the office one day looking at my holiday allocation... “ ohhh can you just keep an eye, *points* mid terms ! I’m going to need those, ok ! “ you might need, but you won’t get. First in first dibs...he had a face on him for a month.

Diziet

Strumms wrote: »

It’s weird how certain people, by virtue of their choice to procreate, decide that it entitles them to be in receipt of preferential treatment. You have a child / children... not a passport to own and dictate everyone’s lives.
This one even came up behind me in the office one day looking at my holiday allocation... “ ohhh can you just keep an eye, *points* mid terms ! I’m going to need those, ok ! “ you might need, but you won’t get. First in first dibs...he had a face on him for a month.

Sure, they can bring their kids to the office in half term... I agree people need to be mindful of others, but people do have children and these children need looking after for more hours during school holidays.

Strumms

Diziet wrote: »

Sure, they can bring their kids to the office in half term... I agree people need to be mindful of others, but people do have children and these children need looking after for more hours during school holidays.

Not my problem, if I need or want those days to suit my own requirements for whatever reason, I’m in first, I’m not running it by x, y, or z person... in my early working days I tried to be helpful and mindful but it was rare the dig out would be reciprocated.. last job the non parents amongst us put our foot down on that score... one dickhead after me booking a get away the week before and a day or two into midterm told me he might need to take it up with management / HR :pac: he did but was told where to go... about all I did for him from then on was open a door...unfortunately he usually came back through it.

bilbot79

coffeeteame wrote: »

I work for a US company with an Irish office. Due to a busy 2020, i finished the year with a few days leave I was unable to take. It now seems the company has decided that all leave not used in 2020 is simply lost. Is that allowed in ireland?

You saved it up because it wasn't worth it during Covid. Your work probably suffered as a result too and now you expect the company to honour your umpteen holidays this year also to their detriment. Definitely should lose it.

Strumms

bilbot79 wrote: »

You saved it up because it wasn't worth it during Covid. Your work probably suffered as a result too and now you expect the company to honour your umpteen holidays this year also to their detriment. Definitely should lose it.

My argument... if you are not at / in work... how can you complete the work task of applying for annual leave ?

You’ve no access presumably to the holiday database / spreadsheet to see who is already off...

The company should have said... “ ok, if you have 7 days to take, 4 will be carried over into next year, 3 into the following.”... that’s a reasonable and sensible compromise...they’ll be hammering on about flexibility but in times like this, they are advised to show some themselves, people have long memories.

jimmycrackcorm

bilbot79 wrote: »

You saved it up because it wasn't worth it during Covid. Your work probably suffered as a result too and now you expect the company to honour your umpteen holidays this year also to their detriment. Definitely should lose it.

No, he should expect the company to honour the law regarding statutory holidays and also whatever else is in his contract.

coffeeteame

bilbot79 wrote: »

You saved it up because it wasn't worth it during Covid. Your work probably suffered as a result too and now you expect the company to honour your umpteen holidays this year also to their detriment. Definitely should lose it.

Incorrect - My company was actually quiet busy during COVID and I was asked to delay taking annual leave. My role is based on big projects and these can happen at short notice. I simply ran out possible days to take off even with a sizeable Christmas break.

As it turns out things are much quieter in the start of our year so I'm planning to take the bulk of the days in the first few months of the year.

The company has agreed to comply with Irish law once it was pointed out but with an understanding that days SHOULD be taken within a given year.

skallywag

We usually allow for a certain number of days to be carried over, and if it less than five then no questions are usually asked. Last year was different though, and everyone was clearly requested (which seems was not the OP's case) that all leave should be taken within 2019. It meant a lot of people having to take most of December free, even though there was nothing really to do outside of work due to lockdown. To be honest most people complied without making a fuss with the year that was in it. Leave in the bank reflects negatively on a balance sheet, and most folk were just happy that they were holding onto their jobs at the moment.

If someone had kicked up a fuss about it then I guess that they may have been able to hang onto the leave. It was a similar situation with a voluntary pay cut of 5%, most went along with it (I think 85%+ in the end).

In the OP's case though the clear issue is that they were not informed that the leave would be lost. I think it is always a good idea to acquire some class of approval before carrying leave over into a new year.

yop

Where I work its down to the manager to allow you to carry those extra days. The system takes over 5 days and you lose the rest.

ED E

yop wrote: »

Where I work its down to the manager to allow you to carry those extra days. The system takes over 5 days and you lose the rest.

Similar here, 5 day carry which IMO is fair enough.

CruelCoin

coffeeteame wrote: »

I work for a US company with an Irish office. Due to a busy 2020, i finished the year with a few days leave I was unable to take. It now seems the company has decided that all leave not used in 2020 is simply lost. Is that allowed in ireland?

From citizens info: "In addition, annual leave should be taken within the appropriate leave year or with your consent, within 6 months of the relevant leave year. Further holding over (also known as carrying-over) of annual leave at your wish is a matter for agreement between you and your employer."

They can do it yes. Bit mean, but nothing you can do.

In my own place, we allow staff to carry over to the end of January, which lets them take holiday days they've worked up in December.
After that we write anything outstanding off. A bit of leeway is nice, but your employer doesn't have to give it.

dennyk

CruelCoin wrote: »

From citizens info: "In addition, annual leave should be taken within the appropriate leave year or with your consent, within 6 months of the relevant leave year. Further holding over (also known as carrying-over) of annual leave at your wish is a matter for agreement between you and your employer."

They can do it yes. Bit mean, but nothing you can do.

In my own place, we allow staff to carry over to the end of January, which lets them take holiday days they've worked up in December.
After that we write anything outstanding off. A bit of leeway is nice, but your employer doesn't have to give it.

"Further holding over" in that case refers to carrying over leave from the previous year *beyond* six months into the next leave year. The six months is clearly specified in the legislation and is not a matter for negotiation. Any further carryover past those six months is optional. Your employer is violating the law.

seamus

coffeeteame wrote: »

The company has agreed to comply with Irish law once it was pointed out but with an understanding that days SHOULD be taken within a given year.

If you're good at political language, I'd remind the HR person that it is THEIR responsibility to ensure that leave is taken, not the employee's.

chrisd2019

coffeeteame wrote: »

Incorrect - My company was actually quiet busy during COVID and I was asked to delay taking annual leave. My role is based on big projects and these can happen at short notice. I simply ran out possible days to take off even with a sizeable Christmas break.

As it turns out things are much quieter in the start of our year so I'm planning to take the bulk of the days in the first few months of the year.

The company has agreed to comply with Irish law once it was pointed out but with an understanding that days SHOULD be taken within a given year.

Good result then, seems whoever manages holiday planning needs to monitor the situation during the year, in that way avoiding issues with carryover into the following year.

Diziet

Diziet wrote: »

Sure, they can bring their kids to the office in half term... I agree people need to be mindful of others, but people do have children and these children need looking after for more hours during school holidays.

Not the problem of those who don't have kids themselves, and is something which should be factored in by those that do. How would you feel if your boss turned around and said "Sorry, John, I know you've two weeks booked in Tenerife from Monday, but Lucy's daughter is off school with Chicken Pox so you're gonna have to cancel that and come in on those days".

Any company who has a policy of favouring staff with kids is asking to be hauled in front of the labour court, especially if they have it in writing. Disallowing those people without kids to take certain holidays falls under the exact same heading as refusing someone with kids a promotion in case they won't be around. It's enshrined in legislation as one of the 9 grounds for discrimination:

Gender
Civil status
Family status
Sexual orientation
Religion
Age
Disability:
Race
Membership of the Traveller community.

Deleted User wrote: »

There were some with a similar attitude where I used to work too, (that as they had children they should have priority or first pick of holidays over anyone who was childless).

I know someone who worked in the Prison service and every year, the new calendar would be pinned up on the wall. Each person could fill it in, in order, depending on rank/grade from most senior to least. Only a certain number of people could reserve a specific day off, so if it got down to you and there were already, say, 6 names on that date, you were snookered.

Plus, you were allowed to reserve MORE DAYS than you were entitled to. This meant that the first 5 or 6 managers up would book off every single Friday and every single Monday (bar bank holiday mondays ). It meant that every Thursday or Sunday, lads would be hanging around waiting for the dinosaurs to confirm they were/weren't coming in the following day or not. If they rubbed out their name, there'd be a mad scramble of everyone trying to put their names down. Sneaky feckers would remove all the markers and everything to stymie their 'opponents'.

It all came to a head one Thursday when there were about 15 lads in the canteen arguing over who was going to get the first ever Good Friday off when the pubs were opened.

Strumms

You’d want to be a gargantuan of a tosser to ok and implement a procedure like that. That’s absolutely brain dead stupidity. Whatever manager thought that up I wouldn’t let them manage making the tea without supervision...

Seniority can enable certain positive aspects of your employment which I’ve nothing against but to get first dibs on holidays, no. Has to be first come first served.

Any job I’ve had including one state company it was just first come first served.

Strumms

Strumms wrote: »

You’d want to be a gargantuan of a tosser to ok and implement a procedure like that. That’s absolutely brain dead stupidity. Whatever manager thought that up I wouldn’t let them manage making the tea without supervision...

Seniority can enable certain positive aspects of your employment which I’ve nothing against but to get first dibs on holidays, no. Has to be first come first served.

Any job I’ve had including one state company it was just first come first served.

Yeah, I was flabbergasted when it was told to me. I'd say a lot of those kinda places are run like an old boys club. Garda stations, Fire Brigade, military........I reckon you wouldn't last very long if you started piping up about unfairness and inequality with the sort of Dinosaurs who are at the top. Especially if they've had to put up with it for years themselves and only now get to see the benefits of crapping all over the lower down guys.

I've a similar story of a golf club out past Dublin Airport. There was a physical timesheet put up in the clubhouse, and the official line was that you couldn't put your name down for a particular tee-time until after the weekly meeting of the chairing committee. One of the inlaws was a member for years. He had to collect someone from the airport one Sunday, so wanted to time his round to finish in time to collect that person. Trouble is, the handicap secretary and his buddies used that slot as their regular Sunday tee time.

He showed up to the committee meeting with 10 minutes left. Afterwards, the sheet was posted and, as expected, the secretary and his mates are already down for that time. He calls out this chaps name and nobody answers. He calls out the other three names, and again, nobody answers. So everybody can hear, he then says "well somebody is obviously playing pranks with this sheet as none of these guys are here to put their name down". He crumples it up and asks the committee for a new one, then writes his name down.

There was murder, afterwards. He was, for all intents and purposes, hounded out of the club by those holding the positions of power.

Latro

Strumms wrote: »

You’d want to be a gargantuan of a tosser to ok and implement a procedure like that. That’s absolutely brain dead stupidity. Whatever manager thought that up I wouldn’t let them manage making the tea without supervision...

Seniority can enable certain positive aspects of your employment which I’ve nothing against but to get first dibs on holidays, no. Has to be first come first served.

Any job I’ve had including one state company it was just first come first served.

First come first served sometimes doesn't work either.
In some places you would find same few people blocking "prime time" for holidays every year.
That was the case in my workplace. You could never book summer holidays, because it was all booked out in 1st week of Jan or even earlier.

We had to implement seniority list that was rotated every year. 25 employees - 4 people from top are moved to the bottom of the list every year.
New starters were always listed last and had to work their way up for 2-3 years before summer was available for them.

The system where you have same seniority list every year is very unfair too.
Imagine having about 25 workers. Only 2 at the time can be on holidays and most people want summer. If you are new starter you are unlikely to get summer slot for maybe 10 years.

Mrs OBumble

Strumms wrote: »

You’d want to be a gargantuan of a tosser to ok and implement a procedure like that. That’s absolutely brain dead stupidity. Whatever manager thought that up I wouldn’t let them manage making the tea without supervision...

Seniority can enable certain positive aspects of your employment which I’ve nothing against but to get first dibs on holidays, no. Has to be first come first served.

Any job I’ve had including one state company it was just first come first served.

I'd bet pretty highly that a union was pretty heavily involved in dreaming up a scheme like that.