Hours Owing

[kateeb]

Hi all,

My partner has been with an organisation since December 2009 working shifts. He is looking to leave for another job that he's been offered, however the rostering system has calculated that he owes the organisation hours.

We are attempting to do a manual calculation of his hours to verify that the system is correct, as it is notoriously wrong due to a lack of consistency with the way in which data is input by multiple people.

His organisation are stating that they are only taking into consideration the hours from 1 April 2016 onwards to work out his hours owed, despite him having been employed for six years prior (during which he may have worked excess hours which could potentially balance out what he reportedly owes now). Is restricting the amount of years to take into consideration something an employer is generally entitled to do, or is this something that sounds as though it could be challenged?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Newchodge]

I would challenge the whole concept. Why weren't hours re-calibrated every month, or quarter or year?

 

[kateeb]

From what I understand, it is possible to see a balance of your hours if you go looking for it and so the organisation placed the onus on the employee to ensure they have worked enough hours per year - which I don't necessarily disagree with.

However the majority of people work fixed shift patterns, which as standard do not make up the full amount of contractual hours they should be doing. It's also taken until this financial year for the organisation to start reviewing these hours themselves, as opposed to it being something they regularly keep on top of to ensure employees are not grossly under what they should be. Staff who do not pay attention to their hours have only recently been notified that they have racked up a shortage over the last five years.

I suppose there's fault on both parts, but alas it is what it is.

 

[ecommerce84]

I’d say the onus is wholly and exclusively on the company on this one.

If you’re paying your staff for 35 hours a week, you should make sure you have software that rota’s them in for 35.

It seems bizarre that they have allowed this to happen for all this time without addressing the issue, it must have cost them thousands of pounds.

Out of interest, how many hours are they claiming your partner owes?

 

[kateeb]

They award their staff with additional annual leave after being employed for 10 years, which is the amount of leave that these rotas are designed on as historically, the workforce used to be made up predominantly of people who had worked there for a long period of time. It was never redesigned to accommodate for the fact that probably 80% of staff nowadays have been there for less than 10 years and are averaging a retention of 5.

They say he owes 300 hours, which would equate to him having to pay back around £5,000 in order to leave - enough to prevent him from taking the new job.

 

[Mr D]

They award their staff with additional annual leave after being employed for 10 years, which is the amount of leave that these rotas are designed on as historically, the workforce used to be made up predominantly of people who had worked there for a long period of time. It was never redesigned to accommodate for the fact that probably 80% of staff nowadays have been there for less than 10 years and are averaging a retention of 5.

They say he owes 300 hours, which would equate to him having to pay back around £5,000 in order to leave - enough to prevent him from taking the new job.

And they will recover the money how? Out of his final payslip?

Perhaps if they chase for money, pay at £1 a month. If its even payable.

As @Newchodge suggests challenge it.

 

[kateeb]

From what he's told me following other people facing similar situations, yes as you say - both his final payslip and then chasing him (presumably with the threat of passing the debt onto some kind of collection agency?)

Pardon me for checking, but I presume you all mean challenge the company for having knowingly indebted their employee(s) for hours?

 

[Newchodge]

I suggest that he leaves as planned, and, if he does not get full pay on his final salary he weeks professional advice about suing them for unlawful deductions. If they pursue him throguh the courts for that kind of amount I would expect them to struggle.

What does the contract say about repaying for time not worked when all rostered hours have been worked?

 

[nelioneil]

He needs to ask for records totalling how it gets to the stage he owes 300 hours and why the hours before 2016 are not considered.

Think about it - if an employee really owes 300 hours, would that surely not constitute a disciplinary, or at least be approached about why he is not working his hours.

 

[Paul Norman]

What a bizarre way of operating! The company, I mean.

Moving to a new employer sounds like an immensely good decision here.

As for the hours, proving it either way sounds like many months worth of work, and if there are input errors the whole thing will end up being a nonsense.

Repeatedly, from threads like this, we are reminded just how appalling a lot of businesses are at dealing with HR issues!

There are strict rules about deducting money owed from the final pay packet. I suspect this company doesn't much respect the law.

 

[kateeb]

He needs to ask for records totalling how it gets to the stage he owes 300 hours and why the hours before 2016 are not considered.

Think about it - if an employee really owes 300 hours, would that surely not constitute a disciplinary, or at least be approached about why he is not working his hours.

He has these records, it is what we've been trying to work through to verify that they appear correct. As for why pre-2016 is not considered is a mystery to me too, it's what I'm wondering is legal or not given it is a continuous period of employment.

It's only in the last six months or so that the organisation have began to review all employee's hours... they still don't appear to be trying to organise a way of these people paying them back though and are just letting them accumulate further ‍

 

[kateeb]

I suggest that he leaves as planned, and, if he does not get full pay on his final salary he weeks professional advice about suing them for unlawful deductions. If they pursue him throguh the courts for that kind of amount I would expect them to struggle.

What does the contract say about repaying for time not worked when all rostered hours have been worked?

It does say that overpayments may be deducted from his final pay. It also says excess annual leave can be recovered from (his final pay) too... well, it doesn't appear to be that he's taken annual leave in excess, just that not enough shifts have been inserted into his working pattern to make up the equivalent of 37.5 hours per week.

 

[kateeb]

There are strict rules about deducting money owed from the final pay packet. I suspect this company doesn't much respect the law.

Only when it suits them and not when it doesn't

 

[pentel]

It does say that overpayments may be deducted from his final pay. It also says excess annual leave can be recovered from (his final pay) too... well, it doesn't appear to be that he's taken annual leave in excess, just that not enough shifts have been inserted into his working pattern to make up the equivalent of 37.5 hours per week.

Does the contract say anything about what happens if there is insufficient final pay?

Seems like it could be a good move to leave immediately after payday.

 

[kateeb]

Does the contract say anything about what happens if there is insufficient final pay?

Seems like it could be a good move to leave immediately after payday.

Very interesting suggestion, but this is what it says (which sadly I think might cover your idea):

We reserves the right to require you to repay any of the said losses, either by deduction from salary, or any other monies owing to you for which your authority is deemed by acceptance of this contract or any other method acceptable to us.

 

[simon field]

I’d just leave after payday!

No reasonable person/tribunal/judge is gonna swallow that guff!

 

[STDFR33]

If the employee has done regular shifts / hours (that are below what they signed up for) and paid for different hours, surely after so long it would constitute a change of contractual hours that both parties have agreed to?

 

[Uke]

If the employee has done regular shifts / hours (that are below what they signed up for) and paid for different hours, surely after so long it would constitute a change of contractual hours that both parties have agreed to?

I’m no HR expert, but I’m sure it’s called ‘custom and practice’.

I’d just leave after payday!

No reasonable person/tribunal/judge is gonna swallow that guff!

Exactly what I’d do. They’d be throwing good money after bad to try and chase you for anything.

 

[Newchodge]

Very interesting suggestion, but this is what it says (which sadly I think might cover your idea):

We reserves the right to require you to repay any of the said losses, either by deduction from salary, or any other monies owing to you for which your authority is deemed by acceptance of this contract or any other method acceptable to us.

They would have to get a court order. I don't think they would succeed. At they very least it is worth trying.

 

[BeauLacey]

Just checking I understand this correctly. Is this issue he's had more paid holiday over many years but not worked the full hrs to accrue it?
So, a FT worker at that company works 37.5hr a week & was entitled to 30 days a year inc BH. Are you saying he has been allowed 30 days paid holiday each year but only worked an average of say 28 hrs a week?

 

[Newchodge]

Just checking I understand this correctly. Is this issue he's had more paid holiday over many years but not worked the full hrs to accrue it?
So, a FT worker at that company works 37.5hr a week & was entitled to 30 days a year inc BH. Are you saying he has been allowed 30 days paid holiday each year but only worked an average of say 28 hrs a week?

No. He has worked all his rostered hours but the roster did not amount to the hours he was 'expected' to work. Nothing to do with holiday and an excellent example of an employer not having a clue about employing staff.

 

[WaveJumper]

It sounds like the most bizarre situation ever a company is paying people for hours not worked and not just over a month but going back years. What field of employment is this not the care sector by any chance ?

 

[WaveJumper]

I also meant to add, so if he was not leaving what are the company expecting their employees to do are they going to put an additional hours rosta in place to claw back these hours owed

 

[Newchodge]

Incidentally, OP, was he on an hourly rate of pay or on a salary?

 

[BeauLacey]

So bizarre