Richard Grogan: Holiday pay



Richard Grogan

Employment law solicitor Richard Grogan reminds employers they cannot pay an allowance instead of granting leave.

The issue of holiday pay arose in case ADJ-00025369 between a former tutor and an Educational Training Board. In this case the issue was that the employee was paid an additional sum on top of the salary to cover annual leave.

The Adjudication Officer referred to the case of Kvaerner Cementation (Ireland) Limited -v- Martin Tracy DWT017 where the Labour Court held:

“Article 7 of the Directive provides as follows:

  1. Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that every worker is entitled to paid leave of at least four weeks in accordance with the conditions or entitlements to, and the granting of, such leave laid down by national legislation and/or practice
  2. The minimum period of annual leave may not be replaced by an allowance in lieu, except where the employment relationship is terminated. Part III of the 1997 Act was an enacted to give effect to Article 7 (1) of the Directive. If provides employees with an entitlement to four weeks paid annual leave per year (and proportionally less where the employee has less than a full year’s employment) and to be paid leave, or additional payment in respect of public holidays. This part also makes consequential provisions in relation to the calculation and time of payment for such leave. It also makes provision at Section 23 where the payment of compensation to an employee where annual leave is outstanding at the cesser of his/her employment”

The Adjudication Officer pointed out that the Labour Court went on to state:

“What emerges from theses statutory provisions is that:

  1. The primary legation on an employer is to ensure that employees receive the requisite period of paid leave.
  2. That obligations cannot be offset by payment of an allowance in lieu of such leave.
  3. The obligation is imposed for the protection of the health and safety of workers”

The Adjudication Officer then went on to state that the Court decided that “the inclusion of an element in basic pay designed to cover holiday pay is inconsistent with the result with Article 7 of the Directive Part III of the Act is intended to achieve”.

The Adjudication Officer also quoted the Labour Court case in Mold Nal Limited -v- Motovilova DWT0754 where the Labour Court did not accept the respondent’s position of paying an allowance in lieu of annual leave entitlements where the Labour Court stated:

“The right of paid annual leave is provided for by Article 7 of Directive 93/104/EEC concerning certain aspects of the Organisation of Working Time. Section 19 of the Organisation of Working Time Act gives effect to Article 7 of the Directive and must be interpreted so as to achieve the result envisaged by the Directive.”

The Adjudication Officer pointed out the Labour Court had held in that case that Article 7 of the Directive and the Organisation of Working Time Act provides that the prescribed minimum period of annual leave may not be replaced by an allowance in lieu accept where the employment relationship is terminated.

This is a helpful decision by the Adjudication Officer. It does mean that, where an employer decides to pay an additional amount to cover annual leave, this will not stop the employee being able to bring a successful claim against the employer for not receiving their annual leave entitlements.



Related posts