You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Due to the number of staff, annual leave entitlements and the number of working days in a year, we need to have a minimum of 1.7 people off every day if we are to get all our leave used up.
Is it reasonable then to set a maximum allowance of 2 people per day, or should it be 3? If it's only 2, then there will be little flexibility and conflict over who gets what days.
Is this something that's legislated somewhere?
Is it reasonable then to set a maximum allowance of 2 people per day, or should it be 3? If it’s only 2, then there will be little flexibility and conflict over who gets what days.
Well, you could all take a cut in salary so that your employer could take on someone else to cover for that 3rd person. Have you suggested this to your colleagues?
Reasonable depends on why they have done it, it could be anything from your employers are arse holes to lack of staff threatens lives.
Realistically what's likely unreasonable is the staffing level if a higher rate of authorised absence isn't practical.
In terms of legislation to my knowledge no, they have to give you holiday, they have to give you the opportunity to take it, might even obige you to do so, but there is no obligation to provide specific holiday, be flexible etc. As far as I'm aware, so long as they provide you with opportunity to take "every third Thursday" as holiday and reach your legal entitlement I don't believe they've got to do anything more, whether that suits you or is convenient isn't their legal problem but probably makes them arse holes. It may be staff retention is their problem though.
Is it reasonable then to set a maximum allowance of 2 people per day, or should it be 3? If it’s only 2, then there will be little flexibility and conflict over who gets what days.
Well, you could all take a cut in salary so that your employer could take on someone else to cover for that 3rd person. Have you suggested this to your colleagues?
I work for the NHS. Our departmental manager is changing the rules that have been in place for 20+ years.
If we were all to take a salary cut, it definitely would not be used to employ another person. Besides, our wages are defined by National payscales.
Perhaps a better way of determining who can be off is to make sure that each job can be covered by the people left at work. Having an arbitrary limit based on a mathematical calculation is only going to cause issues. And have you taken into account if your staff have children and therefore are limited to when they need to take time off and is this fair to staff who don't have kids and always need to work over the summer?
our wages are defined by National payscales.
Yes they are, but those pay scales are adjusted pro rata for folk working various numbers of hours.
‘Reasonable’ as far as legal/contractual... maybe. As far as being-a-decent-manager... not so much. Maybe practicable is a better term.
Setting a maximum so close above the required minimum amount will cause issues with flexibility or when folk join/leave the team.
If they can display that the department simply cannot function with three people out of the room then maybe.
But IMO (and having run leave allocations in several different work patterns over the years) allowing up to three sounds *much* better. Make a case for flexibility & morale, and establish some work patterns for catching up on any missed work on days when less than three are away, there will be some.
Unless you have endemic staff morale issues, when sick rates will often mean you’re down by a lot more staff than 1.7
You may want to mention this.
our wages are defined by National payscales.
Yes they are, but those pay scales are adjusted pro rata for folk working various numbers of hours.
Yep, that's a good point. It would be interesting to see what happened if all of us put flexible working applications in! I can be 100% certain they would not take on another person, it would just be seen as a cost saving and we'd have to put up with it.
We're a team of 11 (9 full time) and we cover 12 hours a day, 365 a year (with an overnight on call service as well.)
We've always had up to 3 people off per day, with limits to how much time you can take during school holidays when necessary which has suited everyone. We've always maintained the service, but this proposed change will reduce flexibility we've previously enjoyed and impact on morale for sure. People are already feeling awkward about booking time off and that shouldn't be the case.
I work for the NHS. Our departmental manager is changing the rules that have been in place for 20+ years.
If you work in a clinical area then the first priority is and must be safe staffing levels to ensure the safety of the patients.
The previous policy may have been in place for 20+ years but your managers will likely be dealing with the realities of staffing in the current NHS, not that which existed in 1999. Unfortunately the Tories are pretty much wrecking the NHS at the moment and tje uncertainty of Brexit is only making things worse.
Have you spoken to your union about this?
If we were all to take a salary cut, it definitely would not be used to employ another person.
They can employ someone out of the brexit savings. There, I've said it.
If you work in a clinical area then the first priority is and must be safe staffing levels to ensure the safety of the patients.
No, the first priority is legal compliance by the employer (whoever they are) in terms of employment rights, health and safety etc. Once those are protected, contractual rights can be weighed against patient safety.
...contractual rights can be weighed against patient safety.
Whilst weighing contractual rights against the 'customer' may cut it in other industries the safety of the patient is and has to be the higher measure in healthcare, especially so the more acute the type of care being provided is.
Across the entire NHS we are seeing the effects of staff shortages, and whilst battles can be fought and won at (very) local levels regarding contractual rights, it is often very much as a result of 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'.
My sympathies are with the OP and as I touched upon, I would suggest they speak to their union rep (who will have experience and knowledge particular to this field), rather than ask random folk on the internet who can wheel of line and verse something they heard in an HR meeting many years ago.
Unfortunately this 'adjusting' of staff leave ratios is the effect of trusts having to cope with government-level policy and mismanagement and thus is unlikely to be solvable without a change in government.
Doesn't this mostly just depend on how many people are required to provide adequate cover? If in the past you managed with 3 people off have your management provided details of they think they can only allow for 2 people being off? Maybe they're having to abide by new rules on minimum staffing levels? Also if 3 people off is cutting levels to the bare minimum what happens if another goes off sick, are they just building in some contingency (without presumably having to rely on agency staffing)?
Legally you have to take the statutory minimum holidays, 20 I think, paid and not at work. So unless they start sending people home in January I can't see they can maintain the ratio and comply with their non-negotiable legal duties as an employer.