19th October 2011, 01:07 PM
In reply to Kevin the reason that I raised the issue of rolled up holidays is simply because the issue came up and there was a wide sperad feeling that the provisions of the working time directive effectively outlawed the practice. The case I refered to is not 'old' in the sence of being outdated; it sets out the current state of the law in England and the fact of the matter is that we are better knowing this than not. The ECJ ruling, IRLR (Industrial Relations Law Reports), 2006, 386 found that the practice was contrary to the provisions of the WTD and therefore unlawful but went on to say that sums paid by way of rolled up holiday pay would bre offset against payment owed to a worker for aspecific period of leave actually taken....in other words employers could still do it. Governments both current and previous could have plugged this loophole but have chosen not to do so. The issue for me is that rolled up holidays are likely to be imposed on short time and contract staff, precisely those who are in the weakest position to raise concerns with their employer and it is not a practice that I would like to see spread within archaeology. Similarly despite what the courts imagine the relationship between employer and employee is not an equal one. If someone starting a job is given a contract that includes rolled up holidays they can only reject it at the risk of rejecting the whole contract tand therfore the job itself! Whilst the practice remains legal in England, if we are serious about improving trems and conditions in archaeology, then we need to be reminding the employers of the provisions they must make as set out in my earlier post. Hopefully by doing so we will help to make the practice less appealing than it may appear on the surface.