The HR Forum

Hi Everyone,

You're probably familiar with the various cases working their way through ET and EAT, which focus on the principle that employees shouldn't be discouraged from taking their (minimum 4 weeks) holiday.

In the case of Bear Scotland v Fulton, the judgement was that employees should be paid as though they had worked their regularly required overtime.

Although there is some debate over what overtime this should include (compulsory, non-compulsory, regular as in often, or regular as in every X days), and there is still the possibility of further appeal, many businesses are erring on the side of caution and integrating average overtime earnings with their holiday pay.

I can see why businesses are choosing to do this. they will effectively cut off back pay claims and get themselves an employee relations win.

I work in the automotive manufacturing industry, where due to the flexible nature of customer demands, we operate a flexible workforce. Our flexibility model includes the use of overtime to quickly "flex up" in times of high demand, and allows for shift hand-overs etc.

If we were applied the most liberal application of this ruling (which I suspect there will be building pressure on all businesses to do) the financial cost could be substantial, and I am concerned about the ER implications.

My question to the community is - how have you dealt with the implications of these EAT judgements?

• Are you choosing to just "wait and see"?
• Have you had to tackle a culture of overtime, and if so how?
• How did you deal with the negative ER from employees who don't do overtime?

Many thanks,

Ruth