Change of contracted hours by employer - Question.
Discussion
A colleague of mine is employed by a company and then contracted out to an IT company as a trainer.
The IT company have reduced budget this year so only want the colleague for 2 days a week (she was on 5 days a week before).
The colleague believes that the employer needs to keep paying her the full 5 day a week salary (paid monthly) for every year she has been employed (currently 4). So would be paid full time for 4 months before the new 2 day salary kicks in.
Is this correct?
The IT company have reduced budget this year so only want the colleague for 2 days a week (she was on 5 days a week before).
The colleague believes that the employer needs to keep paying her the full 5 day a week salary (paid monthly) for every year she has been employed (currently 4). So would be paid full time for 4 months before the new 2 day salary kicks in.
Is this correct?
SLCZ3 said:
So her employer has not changed her hours, if so then she is still employed by her "employer" for her initial contracted hours, but I am sure someone else will be able to expand on this.
You are correct. The history is this:
The person is in the UK and was contracted by a big US software company for a number of years. They were paid by Brook Street (because the sw company does not employ contractors directly) who do the PAYE but always under a one year contract that was renewed every year.
Just over 3 years ago, the SW company decided to consolidate their vendor company relationships globally and so decided to change vendor companies. The new vendor company then employed the person (full time employee now) and 'contracted' them back out to the SW company. That was originally for 5 days per week. About 3 months ago she was told by the SW company that from July 1 she would only be needed for 2 days per week.
She has just been paid for her first month in the 2 day week contract and her salary is as it was when she was on a 5 day week.
I wondered if they had mistakenly paid her the full time rate but she believes that they have to keep doing so for 4 months (because she believes she will be paid full time for one month per year worked).
So is that correct or do the vendor company (who employ her full time) have to keep paying her for a 5 day week and it's up to them to find her another 3 days per week of work?
Thanks!
Hmm, as she is a "full time employee" on 5 days then she should get paid for 5 days irrespective of the actual hours/days worked on the external contract, assuming she is on PAYE!. That should continue until she works any notice given to her by her employer, or until she signs another contract reflecting the new situation.
IANAL but the above seems reasonable to me, I personally am not aware of any pay per month per year worked, unless it is in her contract.
IANAL but the above seems reasonable to me, I personally am not aware of any pay per month per year worked, unless it is in her contract.
As always, no meaningful advice can be given without details of the contract. The months per year worked thing you refer to above is total hooey.
This may be of some relevance -
https://www.gov.uk/lay-offs-short-timeworking/over...
This may be of some relevance -
https://www.gov.uk/lay-offs-short-timeworking/over...
Just a quick update.
Her employer is now saying they made a mistake paying her for 5 days so will make the deduction for the overpayment next month.
One employment lawyer, over the phone, says that they cannot do that without a new contract and should be paying in full until then and she is seeing another emplpyment lawyer in person on 25th.
Her employer is now saying they made a mistake paying her for 5 days so will make the deduction for the overpayment next month.
One employment lawyer, over the phone, says that they cannot do that without a new contract and should be paying in full until then and she is seeing another emplpyment lawyer in person on 25th.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 11th August 11:00
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff