ECJ: Sick workers earn holiday entitlement

HR department headaches

well a taste of their own medicine would be nice.

Careful wording

Interesting wording in that judgement, which leaves lots of open issues.

It says that a worker who wasn't able to take leave because he was sick can either carry it over, or be paid for it if he leaves the company. There's no clear definition of "wasn't able", though. What about someone who has chosen to take no leave during the year, then ends up sick for the last two months? Was the illness the reason they couldn't take the leave? They had 10 months of opportunity which they didn't use, so can it be assumed that it is only 1/6 (i.e. 2/12 of a year) worth of leave which was potentially lost?

It's also not clear on earning leave. Everyone's entitled to 4 weeks paid leave, yet under French law, for example, you need to earn your entitlement. Anyone starting a new job in France has no guarantee of leave, and if you start half-way through the year you only earn half a year's entitlement for the following year.

Most EU directives are carefully ambiguous, so that they can be interpreted according to each member state's needs and not rejected outright. That's exactly what leads to these weasel-worded judgements that don't clarify anything. It'll just make employment lawyers even richer.

I think this ruling is wrong

If an employee is off for a day or two that should have no effect on their holidays. But when on long term sick? Sorry, they should lose those rights (pro-rata) because they are NOT working! All that should be required is for the company to have a policy in place stating when they consider a health-related leave of absence to change from "one of them things" to "long term". I'd say the trigger would be any sick leave which accrues to more than 14 days off a year. So if you are off on longer term sick for 6 months, you only get 50% of your annual leave. Simple and fair.

The employer has to hire someone else to do cover the sick employee's job (or pay overtime, or work remaining staff harder) AND now pay sick employee for their holidays or let them take those. If the employee has been off to a long time, this could make it near impossible (or very expensive) to integrate the worker back in. Why should the employer foot this bill? Is this not why we have insurance etc? There may be a case where the work is what has made the employee sick (but H&S legislation should cover that).

This will be open-season for the work-to-rule-shirkers that infest the UK workforce (although I guess most of them are living it up on our overly-generous benefits system). Although it does not surprise me that this was brought by civil servants, another bunch of parasites. UK workers need a SERIOUS attitude adjustment.

Oh, and cue some companies brining in medicals to try and screen out "unhealthy" potential employees.

Here in Finland - More European than "the heart of Europe - puke"

We can do this. Possible for years.

If you take holiday, and fall sick in^H^H during it, as long as you've a doctors note (or a valid AA card - we're not talking 'bout a motoring org. here...;-) you can extend the holiday by at least some of the days you were sick.

It's here (http://www.kela.fi/in/internet/english.nsf) somewhere, but I can't be arsed to wade through so many documents. Those who like to play with plastic dolls, and have time on their hands (not talking about a watch, 'natch) might have a 'flick-through'. (Sorry Lester, couldn't resist).

So, as John Major famously hoped that Britain would be the "Heart of Europe", then rejected most Euro stuff, I'm fuc*king glad Europe had a tremendously successful bypass operation.

At last, something for people rather than "business"

It makes a refreshing change that the ECJ has made a ruling that gives penny-pinching "HR" people a good kicking.

I for one am sick to death of "business" this and "business" that and legislation constantly being made or ignored (eg working time directive), all to suit "business". The fact that the CBI are squirming is a good sign.

Having witnessed the growth of "HR", ie treating people as pawns who only exist to be exploited and who should be dumped at the earliest opportunity if they get sick, and whose access to health care should be restricted by preventing people attending appointments etc, they deserve a VERY hard kicking. Back when they were called Personnel departments they at least had the name to remind them they are dealing with PEOPLE, not "resources".

Anon because we have "HR" here and senior management who have been engaged in a continuous attack on the staff for the last two years. Thank $deity for unions.

It'll just mean they get made redundant more quickly

Instead of having a job to go back to?? That's what happened when I worked at one company. You make the job redundant not the person, but HR depts are very good at that kind of thing.

It may get some people a bit more dosh in the short term - long term I think it'll probably mean things actually get worse.

The only good news is the carrying over holidays (or payment!!! hopefully).

Dear Boss...

... since I've been off sick but still accruing holiday entitlement and didn't get to take all my holidays last year, I'm just writing to let you know that I'm taking a break and I'll see you again in June.

Yours sincerely...

PS Mines the one with the "how to play the system" notes in the pocket.

One more reason

Why my wife and I are glad we got rid of all our staff and just work as self employed consultants. Businesses should not be the welfare state and all this judgement does is make it less attractive to employ people. So thats a few less jobs created....

@AC Business Twits

Very glad I dont work with either of you, you both sound like tossco and their half mind "managers" who couldnt manage a chocolate orange, and use excuse after ridiculous excuse to justify BS "well you have to multiply this out by X stores and Y xxx, so we couldnt do that" <-used whenever they get a suggestion they wish they had thought of. Bring on the depression, perhaps some more "consultants" and "business tycoons" will lose their shirts, too much to hope for sadly.

Once again the CBI will pull some strings with pastor brown and poshie cameron (depending on which of the terrible 2 are running the country when this finally works its way through the legal system and the govt is done squandering OUR money to satisfy the CBIs desire for slaves)

Frankly I'm getting sick of so called "business leaders" treating employees like slaves and haranguing people to give up their rights with veiled threats such as "profits are tight this year, we might have to make some job cuts unless everyone signs this Working Time Opt Out, if it gets signed I'll persuade head office not to cut any jobs" <- idle threat which works to get people to do unpaid overtime etc. Bloody ridiculous.

HR are a dept which should be banned, Personnel is what they should be called....People are NOT Photocopiers!!! I'm not a fucking resource I am a PERSON!

Might also help if recruitment wasnt based on who the interviewer thought might be a good sexual conquest / bar buddy

UK is uncompetitive as people spend far too bloody long at work, end up demotivated and spend all day browsing the web instead of working as they are royally hacked off.

In Australia for example

work >2 hours - get 10 mins break, work more than 4, get 10 and 30, work more than 6 get 10, 10 and 30, add on ten and so on.

Compared to here - work 6 and get 20 mins, (ok most say 4 hours and get 10 - 15) so HR and managers decide to make shifts 5 hrs and 55 mins long so they dont have to issue breaks.

CBI has no right to be sticking its nose into employees rights, they can sod off, minimum wage will cost millions of jobs!! <- uh huh, a few maybe, which were going to be shipped to india / china anyway.

Perhaps there should be an enquiry into who Bribes......I mean donates to the big 2 political parties.

At the end of the day, this country is overworked, overstressed and under appreciated, no wonder Britain is a nation of Alcoholics.

Sensible ruling from the EU - keep 'em coming

"Businesses themselves also suffer when staff take sick leave, and we had hoped that a compromise could have been achieved over unused holiday time," said the CBI's director of HR policy, Katja Hall"

Poor Katja. What a bummer to realise that business have such a high reliance on meatware deployment, and that businesses in fact only exist to provide support and resources to other meatware units.

Or in simple English - get a grip, you stupid bitch.

(And before people hoik the flamethrowers out, I've no time at all for skivers, but any HR department with a bit of common savvy should be able to differentiate between the genuinely ill and mere chancers)