The Royal Wedding - Another Day Off

Date Added: 17 January 2011

Employees will be pleased at the prospect of an additional bank holiday on April 29th 2011 in celebration of the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton. Some employers will be concerned about the additional cost and operational difficulties that the timing of the additional day’s holiday will bring, but do employers have to allow employees this time off and, if so, do they have to be paid.

There has always been confusion about the status of bank holidays. However, it is worth remembering that there is no automatic right for an employee to be paid leave on bank holidays. Whilst some employers do close down on bank holidays or offer employees who work extra pay or a day off in lieu, they are not required to do so. In short, any right to time off or extra pay for working on a bank holiday depends on the terms of the contract of employment.

Below we set out what you need to consider in readiness for the big day.

Statutory position
The only legal obligation on an employer is to allow their workers the minimum annual leave laid down in the Working Time Regulations 1998, 28 days for a full-time worker. This may include bank holidays. It follows that entitlement to paid time off will not increase when an additional bank holiday is granted as the total remains 28 days, 5.6 weeks.

Contractual position
An employee’s contractual position may be different. For example, if a contract states an entitlement to 20 days paid leave per annum plus bank holidays, then an employee will be entitled to the Royal Wedding bank holiday next year in addition to the usual 8 bank holidays. However, if the contract states an entitlement to 20 days leave per annum plus normal bank holidays, an employee will not be entitled to the extra day’s leave because the Royal Wedding is not one of the normal 8 bank holiday per year. Likewise, if the contract states that the employee is entitled to ‘28 days holiday per year’, ‘28 days holiday per year including any bank holidays’, or ‘28 days holiday per year including normal bank holidays’ there will be no such contractual entitlement and an employer with such a holiday clause may decide to close down on 29th April 2011 but require employees to take the day out of their annual holiday allowance.

Requests for time off
Because the additional day’s holiday in 2011 falls between Easter and May Day, an employee need only take 3 days annual leave to have an 11 day break. It is likely, therefore, that demand for time off over this period will be high.

Time off on a bank and public holiday
The timing of an employee’s holiday must be agreed by the employer. For some businesses, such as retailers who remain open on bank holidays and need to maintain staff cover, bank holidays are usually treated just like any other day and, therefore, employees have to make a request for annual leave in the normal way if they do not wish to work it.

Pay for working on a bank and public holiday. How an employee is paid for working on a bank holiday should be covered in the contract of employment, for example, whether there is an entitlement to an enhanced rate of pay.

Impact on morale
What will be the impact on morale if an employer insists, e.g. for those with ‘including bank holidays’ in their contracts, that staff take a days holiday from their annual entitlement or unpaid leave on the wedding day. Employers may happily give staff a paid day off regardless of their contracts but, in these times, that may not be an affordable option to all companies. Conversely, if an employer decides not to allow employees the additional day, they need to consider and be prepared for any potential employee relations or adverse publicity implications. In situations where there is no consistent contractual wording, and some but not all staff are entitled to the extra day, it may be appropriate to permit all staff an extra day off to ensure consistency of treatment and good relations.

If you are in any doubts as to your position, please contact the employment team.

<< Back to News

newsletter signup

news

17 May 2012
Age Discrimination: Developments
In Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes (a partnership) [2012] UKSC 16, the Supreme Court considered whether a solictor's … | Read more