Employment Law : Am I obliged to pay an employee for hours not worked?

Question

I have employed someone since Sept 05. The terms of employment (relevant to this question) were essentially that hours would be varied (but never weekends or nights) and a (generous) flat rate would be applied. Consequently this person sometimes does 20 hours one week and perhaps 50 hours the next. From Jan 07, we increased the hourly pay rate by 8% and promised a guaranteed 40 hours a week paid whether I have work to give them or not. i.e. if they work 20 hours, they would be paid for 40 hours a week. If they did 50 hours in a week, they would be paid for 50 hours. This employee is now insisting he is entitled to a minimum 8 hours pay per day (Mon-Fri), whether we have work for him or not. I disagree as his terms of employment were an improvement on their previous terms and there will be many weeks where he is paid for hours not worked.
Am I obliged to pay?

Just to clarify: If this person works Mon to Weds for 12 hours a day and we have no work on Thursday/Friday, they get paid 40 hours for that week (even though they only worked 36 hours). This person is insisting on also being paid for 8 hours on Thursday and Friday. i.e. expects 52 hours pay.

Answer 1

As I understand, you informed your employee that you will pay him for the hours worked that week but will always pay him for 40 hours if he does less.
To answer your question, if he has done 40 hours or less that week, you are not obilged to pay him any more than 40 hours. However, you do have to pay him the 40 hours. He is not entitled to a minimum 8 hours a day unless that is what has been agreed.

Answer 2

If you have agreed the set rate of 40 hours a week regardless of how many hours less than 40 he does, then you have to honour this side of the contract.

It shouldn't make any difference to the employee if you pay them a minimum of 8 hours a day regardless as this would equal the minimum of a 40 hour week!

Have a chat with the person involved and explain this to them...

Answer 3

You promised him 40 paid hours per week, so why is his asking for 8 paid hours a day for M-F a problem? It works out the same, whether you do the calculations by week or by day.

Am I missing something here?

Answer 4

After reading your edit, Gordon, I had to laugh a little... how big of an idiot have you hired that he thinks he gets 40 hours of UNPAID work and then whatever he actually produces is on top of that? Sorry, I would hand him his walking papers and find someone else, you're being extremely generous and he's being an ***.

Still would like to see your agreement in writing in case he comes back to argue. The old saying applies, "There's nice, and then there's business... never mix the two."

Answer 5

you have to pay him for 40 hours a week but you arent required to have him work 8 hours a day monday-friday

Answer 6

I used to be an employer..not any more though. Go to your local Citizens Advice Bureau and pick up all the booklets on employment law and note that , in all 26 books (of approximately 20 pages long) there is ..ONE PARAGRAPH !! on Employers rights. Need I say say more.?

Answer 7

You are not obliged to pay for lunch breaks. Therefore seven hours a day is counted as actual work. I actually think you're being very generous!

He's pushing it!

Answer 8

yes you are if you have changed his contract to guarantee him 40 hrs per week.What you can do is to give him notice,(how much depends on how long he has worked for you.I would say 3 months) change his contract to pay hrs worked only i.e.he is not then guaranteed 40 hrs a week if you have no work.Why didn't you leave his contract as it was before.

Answer 9

yes you are. you made a deal with him to pay 40 hours a week wether he makes those hours or not.

Answer 10

yes you agreed the hours now he has you by the balls,, have a chat with him and thrash out a deal before it gets nasty