Annual leave Civil Service circular 08/2023

My understanding is that the statutory days are the 20 days you get under the working time act. Anything over that is non-statutory.

I had never made it out of year one before covid, not taking as much leave as possible never crossed my mind!

I was ironically disadvantaged by PeoplePoint going "Ah, Covid, we've decided this year doesn't count in the three-year cycle." For me, that meant instead of being in year 1 last year, I was still only in year 3, and couldn't carry leave into this year. And this year, I want lots of time off because I'm planning a long trip in September/October.

I'll have to have a good read of the circular.

It is disgraceful that there's been nothing about this from Fórsa or the AHCPS. I hate to say it, but it seems the only point in being in a union these days is to get a discount on insurance, or if you become the victim of bullying/harassment/unfair dismissal and need individual representation. For "ordinary" negotiations on pay and conditions, they've turned into quiet little sheep!

It's amazing (and highly aggravating) the lack of consistency between depts/offices even though all HR depts are supposed to be implementing the same circulars!

Disgraceful that the unions haven't said a word about this, did they raise any objections at all? Certain people will be highly disadvantaged over this and I thought we were supposed to be moving towards greater flexibility in the workplace not less!

PER seem determined to chip away at T&Cs bit by bit, just because they can.

Yeah, agreed. I'm going to get in touch with my branch/head office and see what the story is.

My understanding is that after the transition period, you can only carry leave into the next year. Under the old rules, you could carry leave over from Year 1 into Year 2, and from Year 2 into Year 3 - including some of the leave from Year 1. (And you were very much limited as to what you could carry over from Year 3 to Year 1).

The effect of the rule change means that I will no longer be able to do what I did a few years ago, i.e., "save up" leave over 2 years to be able to take six weeks off, to go on a long-haul holiday and still have time off at Christmas and a few other days here and there for emergencies, etc.

It's not something that everyone would use, sure. Those of us who have family on the opposite side of the world absolutely did use it. And that flexibility is being removed for no real reason - other than PeoplePoint/NSSO's leave system will no longer have to do the calculations in December/January and March/April, depending on when the leave year ended.

I would rarely want to take 6 weeks off across Jan/Feb. and shorter working year means you're not paid for some of those weeks. I mean, it's an option, yes, but ultimately some people can't afford that and it's a reduction in flexibility.

Also, there has always been statutory leave. 20 days since the 1997 act

and we are all supposed to use that other than in exceptional circumstances. and any statutory leave carried over had to be used by September of the next year. However this was not always enforced.

yes

again unless there are more exceptional circumstances but I think HR would be monitoring such

Regardless of the issue itself, echo somebody else here who sad the lack of comms from the union on this has been ridiculous

A CO would always have had to use 20 days per annum though - the stat min - for health & safety / working time reg purposes.

AHCPS briefed members on this last February / March in fairness......

Nor anywhere I've worked. Managers would ask people to take at least two weeks together, but it was certainly the case that people would 'save up' their leave for things like big trips or weddings the following year.

Wrong end of stick... and we're mainly talking about losing the ability to carry over non-statutory leave, anyway. In any case, you're private sector, so the circular doesn't apply to you.

The only rule I knew of that was strictly enforced was as another poster said -you had to take at least 2 consecutive weeks per week- you could carry over everything else under the old circular.

Also, I understood that a circular is terms and conditions of a civil servants employment.

In order to change terms and conditions you have to "consult" with employee.

In civil service this has always been done through formal meetings with union on behalf of all civil servants.

So did Forsa sit down with Dper and give them the nod to go ahead??

If not, is the new circular even valid?

I'm annoyed as I've a wedding In Oz year after next and was hoping to make it into a big break with my family.

I'm surprised I have to say. I'm nearly 30 years in CS in various places and have never, once, heard of anyone being asked to take two weeks together.

Although it was a rule when my wife was working in financial services!

Wow. Didn't know they'd no obligation to consult with unions.

So they can look at what's the legal minimum we can get away with and apply that?

That seems wrong when they are always promoting themselves as employer of choice for flexibility etc.

What's the point of the union then?

Anyway keeping an eye on this! Very enlightening this discussion.

So the most recent time FFG bankrupted the country, civil servants had a pension levy, a pay freeze, and (2?) pay cuts, plus an increase in hours worked. The unions' reaction was "well, it could have been worse, there could have been redundancies!"

The public service unions covering clerical/admin/managerial staff seem mostly there to act as a conduit for insurance companies selling stuff to us and for recommending we vote in favour of whatever below-inflation pay rise they "negotiated" for us.

That said, they're still necessary, because a) imagine how much worse things would be without them; and b) if an individual needs advice/representation because of bullying/harassment/victimisation.