Mr O Akinsete v Ward Security Ltd — 2021

The claimant, a security officer who became a London Relief Officer from 1 November 2019, claimed that the respondent refused to permit him to exercise his right to 5.5 days paid annual leave during the 2020 holiday year. As a Relief Officer he accrued holiday on an hourly basis at 12.07% of hours worked, and in 2020 he accrued 295.14 hours, approximately 25 days. The tribunal identified the central issue as whether the respondent refused to permit him to take leave under the Working Time Regulations 1998.

The tribunal found that the claimant's contract and the respondent's annual leave policy made clear that leave had to be taken in the relevant holiday year, could not ordinarily be carried forward, had to be requested through the employee portal, required one month's notice, and was subject to operational cover and a holiday ban from 18 December to 5 January. The claimant had access to the employee portal, was reminded through welfare checks and staff updates to manage and spread leave across the year, and could see his accrued and taken leave through the portal.

The tribunal accepted the respondent's contention that it did all that was reasonably practicable to encourage the claimant to take holiday. It found that the claimant ended the year with untaken leave because he had not managed his leave efficiently, having attempted to take a large proportion of his annual entitlement in the final quarter, when some requests lacked sufficient notice and there was no available cover. The tribunal also found no evidence that the coronavirus pandemic made it not reasonably practicable for the claimant to take his leave.

The tribunal considered a one-off June 2020 payment to relief staff for holiday entitlement and noted unease because Regulation 13(9) WTR does not permit payment in lieu of holiday except on termination. However, it found that the respondent did not refuse to permit the claimant to take those 36 hours: the respondent made an offer which the claimant accepted, while other colleagues declined. The claim was dismissed as not well-founded, no compensation was awarded, and the tribunal did not need to decide whether the claim had been brought in time.