›

PTO & Years of Service

Creds326Creds326 7 Posts
in Benefits & Leave Vote Up0Vote Down
Our employee handbook states that an employee is entitled to 40 additional hours of PTO based on specific years of service.  They are:  0-2 years = 120 hours; 3-8 years = 160 hours; 9-15 years = 200 hours & 16+ years = 240 hours.  When would an employee qualify for a higher number of hours?  At the completion of year 2 or at the end of year 3 to get the 160 hours?  Our HR director is saying at the end of year 2 going in to year 3 but our payroll clerk disagrees & says that an employee must complete year 3.  Those of us who are at the various plateaus are caught in the middle because the CFO is siding with his payroll clerk.  Any thoughts?
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Comments

  • 7 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • HRforMEHRforME 497 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down

    PTO is strictly interpretted by what it states in your employee handbook.  When do you give the vacation? At an anniversary date?  What's confusing about your policy is also that you give a 0 year employee 120 hours.  I'd have to see the exact wording to give you a better interpretation.    If it is vague, then someone needs to make the decision.  It sounds like the CFO and HR director need to sit down and discuss it with someone higher than them.  The other question I would ask is how long has this been in place and how is it currently being done?

    Our vacation policy, when it was tiered, specifically stated that in the year of an anniversary where vacation levels changed that the amount was prorated between the two amounts (10 and 15 days).  So the employee got more, but not all.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Creds326Creds326 7 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down
    The company put the those PTO times in effect at the beginning of 2008.  However, they soon realized that it was a mistake giving all the hours up front.  (Several new employees took vacations within the first 2-3 months & then quit.)  Not too smart.  Starting January 1, 2009, we're going back to the accrual method but the "time tiers" will remain the same.  The bad thing about all this is that we were just told about the change & most employees had used up their PTO & now have nothing to start the new year with.  I've been with the company 10 years & now have to start all over accruing time.  And, we've been told that we can't borrow from our PTO.  Several people made travel arrangements (including air fare) in January and now must take time off without pay!  If we would have been given a heads up maybe in September that the company was thinking about going back to the accrual method, most of us would have better managed our time off.  This whole situation has been a nightmare.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HRforMEHRforME 497 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down
    Based on your reply, I would say that the powers that be need to make the decision on how it is accrued.  But in 2008, how was it handled, even if it was all given at the beginning of the year...did a person with 2 1/2 years service get the lower amount or the higher amount?
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Creds326Creds326 7 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down
    I'm not sure how others were handled but I'll give you my scenario.  I completed my 8th year in November 2007.  On January 1, 2008 I was given 164.62 hours that supposedly were what I would have accrued in December as well as the 160 hours to get me on track with the new upfront PTO.  The HR director who put together our handbook & all the "benefits" left in March.  My boss, who is a former HR director, and the current HR director are of the opinion that I should have received the extra week (for a total of 200 hours) but the payroll CLERK says no that I was not entitled to it until November 2008 when I completed my 9th year.  As of January 1, 2009, I will be accruing at the 200 hour rate.  The handbook does not give any explanation so most everything is open to interpretation.  At the other companies that I worked for, the HR dept interpretated the rules, not the payroll department.  This is not the only incident with this particular payroll clerk.  However, her boss says that whatever the clerk says must be right & he won't get involved.  Bottom line:  when does an employee qualify for the increased hours of a new tier?
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HRforMEHRforME 497 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down

    Who is the payroll clerk's boss's boss?  That is who the HR director needs to clarify this with. I agree that the payroll clerk SHOULD NOT be the one making this decision.  The payroll clerk's boss sounds like a real winner.

     Again as to when an employee qualifies is something someone above the payroll clerk needs to decide.  Sorry this is such a hassle!

    *Ü* 

     

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • TXHRGuyTXHRGuy 1,586 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down
    [quote user="HRforME"]

    Who is the payroll clerk's boss's boss?  That is who the HR director needs to clarify this with. I agree that the payroll clerk SHOULD NOT be the one making this decision.  The payroll clerk's boss sounds like a real winner.

     Again as to when an employee qualifies is something someone above the payroll clerk needs to decide.  Sorry this is such a hassle!

    *Ü* 

     

    [/quote]

    I agree.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • IT HRIT HR 595 Posts
    PMVote Up0Vote Down

    I agree that someone above the payroll clerk needs to make the decision.

    If I had to answer your question I would interpret it this way - since 0-2 years gets 120 hours then when someone hits their 3 year anniversary they should get the 160 hours.

    That is just my opinion.   Someone with authority needs to make a decision.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.