Advice regarding leave payout

Monthly salary / 21.67 * leave days owed to you
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys.

The amount I'm looking at is the amount on my payslip before tax. So it should be the correct amount.

I will contact the HR department and have a chat on exactly how my leave payout was calculated. Just a lesson I guess is that I worked for the company for 10 years and now at the end they try and screw me on every technicality.

Just to be sure how I'm calculating it is that you take your monthly Salary and divide by 21.67 which gives you your daily rate. Then you multiple that rate by the amount of leave days.
 
TheGuy said:
Thanks guys.

The amount I'm looking at is the amount on my payslip before tax. So it should be the correct amount.

I will contact the HR department and have a chat on exactly how my leave payout was calculated. Just a lesson I guess is that I worked for the company for 10 years and now at the end they try and screw me on every technicality.

Just to be sure how I'm calculating it is that you take your monthly Salary and divide by 21.67 which gives you your daily rate. Then you multiple that rate by the amount of leave days.
Click to expand...

Just confirm the minimum labour leave rate, and the company's leave rate, they only pay out the minimum labour rate (the extra they give you is a perk)
 
TheGuy said:
Just a lesson I guess is that I worked for the company for 10 years and now at the end they try and screw me on every technicality.
Click to expand...

The common mistake both companies and employees make is to assume that the one will have a sense of loyalty to the other. That's BS. You do work, you get paid, that's it. If you don't work for them anymore, they won't pay you. If they won't pay you, you won't work for them. It's as simple as that.
 
You say you got a promotion last year. Perhaps the 14 days were accumulated before the promotion, hence why they calculated it at the previous date, and the 11 days that are outstanding, would be calculated on your new rate, and paid out on your last day at work.
 
The_MAC said:
Just confirm the minimum labour leave rate, and the company's leave rate, they only pay out the minimum labour rate (the extra they give you is a perk)
Click to expand...

NO. If you received extra, and it's part of your contract, that is NOT a perk. It is leave and is required to be paid out. The only way to lose leave is to either use it OR forfeit due to not taking.
 
In terms of the new salary or the old salary it could be that they can show the leave was accrued during a period in your old salary.
 
Well then you can argue that you only want the "new leave" paid. That's crap. If you take "old leave" they're not going to pay you less if you take it. Leave value is increased if you get a raise.
 
OP, it could be they are paying you out on your basic rate and not your total cost to company. However, I speak under correction as to the legality of that.
 
My previous company did this, shafted me for leave days, I only found out after I left because the HR lady in cpt called me and said they shafted me, BUT that I didnt hear it from her.I moved from JHB so I had to deal with JHB HR.This wasnt some mom and pop company ,this is a company with assets to the tune of R200 billion.
 
A couple of other things to bear in mind:

- Leave is only paid on your basic salary, not your cost to company. Any allowances over and above this (for example a travel allowance) will not be included in the leave pay out calculation.

- Your company should have a maximum leave day policy, whereby any leave over and above will be lost if you do not take said leave. The company cannot legally deny you this leave, regardless of how much they need you. Should your company be denying a payout on leave you wanted to take but were refused, they have to pay this out.

- There is a distinction between current leave and accrued leave (current is in the current yearly cycle an accrued will be any time before). It's tough to explain without detailed numbers but sometimes when you take leave, it is not allocated properly (to the accrued leave first) so you "lose" some leave even though you shouldn't. The company takes from your current leave, and leaves the accrued, which eventually falls away. This is why it is imperative to always check your leave on a monthly basis on your payslip.

Everything else seems covered well enough in the other comments.

Also, check your payslip for the prior month of your termination to make sure they haven't mucked with your leave days.
 
Last edited:
Same thing happened to me, had 30+ days of leave but only got paid out for 15 which is the legal requirement. The other days were "Bonus Leave" so anything over and above the 1.25 pm that you get (stand to be corrected) counts as bonus leave which they don't have to pay out. Kark thing is that when you take leave it comes out of your real leave first and then goes into your "bonus leave". It sucks but I knew that it was coming and didn't moan about it.
 
theratman said:
Same thing happened to me, had 30+ days of leave but only got paid out for 15 which is the legal requirement. The other days were "Bonus Leave" so anything over and above the 1.25 pm that you get (stand to be corrected) counts as bonus leave which they don't have to pay out. Kark thing is that when you take leave it comes out of your real leave first and then goes into your "bonus leave". It sucks but I knew that it was coming and didn't moan about it.
Click to expand...

Just doesn't sound legal. I'd be very surprised if this would stand up in a court of law.

There is no "bonus leave". There is only leave. I negotiated my leave so that it is 21 days per annum - it isn't 15 + 6, it is 21. The 15 minimum just means that they can't give me any less than that.

Not normally a problem for me since I use leave regularly, but I'd be very surprised if any of these shenanigans would hold up at the CCMA.
 
Ancalagon said:
Just doesn't sound legal. I'd be very surprised if this would stand up in a court of law.

There is no "bonus leave". There is only leave. I negotiated my leave so that it is 21 days per annum - it isn't 15 + 6, it is 21. The 15 minimum just means that they can't give me any less than that.

Not normally a problem for me since I use leave regularly, but I'd be very surprised if any of these shenanigans would hold up at the CCMA.
Click to expand...

Yeah I looked into it and afaik they were within their rights as my basic leave was 15 days per year (1.25) but due to time at company I was on 1.75 and the extra .5 days each month was "bonus leave" and reflected as such on payslip/sage etc. Ended up back at the company a few months later, ironically I'm leaving for good at the end of this month and only expecting 10 days to be paid out even though I have a bit more. What grates me is having to work up until the 31st so I can get a full salary :(
 
Ancalagon said:
Just doesn't sound legal. I'd be very surprised if this would stand up in a court of law.

There is no "bonus leave". There is only leave. I negotiated my leave so that it is 21 days per annum - it isn't 15 + 6, it is 21. The 15 minimum just means that they can't give me any less than that.

Not normally a problem for me since I use leave regularly, but I'd be very surprised if any of these shenanigans would hold up at the CCMA.
Click to expand...

My view...

Perfectly legal in terms of Labour Law. The BCEA governs the 15 day minimum it refers to with specific guidelines. Anything above this is at the will of the company. In other words, they aren't breaking any laws by not giving it to you and no law governs it so they can make up their own rules relating to the days above 15.

There is an element of contract negotiation that may be influenced by this. So it should be specified how leave is accrued and paid out in the contract. They still wouldn't be breaking any Labour Laws by not paying you out for accrual on anything more than 15 days per year even if it was specified. It does however become a civil matter and you can take legal action for breach of contract if this is the scenario.

It may also be an aggrivating factor in unrelated CCMA cases such as constructive dismisal, but I can't see that the CCMA has jurisdiction over that as a standalone case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X