Can an employer force its employees to use paid vacation to reduce it’s operational costs?
Get Legal Help Today
Compare Quotes From Top Companies and Save
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
Can an employer force its employees to use paid vacation to reduce it’s operational costs?
This is a company in a hiring freeze and likely facing what it’s policy manual calls a “Reduction In Force, (RIF)”. It is likely the company is attempting to reduce unused vacation payouts when the RIF occurs. Since NE considers vacation pay a wage, does the employee have any control over it while still employed?
Asked on August 10, 2011 Nebraska
Answers:
MD, Member, California Bar / FreeAdvice Contributing Attorney
Answered 12 years ago | Contributor
Typically, many employers cap the amount of vacation time and even sick time (if one or both are offered) to a certain amount overall and therefore, many are forced to use a certain amount per year to avoid losing those fringe benefits. So if you get a total of three weeks of vacation pay per year and you are capped at six weeks total and you now have accrued another amount that takes you over the six weeks, then by default you have to take as many vacation days off to get back to the six weeks. However, simply forcing you to take vacation days will still require your employer to pay you for those days off. If this is your employer's way to avoid layoffs, you wish to reconsider it as a negative thing and look at it as a way to maintain your job. If you are concerned, contact the Nebraska Labor Department and see if there is a precedent or history of this issue at your state. Chances are other employers have done the same thing in the past and more likely than not, at least one person must have complained.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Answer(s) provided above are for general information only. The attorney providing the answer was not serving as the attorney for the person submitting the question or in any attorney-client relationship with such person. Laws may vary from state to state, and sometimes change. Tiny variations in the facts, or a fact not set forth in a question, often can change a legal outcome or an attorney's conclusion. Although AttorneyPages.com has verified the attorney was admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction, he or she may not be authorized to practice law in the jurisdiction referred to in the question, nor is he or she necessarily experienced in the area of the law involved. Unlike the information in the Answer(s) above, upon which you should NOT rely, for personal advice you can rely upon we suggest you retain an attorney to represent you.