17

'Banked hours' vs overtime

Hi all

This is only my second time posting on the forum as I am not usually very brave. So apologies in advance if my post is too wordy.

I work in manufacturing and my company goes through peaks and troughs at certain times of the year.

Naturally, during peak periods, our factory operatives have the opportunity to work overtime and are paid at x1.5 for the first 4 hours of overtime and x2 thereafter.  

During quiet periods, we sometimes have to implement short time working or even lay off. Thankfully, the latter is very rare.

With the current cost of living situation, my senior management team are looking at ways to alleviate the financial impact of short time working on employees as well as ensure that we don’t lose good employees.

So, my MD came up with the idea of banked hours where employees would bank hours worked above their contractual hours to be used during quiet periods. For example, an employee on a 39-hour week works 48 hours in a week. Rather than pay the excess 9 hours at the relevant premiums in the pay reference period, the hours are banked. When the business is experiencing a downturn in sales and the employee is working short days (with the hours not worked unpaid), the banked hours are used to pay them for full 39 hours.

I must admit, when this was first mentioned to me, I immediately thought…TOIL (which would have been easy). However, I am a bit stumped due to the overtime element as our contract does state that overtime will be paid at the premiums and what minimum wage implications could be.

If anyone has implemented this successfully, I would be very much grateful for any ideas you can share. Likewise, any thoughts on the ‘whys’ & ‘why nots’ would be equally appreciated.

If this subject has previously been tackled, a point in the right direction would also be appreciated as I am struggling with my searches.

Many thanks in advance

5440 views
  • You say that you have to implement short-time working occasionally - I would guess the frequency of this will impact on the response from the workforce. If it is rare then they may well prefer to be paid the overtime rather than bank it.

    Your point regarding premium rates can be resolved by banking the equivalent number of hours worked as overtime. e.g. if they work 6 hours overtime they would currently get 4 at x1.5 and 2 at x2 - let then bank 10 hours.

  • In reply to Robert James Munro:

    Hi Robert

    Thanks for your response. Slow periods are usually during the summer months and can start from the tail end of May to mid or end of August. Understandably, consumers are more likely to be spending on other things like holidays rather than beds during these months. We have been fortunate enough that even with reduced orders at these times, we have managed to maintain full working weeks or kept short time working to a minimum. The idea behind looking into banked hours now is a matter of just in case.

    I like your idea of how to resolve the premium rates issue. Quite frankly, I don't think I would be willing to give up a premium rate now to be paid my normal rate at a later date if I were in their shoes. I just need to convince my senior management team.

    thanks again
  • Yes, that was my first thought - why bank hours to be paid at normal rate, when you could be paid for them now at x1.5 or x2? Especially if you have managed not to move to short time working/lay offs in the quieter months - it reduces the appeal of being able to cash in banked hours if there are few opportunities to do so.
  • For all the reasons articulated by Robert and Maya, I think very few of your workers are likely to take the bank hours option if it were offered. There are a range of technical issues with implementing such a scheme (e.g. what do you do if someone banks time and then leaves before they use it? What if you don't have a summer slow-down and they never need it? At what rate would it then be paid out?) to very little benefit and no legal obligation.

    If I were your MD, I would be focusing more on finding creative ways to use the time not building beds to make something else that can be revenue generating in the down time. Perhaps acquire some storage so that beds can be made in the summer to provide a surplus of stock for sale in the winter/spring so that less overtime needs to be paid to meet demand.

    But I'm just in HR, so what would I know?
  • In reply to Maya:

    Thanks Maya. Glad that I'm not alone on that thought. The voice of reason can be a bit lonely at times!
  • Steve Bridger

    | 0 Posts

    Community Manager

    20 Jun, 2023 08:43

    Hi Sarah... thank you for posting!

    I hope you don't mind but I've tweaked the title of your thread.
  • In reply to Robey:

    Thanks Robey...very much appreciated!

    All points added to my list of 'what ifs'.
  • In reply to Steve Bridger:

    Hi Steve

    Absolutely no problem at all! Thanks for the thought.
  • In reply to Sarah:

    Also a lot of the response will be dependant upon peoples personal thoughts on inflation.

    £100 in January bought a lot more than £100 today

    Equally think carefully about how it will interact with payrises - imagine a worker banking those 10 hours Ron Munro mentioned in Jan based on the Jan pay rates, you give a 5% payrise in Apr and then they take the 10 hours instead of short working in August. Those 10 hours (which were actually only 6 worked hours) are now paid at 5% more than they were worth when banked.

    My payroll head just exploded and I suspect the accountants are shuddering at the thoughtof numerate workers banking a load of hours just pre payrise and then using post payrise at a higher rate (as surely you will have to pay up any unused bank hours at the end of the holiday / financial year)
  • In reply to Ian:

    Thanks Ian

    I'm banking on (pardon the pun) on the FD and Payroll Officer remaining in my camp of 'what ifs' which they are at the moment!
  • In reply to Ian:

    No reason why the cash value of any hours banked can't be the prevailing rate at the time they were worked.
  • In reply to Robert James Munro:

    No reason at all - it is just something that needs to be thought about up front and communicated clearly to affected staff to reduce possibility of confusion/resentment in future
  • In reply to Ian:

    Also to consider is depending on your normal rate of pay, you may fall foul of HMRC if by banking the hours it brings them under the national living wage
  • In reply to Sharon Lesley:

    On the other hand - and notwithstanding Robey's sensible observations about what if there is no summer down time - if banked hours were enhanced by the same enhancement as pay, some staff might well enjoy getting paid time off in the summer over and above their annual leave entitlement? You could agree to something that includes how to manage anyone who leaves before they can take the additional time or mix and match so a maximum amount is taken as banked time and the rest paid at overtime. I admit I am taking a simplistic view though!
  • In reply to Sharon Lesley:

    Thanks Sharon. This was the very first point raised by the Payroll Officer...naturally!