# Whose responsibility to arrange cover for A/L?



## Lord Camomile (Dec 2, 2013)

This has come up recently at work, and it occurred to me it was something I'd just taken for granted, but possibly I shouldn't have.

Here, if you want to take A/L when you're working an early or late shift it's up to you to find someone who can cover that shift. I've never really had much of a problem with this, even though it can be frustrating sometimes.

However, some of my colleagues think it should be our employers responsibility to ensure the service is covered. Some argue along the lines of "we're entitled to our A/L, we shouldn't have restrictions put on it", though to be honest I think a lot of them just resent having to do it themselves.

Having said that, restrictions _are_ put on A/L during peak periods (beginning of term), with only two staff members per team per site allowed to take A/L at the same time.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 2, 2013)

Surely the employer should arrange cover, but it seems reasonable they should delegate that task to staff within the firm. If staff don't have time to complete their normal duties because of the time they are spending arranging cover for their own leave, then they should raise this with management.

The employer can put restrictions on annual leave, for example requiring you not to take it during busy periods.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2013)

go on holiday and let them sort it out.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 2, 2013)

If you are talking about "one or two" days, then perhaps the employee should try to arrange it. But, if the period is longer than a week ie "proper holiday" then the employer should lead on arranging cover.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Dec 2, 2013)

Depends. I've always been involved to an extent when people take leave on my team. Obviously I approve the leave for my direct reports, but I also need to be aware of the leave for my more junior staff who don't report to me directly. I need to ensure sufficient cover and even odd days can cause problems if specific activities are planned. But I expect my direct reports to manage it appropriately and make sure I'm informed. People don't work shifts where I work so individuals swapping shifts isn't an issue.


----------



## andysays (Dec 2, 2013)

It depends on how your shift system works and what exactly covering someone else's shift means.

When I worked on the Underground we had a two-year long roster covering exactly what shift we would be working each week and when we would be on leave. If we wanted to change it was our responsibility to find someone who was prepared to swap.

If it's less specific than that and the deal is simply that only two people can be on leave at one time, then it doesn't sound to me like you should be responsible for finding whoever will cover for you.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 2, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Depends. I've always been involved to an extent when people take leave on my team. Obviously I approve the leave for my direct reports, but I also need to be aware of the leave for my more junior staff who don't report to me directly. I need to ensure sufficient cover and even odd days can cause problems if specific activities are planned. But I expect my direct reports to manage it appropriately and make sure I'm informed. People don't work shifts where I work so individuals swapping shifts isn't an issue.


To be fair I think I muddied the issue by bringing in the leave restrictions aspect. Obviously most workplaces can't have everyone taking A/L at the same time, so a certain amount of quota-ing has to be done.

I think it was still more about who should arrange cover. Basically, should it be the case that if an employee can't find someone to cover their shift, they can't go on leave? Or should they be allowed to take leave whenever they want, and it's up to the employer to make sure someone else in the staff covers the service?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 2, 2013)

andysays said:


> It depends on how your shift system works and what exactly covering someone else's shift means.
> 
> When I worked on the Underground we had a two-year long roster covering exactly what shift we would be working each week and when we would be on leave. If we wanted to change it was our responsibility to find someone who was prepared to swap.
> 
> If it's less specific than that and the deal is simply that only two people can be on leave at one time, then it doesn't sound to me like you should be responsible for finding whoever will cover for you.


It's not as in advance as that, but we have regular early and late shifts, so we know when we're supposed to be working. This also goes for weekend shifts. For example, I work Monday earlies, Thursday lates, and one Sunday in four. If I want to take A/L that interferes with any of that I have to arrange cover for it.


----------



## souljacker (Dec 2, 2013)

It's up to my boss to sort it out, although we are expected to check the calendar/rota before applying for leave to make sure others are available and have to give two weeks notice. 

We've just had the annual christmas holiday bun fight. Is that whats prompted your colleagues annoyance?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Dec 2, 2013)

I have never arranged A/L cover for myself. I would only do so if I was contractually obilged to or specifically ask as a favour to management in _a_ particular circumstance.


----------



## wiskey (Dec 2, 2013)

A/L is their responsibility to sort out, if you want a shift off and there's no space for leave you can get a shift swap and you have to find someone to swap with and make sure they turn up.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 2, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


> Basically, should it be the case that if an employee can't find someone to cover their shift, they can't go on leave?



Yes



> Or should they be allowed to take leave whenever they want, and it's up to the employer to make sure someone else in the staff covers the service?



No


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 2, 2013)

souljacker said:


> We've just had the annual christmas holiday bun fight. Is that whats prompted your colleagues annoyance?


Not really, although there has been an increase in "can I get a swap for these shifts?" emails lately.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Dec 2, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


> To be fair I think I muddied the issue by bringing in the leave restrictions aspect. Obviously most workplaces can't have everyone taking A/L at the same time, so a certain amount of quota-ing has to be done.
> 
> I think it was still more about who should arrange cover. Basically, should it be the case that if an employee can't find someone to cover their shift, they can't go on leave? Or should they be allowed to take leave whenever they want, and it's up to the employer to make sure someone else in the staff covers the service?


You're right that in most (all?) workplaces everyone can't be off simultaneously. But if a workplace has a 'swap shifts' policy for odd days then clearly it is the employees' responsibility to sort out cover. I'd guess such workplaces would require certain numbers of staff on duty who can all do the job in hand, compared to where I work where everyone does slightly different things so cover must be arranged.  

It would be chaos if staff could take leave whenever they liked and it was up to managers to arrange cover. Xmas would be simply unworkable. Compromises are needed on both sides - staff are allowed the opportunity to take their statutory leave entitlement (20 days I think?), but they must be reasonable about their requests too.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 2, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> It would be chaos if staff could take leave whenever they liked and it was up to managers to arrange cover. Xmas would be simply unworkable.


Why? There would still be a limit on how many people could take A/L at the same time, it would just be up to management rather than the staff to arrange cover.

Same things happens: staff member takes A/L, their shift is covered by another staff member. It's just a question of who arranges for that second staff member to cover the shift.


----------



## andysays (Dec 2, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


> It's not as in advance as that, but we have regular early and late shifts, so we know when we're supposed to be working. This also goes for weekend shifts. For example, I work Monday earlies, Thursday lates, and one Sunday in four. If I want to take A/L that interferes with any of that I have to arrange cover for it.



So if you want to take a whole week off (hardly unusual or unreasonable) it's up to you to find someone who's prepared to swap or you can't do it?

That sounds totally unreasonable to me and I'd be checking the exact wording of my contract/consulting my union/looking for another employer


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 2, 2013)

andysays said:


> So if you want to take a whole week off (hardly unusual or unreasonable) it's up to you to find someone who's prepared to swap or you can't do it?
> 
> That sounds totally unreasonable to me and I'd be checking the exact wording of my contract/consulting my union/looking for another employer


_Sort_ of. You have to make every effort, but nowadays I think if you can't find anyone who will do a straight swap/cover it will be offered as overtime. So far it's not really got to the point where it's broken, though it's come close a couple of times...


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Dec 2, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


> Why? There would still be a limit on how many people could take A/L at the same time, it would just be up to management rather than the staff to arrange cover.
> 
> Same things happens: staff member takes A/L, their shift is covered by another staff member. It's just a question of who arranges for that second staff member to cover the shift.


Shift work obviously has its own requirements for cover just as office work has its requirements. But the starting point has to be a certain proportion of staff must be in at any given time, and staffing levels should be worked out taking into account contractual leave entitlements and the Working Time Directive. 

Where I work people have to request leave in advance to their manager - there is no swapping of shifts as that isn't how we work. The manager is responsible for deciding whether to approve the leave - taking into account cover, the last time the person had leave where two people request the same time off, special reasons such as someone wanting leave to go to a religious festival, etc. 

The manager has to encourage everyone to take at least 20 days off per year, and is responsible for arranging cover. So for me this would involve looking at what work the person was doing, what could be parked while they were off and what needs to be reallocated to others. But the staff also have to be sensible and suggest who could take on certain tasks and what could be parked - they are adults so I'd expect them to behave as such. Basically I wouldn't expect them to say 'I want two weeks off, and just sort my fucking work out while I'm off'. 

But shift work in, say, a factory may have different needs and might operate such a shift swap system albeit with minimum staff on duty requirement. The managers have a duty to oversee things, and ensure everyone gets a fair crack at the whip for leave. But if staff can swap individual shifts between themselves then fine. Where someone can't arrange a swap and wants the time off, they'd have to request it via their manager who would make a decision on it like I outlined above. 

Being responsible for sorting out cover is a pain in the arse.


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 2, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> You're right that in most (all?) workplaces everyone can't be off simultaneously. But if a workplace has a 'swap shifts' policy for odd days then clearly it is the employees' responsibility to sort out cover. I'd guess such workplaces would require certain numbers of staff on duty who can all do the job in hand, compared to where I work where everyone does slightly different things so cover must be arranged.
> 
> It would be chaos if staff could take leave whenever they liked and it was up to managers to arrange cover. Xmas would be simply unworkable. Compromises are needed on both sides - staff are allowed the opportunity to take *their statutory leave entitlement (20 days I think?),* but they must be reasonable about their requests too.



if you work full time/5 days a week etc it's 28 days a year....................never heard of people having to arrange their own cover for annual leave ....where i worked you just submitted your request on your holiday form and it was either approved or not and that's as far as you responsibilities went..........


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Dec 2, 2013)

mentalchik said:


> if you work full time/5 days a week etc it's 28 days a year....................never heard of people having to arrange their own cover for annual leave ....where i worked you just submitted your request on your holiday form and it was either approved or not and that's as far as you responsibilities went..........



Just to be clear, where I said employees' should arrange their own cover for leave I was referring to swapping shifts like happens in some workplaces - so by swapping shifts they have, by definition, sorted out cover between themselves.  The sort of arrangement by which staff member X doesn't want to work shift A, and agrees with staff member Y to do their shift B is Y does shift A in return.  A 1-1 reciprocal arrangement, which must work in some sectors.

I know British Airways operated such a system whereby staff could do that between themselves (this was a factor in the religious discrimination case that was dragged through the courts).  But that certainly wouldn't happen where I work - not least as I work in an office which doesn't operate shifts.  But quite how it would work depends on the workplace and its needs.


----------



## Quartz (Dec 2, 2013)

Employers should work on the principle that in every group of 5 or 6 people, one person will be off at any one time. That covers statutory holidays, annual leave, sickness, training, jury duty, etc. If your employer doesn't have that level of staffing, it's a management issue.


----------

