I have a friend who's employer has granted them 10 weeks of vacation and every time he goes, he gets called back or is not allowed to use them at all no matter what he tried, (they even went as far as to call the police in a neighboring state to go find them at a camp site!) What is the law about this because the company is making him loose the 10 weeks as of December 31, 2005. At that date, he will loose them, does the company have to compensate him those vacation days? If anyone could send me to a site with the statute listed in where it is that would be great! Thanks for listening to my bable. :)

Ryan

I could find no prohibition against Use-it-or-lose-it policies in MN that I could find. If there were one, I would expect to see it on the DOL FAQs and I did not. That's the thing about wage and hour law. If the law is silent on a particular issue, it normally means the employer's policies control.

It is terribly unfair, and the employee should contact their supervisor and/or HR to ask if they will allow carryover, due to the inability to take their full vacation. However, if the company refuses, there is no legal recourse that I can see.

I do believe when it is the EMPLOYER not allowing the vacation to be used, not a choice by the employee, that you must be compensated. You can not offer a benefit, then refuse to let soomeone use it, then point to a "Use it or lose it" policy. If the employee was not ALLOWED to use his vacation, I do believe said employee must be compensated. You just need to have documentation that you were not granted the promised time. Get a copy of the police report, that would really impress a judge if it were to go to litigation.

ssn, again, I'm going to ask you to check dates. This post is from August of last year. It's quite unlikely that the OP is still coming back looking for new answers.

And vacation time is not a guaranteed or a mandated benefit. Except in the very few states where vacation time, once earned, is considered wages, this would not be illegal, although I agree it would be unfair.

Regardless of dates, people can still benefit from the discussion. That is the point of a message board, to help the masses, not just one person, and to open discussion on the subject. I just read it for the first time, and may learn from it. Are you saying that if the original poster does not read this, there is no merit for anyone else?

Also, I do believe I am right. If an employee has it in writing (handbook, etc) that vacation time is given, and the employer themselves denies the vacation time, you are entitled to compensation in lieu of vacation time. It was promised, and therefore is legally binding. Obviously if the employee does not take the time offered, a "Use it or Lose it" policy is completely justified. If the employer does not allow the vacation, then says since you didn't use it it is gone? Just as there is no legal requirement for an employer to give you an hour long lunch break, if it is in the handbook, he has to. Where am I mistaken?

I'm not going to argue with you about this. You will conform to the rules of the board, which say that you don't respond to dormant posts unless you are the OP with an update or have a question about the law being discussed, or you will not post here. Period.

Whether a company handbook is legally binding depends on both state law and the EXACT wording of the handbook.