In a cost saving exercise that comes close to locking up the paperclips, Withers has tried to avoid stumping up for its qualifying trainees' accrued holiday.

All trainees were emailed by a HR manager who said that, whilst they were entitled to pay in lieu of holiday, it was hoped that they would take all their leave prior to ending their training contracts. Which also, in the case of some two thirds of the trainees who were not being retained, meant before leaving the firm for good.
 
When trainees subsequently contacted HR to ask for clarification that they would be paid for any accrued but untaken holiday, they were told that the firm would only pay for up to five days. When some of the more astute trainees pointed out that there was no reference to five days in their contracts, a partner sent out the following email:
 

	I am aware that a number of you have been to talk to HR about your holiday entitlement and the fact that the firm has asked you to take your holiday before the end of your training contract.   The firm has the right to ask you to take your accrued holiday prior to leaving and you have had sufficient notice to organise this. As a gesture, the firm is willing to pay up to 5 days' accrued but untaken holiday.   Whilst we appreciate that this is a difficult period for you, the firm is also trying to control costs in the current economic climate and there is a fine line to balancing these.   I hope that this resolves any outstanding queries regarding your holiday.   Regards, Partner

So that's them told.

A spokeswoman for the firm claimed that Withers was doing all it could to help the trainees, that the take or lose it policy only affected a very few people, and argued that telling trainees to take their annual leave was supportive of their wellbeing. She added that the firm was entitled to do this under the EU working time directive.

Well maybe, but saving pennies by doing over trainees who have lost their jobs is pretty shabby...