Actions of an employee in case of non-payment of overtime
Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2025 10:11 am
Dishonest employers often try to avoid the mandatory paperwork for recording overtime and do not pay employees for overtime. To protect their rights and substantiate claims in court, the employee must confirm:
the fact that the employer has given an order to perform certain work within a specific time;
their actual implementation.
If an employee voluntarily stays late at work, and there were no assignments to perform work at that time, this cannot be called overtime work.
Actions of an employee in case of non-payment of overtime
Source: shutterstock.com
In judicial practice, evidence student database of overtime may include: timesheets, information obtained from time tracking programs, recording when employees come to work and go home, all kinds of orders, explanations on the case, and waybills.
For example, during one of the court proceedings, an employee presented pay slips to the court as evidence, as well as a certificate from an accountant about working overtime, and put forward a demand for payment of wage arrears for 2 years. The court fully satisfied them.
It is important to remember that the existence of an order to perform work overtime is very difficult to prove, so the courts side with the employer in this matter. An indisputable argument will be an order to involve in overtime. The court generally does not accept other evidence.
Let's look at the situation: during one of the court proceedings, an employee presented a work time log, forms, duty schedules and routes as evidence of overtime. But the court could not recognize the existence of overtime, since the employee himself entered the entries in the log, and the rest of the documentation was planned. The court stated that the applicant did not provide evidence indicating that his immediate superior had assigned him the work. On this basis, the claim was dismissed. Other cases have the same content.
In circumstances where the information contained in timesheets and timekeeping programs differs, courts have relied primarily on the information in the timesheet. Their reasoning is that printouts from an electronic timekeeping program do not guarantee that work was performed in excess of the norm or by order of the director.
Download a useful document on the topic:
Checklist: How to Achieve Your Goals in Negotiations with Client
the fact that the employer has given an order to perform certain work within a specific time;
their actual implementation.
If an employee voluntarily stays late at work, and there were no assignments to perform work at that time, this cannot be called overtime work.
Actions of an employee in case of non-payment of overtime
Source: shutterstock.com
In judicial practice, evidence student database of overtime may include: timesheets, information obtained from time tracking programs, recording when employees come to work and go home, all kinds of orders, explanations on the case, and waybills.
For example, during one of the court proceedings, an employee presented pay slips to the court as evidence, as well as a certificate from an accountant about working overtime, and put forward a demand for payment of wage arrears for 2 years. The court fully satisfied them.
It is important to remember that the existence of an order to perform work overtime is very difficult to prove, so the courts side with the employer in this matter. An indisputable argument will be an order to involve in overtime. The court generally does not accept other evidence.
Let's look at the situation: during one of the court proceedings, an employee presented a work time log, forms, duty schedules and routes as evidence of overtime. But the court could not recognize the existence of overtime, since the employee himself entered the entries in the log, and the rest of the documentation was planned. The court stated that the applicant did not provide evidence indicating that his immediate superior had assigned him the work. On this basis, the claim was dismissed. Other cases have the same content.
In circumstances where the information contained in timesheets and timekeeping programs differs, courts have relied primarily on the information in the timesheet. Their reasoning is that printouts from an electronic timekeeping program do not guarantee that work was performed in excess of the norm or by order of the director.
Download a useful document on the topic:
Checklist: How to Achieve Your Goals in Negotiations with Client