What's so difficult about dividing a figure by 37 and multiplying by someone's contracted hours??
I’m going to assume that full timers on 35 hours will receive 35/37ths payment otherwise all the part timers have been shafted…..again
You would think that would be the case.
What's odd with mine is that the lump sum element is exactly correct using that calculation method, but the escrow is well short.
Anyone know of a reason the escrow is calculated differently/I'm calculating wrongly?
My escrow is there but it's short by about 50 quid.
I'm part time and the pro rata part of the lump sum 500 is correct.
Have emailed HR as their calculation is wrong.
What's so difficult about dividing a figure by 37 and multiplying by someone's contracted hours??
Not sure where people above are arriving at 2k gross, its 1107 add 500.
Their obvs including the weeks wage too and thus as a whole around the 2k pre tax mark.
Dexydog. There's only one way to calculate it if your pro-rata, my friend.
So they have calculated the escrow wrongly.
Let's see what excuse they come back with.
Hopefully no argument and it gets adjusted upwards next week.
Just wondered if perhaps the escrow part might be calculated differently for some obscure reason.
My escrow is there but it's short by about 50 quid.
I'm part time and the pro rata part of the lump sum 500 is correct.
Have emailed HR as their calculation is wrong.
What's so difficult about dividing a figure by 37 and multiplying by someone's contracted hours??
Not sure where people above are arriving at 2k gross, its 1107 add 500.
My escrow is there but it's short by about 50 quid.
I'm part time and the pro rata part of the lump sum 500 is correct.
Have emailed HR as their calculation is wrong.
What's so difficult about dividing a figure by 37 and multiplying by someone's contracted hours??
Not sure where people above are arriving at 2k gross, its 1107 add 500.
