There is a minor advantage to the worker, if they accrued the AL at one pay rate and didn't use it. Then the use/cash it in at a later date after a pay increase, the accrued AL is payed out at the higher rate.

This isn't much of an advantage, unless you have had a major correction to your pay rate in the intervening period (like 20-30% increase). For a "normalish" pay rise of 5% the increase is small.

e.g. AL = 0.08 * rate, after a pay rise it is 0.08 * (rate * 1.05) or 0.084 * oldRate (for old accumulated leave).

A side note, it would be better for businesses if AL was accumulated in $ rather than hours. It is better for workers if it is accumulated in hours rather than $. To be fair thought, if it was in $ there would have to be adjustments for time value of money, it would be way more complicated and almost impossible to audit correctly.

Odd, wasn't paywalled for me other wise I'd have found another source.

I guess The Post plays a little bit of silly buggers with the paywall.

Some people just don't have a life outside of work, do they? You wouldn't have to tell me twice if I got that offer.

From memory, I believe one government increased legal minimum annual leave from 3 to 4 weeks, then the following government changed it so you still got the 4th week but you could cash it in on agreement with your employer. So you can't cash it all in, just 1/4 per year.

In NZ?

The holidays act is quite clear that annual leave cannot be forfeited at all, ever. If you've lost leave your employer has acted illegally. Consult a union rep or a lawyer.