![Avatar](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Flemm.ee%2Fapi%2Fv3%2Fimage_proxy%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Flemmy.nz%252Fpictrs%252Fimage%252F8ad0200b-4f0b-4e60-812f-bafa6dcf3b85.png&w=3840&q=75)
![Avatar](/_next/image?url=%2Flemmy-icon-96x96.webp&w=3840&q=75)
absGeekNZ
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.
I also love/hate excel. It is great for a lot of simple jobs where writing code would take to much time, it is terrible because you can’t audit your code* easily or at all. You get these hideously complex sheets referencing who knows what with no documentation…
- By “code” I mean shitty formula hidden in cells.
Did you do the graphs in python?
Because the colours look familiar.
This “rule” only works for a small set of ages from 14 ~ 30ish
If you are 14 then the range for “age” is 14 - 14
If you are 30 then the range for “age” is 22 - 46
If you are 40 then the range for “age” is 27 - 66
At 30 the upper level is 16 years different; while it could work it is a big gap to bridge. It only gets worse the older you get.