Contract Conflict

Question

My new contract states that "Effective... you will begin accruing vacation time at a rate of 6% of your annual earnings. This is equivalent to three weeks (120 hours) of paid vacation entitlement on an annual basis."

Being an hourly employee who is not paid overtime, all work time is subject to the 6% accruing rate, and as a result not representative/equivalent to 3 weeks, as my work days can greatly vary (20-84 hours a week). On average, I end up at the end of the year working more than the average 40 hour work week. By giving me 3 weeks, I do not accrue vacation pay at a rate of 6%.

By signing the contract did I agree to wave that it will be accrued at 6% and instead representative of the 3 weeks?

Answer 1

By signing the contract did I agree to wave that it will be accrued at 6% and instead representative of the 3 weeks?

No. You only agreed to an accrual rate of 6% of your annual earnings. The mentioned three-week "equivalency" is rather irrelevant for an employee whose schedule significantly differs from 40 hours/week.

Even if at some point your employer tries to shortchange you by using that "equivalency" as criterion to compute your accruals, the doctrine of contra proferentem would favor your position because the employer is the one who drafted the contradictory clause.