Maternity/redundancy
Discussion
The wife is just coming to the end of her maternity and requested flexible hours (declined/appealed/declined again) she offered to do as a trial but declined, offered job share and yep declined saying no-one out there wants a job share. 
She was earning a pretty good salary with commission so a part time (2 1/2 days) would have been on near on 20k.
Anyway lots of emails/ACAS solicitors etc it looked likely an out of court settlement would be made and she would be laid off with the usual redundancy (7 weeks is it? ) plus all outstanding holiday and commision that we have worked out to be around £7k, she just recieved an offer of £3200.
also mentioning she would have to resign. Now she doesnt want to resign but they wont allow her part time work (altho he said financially its a tough time so surely that is an easier option of reducing hours)
Now in theory i know the original job is there and she would go back to this if feasable but TBH it isnt unless as he has done with other employee's and she worked out of the office remotely but he wont allow that either.
Does she have no option but to resign?
She was earning a pretty good salary with commission so a part time (2 1/2 days) would have been on near on 20k. Anyway lots of emails/ACAS solicitors etc it looked likely an out of court settlement would be made and she would be laid off with the usual redundancy (7 weeks is it? ) plus all outstanding holiday and commision that we have worked out to be around £7k, she just recieved an offer of £3200.
also mentioning she would have to resign. Now she doesnt want to resign but they wont allow her part time work (altho he said financially its a tough time so surely that is an easier option of reducing hours) Now in theory i know the original job is there and she would go back to this if feasable but TBH it isnt unless as he has done with other employee's and she worked out of the office remotely but he wont allow that either.
Does she have no option but to resign?
don4l said:
When I decided to have children, I discussed it with my wife.
We both took our responsibilities quite seriously. In fact, we decided that it would be better for our children if their mother was at home. That meant that we had to cut our spending a bit, and we also had to save a bit.
Eventually, I was earning enough to support a family. At that point my wife became pregnant.
I would suggest that you, and your wife, have chosen to have children before you were in a financial position to do so.
Don
--
What a stupid, unhelpful, fWe both took our responsibilities quite seriously. In fact, we decided that it would be better for our children if their mother was at home. That meant that we had to cut our spending a bit, and we also had to save a bit.
Eventually, I was earning enough to support a family. At that point my wife became pregnant.
I would suggest that you, and your wife, have chosen to have children before you were in a financial position to do so.
Don
--
king retarded and old fashioned view to have. In fact, where in the OP is there a mention of the fact that his wife actually needs to work for them to afford to live?
Get off your f
king high horsePMSL its nothing to do with the money, my wife has a pretty good career (40k job) and im running a family business, She would like to continue this career but on a reduced (flexible working) basis. The company have survived for a year with 2 people on maternity leave and 1 person there temping to cover both. Also she has offered to be on call the days she wasnt in the office as she already has a company mobile its not really hard to contact her but he is adament that this isnt an option albeit that 2 salesMEN have worked for 6 months from south africa and france on numerous occasions.
The commission is what is already owed from previous/ongoing contracts that were due for payment after maternity leave had started.
The commission is what is already owed from previous/ongoing contracts that were due for payment after maternity leave had started.
In all seriousness forget the ACAS route and speak to a specialist employment lawyer. Making a woman redundant during or soon after completing a maternity leave is a big minefield for any employer. Most shy away from it or accept a substantial cost will have to be met if they go ahead with the proposal, see below.
My wife is coming to the end of a fixed term contract at one of the biggest Swiss banks. Since she has been there a role occupied by a woman on maternity leave has been made redundant by the boss leaving and the whole department being split up by further redundancies and realignmment of responsibilities - i.e. true role redundancy. The woman on maternity leave now wants to come back part time (she was full time) and job share with someone. My wife's boss (he is a COO) has tried everything to stop this and appoint my wife to the role she is now doing on a permanent basis as she will be able to do her current role and cover anything that is left of the previous role at the same time. His every move has been thrown out by HR as they are scared stless of what the costs would be to make a "compromise" offer to the woman on maternity leave so she does not take them to a tribunal.
Given a payment to this woman of any sort would not even register on the radar at this bank I would think your wife's position to be stronger than ACAS have the experience to help with and hence why I think you should speak to a specialist lawyer.
My wife is coming to the end of a fixed term contract at one of the biggest Swiss banks. Since she has been there a role occupied by a woman on maternity leave has been made redundant by the boss leaving and the whole department being split up by further redundancies and realignmment of responsibilities - i.e. true role redundancy. The woman on maternity leave now wants to come back part time (she was full time) and job share with someone. My wife's boss (he is a COO) has tried everything to stop this and appoint my wife to the role she is now doing on a permanent basis as she will be able to do her current role and cover anything that is left of the previous role at the same time. His every move has been thrown out by HR as they are scared s
tless of what the costs would be to make a "compromise" offer to the woman on maternity leave so she does not take them to a tribunal.Given a payment to this woman of any sort would not even register on the radar at this bank I would think your wife's position to be stronger than ACAS have the experience to help with and hence why I think you should speak to a specialist lawyer.
stumpage said:
As I read it they are not making her redundant. Her job that she left to go on maternity leave is still there on the same terms she left.
If she wants to change the job but the business can prove it's not a practical or cost effective option. Then all she can do is resign.
This is pretty much on the mark i would think. obviously every parent has the right to request flexible hour and the emplyer should seriously consider them BUT dont have to accept. If she wants to change the job but the business can prove it's not a practical or cost effective option. Then all she can do is resign.
He is saying its not practical for the business BUT 1 person has covered 2 roles for the last year. The Other new mum (my sister actually) has now resigned altho well before this all started So its likley that the temp who is doing the 2 roles will be taken on full time. My wife would like to reduce her hours or do 2/3 days from home. They are an IT security software reseller so already have remote capabilities as has been proved by the south africa/france.
Its not a massive company around 10/12 employee's.
Grey Ghost said:
In all seriousness forget the ACAS route and speak to a specialist employment lawyer. Making a woman redundant during or soon after completing a maternity leave is a big minefield for any employer. Most shy away from it or accept a substantial cost will have to be met if they go ahead with the proposal, see below.
My wife is coming to the end of a fixed term contract at one of the biggest Swiss banks. Since she has been there a role occupied by a woman on maternity leave has been made redundant by the boss leaving and the whole department being split up by further redundancies and realignmment of responsibilities - i.e. true role redundancy. The woman on maternity leave now wants to come back part time (she was full time) and job share with someone. My wife's boss (he is a COO) has tried everything to stop this and appoint my wife to the role she is now doing on a permanent basis as she will be able to do her current role and cover anything that is left of the previous role at the same time. His every move has been thrown out by HR as they are scared stless of what the costs would be to make a "compromise" offer to the woman on maternity leave so she does not take them to a tribunal.
Given a payment to this woman of any sort would not even register on the radar at this bank I would think your wife's position to be stronger than ACAS have the experience to help with and hence why I think you should speak to a specialist lawyer.
She was talking to a solicitor about an unfair decision re flexible/homeworking through a personal insurance scheme we have but they aren't willing to take on the case unless its 60% confirmed they will win. My wife is coming to the end of a fixed term contract at one of the biggest Swiss banks. Since she has been there a role occupied by a woman on maternity leave has been made redundant by the boss leaving and the whole department being split up by further redundancies and realignmment of responsibilities - i.e. true role redundancy. The woman on maternity leave now wants to come back part time (she was full time) and job share with someone. My wife's boss (he is a COO) has tried everything to stop this and appoint my wife to the role she is now doing on a permanent basis as she will be able to do her current role and cover anything that is left of the previous role at the same time. His every move has been thrown out by HR as they are scared s
tless of what the costs would be to make a "compromise" offer to the woman on maternity leave so she does not take them to a tribunal.Given a payment to this woman of any sort would not even register on the radar at this bank I would think your wife's position to be stronger than ACAS have the experience to help with and hence why I think you should speak to a specialist lawyer.
which funny enough they wasnt. She is going to find a local employment solicitor tho. S26VE P said:
Its NOT just the fact he wont let her work flexibly, he also wont let her do 2 days from home to accomodate her needs. As previously stated others have worked several hours away (she will only be 45 mins away if needed)
Why does she want to do 2 days from home? I presume childcare issues. Look at it from the Employers point of view. For those 2 days is she at home doing a full days work or sharing her time between work, nappies, feeds, baby attention etc.
If she is doing a full day and being able to give the same uninterrupted service she would if she was in the office then fine.
S26VE P said:
Its NOT just the fact he wont let her work flexibly, he also wont let her do 2 days from home to accomodate her needs. As previously stated others have worked several hours away (she will only be 45 mins away if needed)
What about the business needs? In a small company it can be very hard to accommodate.Have you considered that despite your view that such arrangements have happened in the past that they have not been a success and may have been on trial or fixed periods?
STW2010 said:
What a stupid, unhelpful, fking retarded and old fashioned view to have.
In fact, where in the OP is there a mention of the fact that his wife actually needs to work for them to afford to live?
Get off your fking high horse
Actually, you're right.king retarded and old fashioned view to have. In fact, where in the OP is there a mention of the fact that his wife actually needs to work for them to afford to live?
Get off your f
king high horseI was in a very grumpy mood last night. OP: Please accept my apologies.
Don
--
S26VE P said:
PMSL its nothing to do with the money,
To be fair, it does read as though it's about the money.Looks like you were hoping to get about £7K and were dismayed to be offered £3.2K.
Appreciate that your main question is does she have to resign, but (apart from the money, potentially) what difference does it make whether she resigns or is made redundant?
Deva Link said:
what difference does it make whether she resigns or is made redundant?
It could be a significant difference if she has not received accurate legal advise based on her specific circumstances. The company could be trying to get her to resign so prevent a tribunal case and the associated costs they will have to cover regardless of the outcome. With all employment issues such as this you should regard the company as the enemy who will shaft you to save costs if you do not know your rights.It may well be that she has to accept the offer on the table based on her specific circumstances but until a properly qualified legal professional is consulted she will not know for sure. As I intimated to above if the OP spends a couple of hundred on decent legal advise his wife could gain significantly.
Grey Ghost said:
Deva Link said:
what difference does it make whether she resigns or is made redundant?
It could be a significant difference if she has not received accurate legal advise based on her specific circumstances. The company could be trying to get her to resign so prevent a tribunal case and the associated costs they will have to cover regardless of the outcome. With all employment issues such as this you should regard the company as the enemy who will shaft you to save costs if you do not know your rights.It may well be that she has to accept the offer on the table based on her specific circumstances but until a properly qualified legal professional is consulted she will not know for sure. As I intimated to above if the OP spends a couple of hundred on decent legal advise his wife could gain significantly.
What my question meant was what difference does to it make to, for example, her future employment prospects etc?
edc said:
What about the business needs? In a small company it can be very hard to accommodate.
Have you considered that despite your view that such arrangements have happened in the past that they have not been a success and may have been on trial or fixed periods?
The guy has been to south africa 3 times in 4 years for 6 months a time Have you considered that despite your view that such arrangements have happened in the past that they have not been a success and may have been on trial or fixed periods?
They are an IT reseller that 90 % of the work is done by email, the odd phone call and the odd site visit but in truth i think she has had one meeting offsite in 5 years.
Were not in it for the money we just want the correct outcome. Why should one male employee be allowed to work hours away and a female cant do the same for 2 days per week?
Grey Ghost said:
Deva Link said:
what difference does it make whether she resigns or is made redundant?
It could be a significant difference if she has not received accurate legal advise based on her specific circumstances. The company could be trying to get her to resign so prevent a tribunal case and the associated costs they will have to cover regardless of the outcome. With all employment issues such as this you should regard the company as the enemy who will shaft you to save costs if you do not know your rights.It may well be that she has to accept the offer on the table based on her specific circumstances but until a properly qualified legal professional is consulted she will not know for sure. As I intimated to above if the OP spends a couple of hundred on decent legal advise his wife could gain significantly.
The whole notion that you have to be confrontational though is absurd. From an HR-employer perspective I set out not be confrontational. If someody though is an ar*e towards me then I might well respond likewise and dig my heels in.
People often refer to ACAS in such situations and advocate being bl**dy minded. In this context it is quite ironic what the acronym ACAS actually means.
I have come across aggressive and bl**dy minded (ex) employees some who have gone to tribunal and in my time they rarely if ever get what they set out for or what they believe they can get. On the other hand those who exchange dialogue in a normal manner get treated with respect, no contempt and an agreeable solution can be reached.
For the OP - I have in recent weeks agreed an exit for a person who is in almost exactly the same situation as you and your wife are in. No hystrionics, no tantrums, simply meetings, explanations and constructive dialogue. No compromise agreement. No dismissal.
S26VE P said:
The guy has been to south africa 3 times in 4 years for 6 months a time
They are an IT reseller that 90 % of the work is done by email, the odd phone call and the odd site visit but in truth i think she has had one meeting offsite in 5 years.
Were not in it for the money we just want the correct outcome. Why should one male employee be allowed to work hours away and a female cant do the same for 2 days per week?
Because he was working full time in the SA location?They are an IT reseller that 90 % of the work is done by email, the odd phone call and the odd site visit but in truth i think she has had one meeting offsite in 5 years.
Were not in it for the money we just want the correct outcome. Why should one male employee be allowed to work hours away and a female cant do the same for 2 days per week?
On secondment? That's quite different for wanting a couple of days working from home.
STW2010 said:
don4l said:
When I decided to have children, I discussed it with my wife.
We both took our responsibilities quite seriously. In fact, we decided that it would be better for our children if their mother was at home. That meant that we had to cut our spending a bit, and we also had to save a bit.
Eventually, I was earning enough to support a family. At that point my wife became pregnant.
I would suggest that you, and your wife, have chosen to have children before you were in a financial position to do so.
Don
--
What a stupid, unhelpful, fWe both took our responsibilities quite seriously. In fact, we decided that it would be better for our children if their mother was at home. That meant that we had to cut our spending a bit, and we also had to save a bit.
Eventually, I was earning enough to support a family. At that point my wife became pregnant.
I would suggest that you, and your wife, have chosen to have children before you were in a financial position to do so.
Don
--
king retarded and old fashioned view to have. In fact, where in the OP is there a mention of the fact that his wife actually needs to work for them to afford to live?
Get off your f
king high horseEver think of trying to argue your point without all the ad hominem s
t?singlecoil said:
Typical PH reply, you'll fit right in here- anybody you disagree with is stupid, or even retarded.
Ever think of trying to argue your point without all the ad hominem st?
I apologise for the lack of an essay to back up my post. Ever think of trying to argue your point without all the ad hominem s
t?It was unhelpful, that much is obvious. The child is here, and so "I would suggest that you, and your wife, have chosen to have children before you were in a financial position to do so" is not of any use. Therefore stupid etc.
My second point of there being no mention of financial dependency should be quite self-explanatory.
I may find that I disagree with people from time to time but if their point of view is rational and relevant then that is not a problem, and is certainly not stupid or retarded.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff