employer being 'offish' due to childcare issues

nzmegs

Having a part time job and children is really hard - I know. Having a full time job must be 10 times harder. But as we are part time I guess the expectation is that your job is less important than your husbands. You need to sit him down and explain that your committment to your job is just important as his and that he needs to share the responsibility.
You do not need to explain yourself to your empoyer when it comes to kids days off. they must give you the time no qustions asked. But they do not have to pay you. However it is important your emlployer is aware that you are committed to your job.
I think we all end up feeling guilty because we are working mothers (the worst sin apparantly!)You boss probably understands more than you think.

Oldernotwiser

nzmegs wrote: »

You do not need to explain yourself to your empoyer when it comes to kids days off. they must give you the time no qustions asked.

I don't think that is true at all and I also believe that if you've been there for less than 2 years you can be dismissed for poor attendance. Most working mothers have at least some back up plan for children's illnesses or their attendance would be appalling.

I agree that the OP needs to reassure her employer of her committment but it's hard to do this genuinely if she can't explain that plans have been put in place to prevent the same thing happening again.

alwaysonthego_2

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I don't think that is true at all and I also believe that if you've been there for less than 2 years you can be dismissed for poor attendance.
.

Someone can be dimissed in the first year for no particular reason and can not take the employer to a tribuneral unless it is classed as discrimination. After a year, an employee has full employment rights and the employer has to go through the usual processes to dismiss the member of staff. It is 2 years that an employee is entitled to redundacy.

LondonDiva

nzmegs wrote: »

You do not need to explain yourself to your empoyer when it comes to kids days off. they must give you the time no qustions asked. .

Is this really true????

I was always told that the needs of the service / organisation can be a factor iin deciding whether or not to grant time off.

Sorry OP, but I went through this with not one, but two members of part time staff and unless you were able to reassure me that you were gettign your act together, I would be recommeding that your contract be terminated at yout next review as the service was struggling and you seemed not to realise the effect yoru domestic arrangements were having on everyone else.

Can your OH not chip in alternate days, so the load is at least evenly spread? it sounds as though the two of you need to sort out child care arrangements sharpish.

DaisyFlower

nzmegs wrote: »

You do not need to explain yourself to your empoyer when it comes to kids days off. they must give you the time no qustions asked. But they do not have to pay you.

The above is definately wrong.

Parents are allowed dependents leave but you do need to advise the reason its required - its evidence that doesnt have to be provided not the reason. Dependents leave is supposed to be for a day or two at most whilst alternative arrangements are made.

As long as they are for emergencies there is no limit to the number of times you can use this leave however the employer has a right to warn the person if this is taken frequently and affecting business.

Oldernotwiser

DaisyFlower wrote: »

Parents are allowed dependents leave but you do need to advise the reason its required - its evidence that doesnt have to be provided not the reason. Dependents leave is supposed to be for a day or two at most whilst alternative arrangements are made.

I believe that only large benevolent companies offer this (it was discussed on DT recently) and even the best companies offered only 5 days a year.

surreysaver

cobbingstones wrote: »

I doubt very much that my dh would have time off, he always expects me too. I have no family or friends who could look after them and if a childminder was an option I would have to pay a retainer, also cost per day and also pay the pre school.

It's even more difficult for men that are carers - they are always expected to be able to work at any time, and it is not expected they will have caring responsibilities. Women have the indirect sex discrimination excuse that they are statistically more likely to be carers, so the law is on their side for having time off.

cazziebo

Employees in certain categories can get emergency leave - this is unpaid and is for unforeseen emergencies. So a sick child may be an emergency, an extended absence to look after sick child is not. The dependents leave is to organise care in this instance.

Any employee can be dismissed for too much leave, whether that be absence or other reason. Even the Disability Discrimination Act accepts that employers cannot function with excessive unplanned leave. Within a year an employer does not need to give reasons for dismissal. Beyond a year then failure to fulfill contract is reason enough.

OP, you have to understand the employer's point of view here. If you cannot fulfill the obligations of the contract then you have to review your situation. That may mean retaining someone to offer relief cover for childcare, and that cover may be your OH. It may be an informal arrangement with a third party. Whatever, you have to do your best to meet what your employer needs.

cazziebo

surreysaver wrote: »

It's even more difficult for men that are carers - they are always expected to be able to work at any time, and it is not expected they will have caring responsibilities. Women have the indirect sex discrimination excuse that they are statistically more likely to be carers, so the law is on their side for having time off.

I've found that men get far more leeway than women. I know several men who work part time hours and get full time salaries because they are "primary carers" of children. All of whom work in the civil service.

The law doesn't discriminate in favour of women. Perhaps SOME employers do. As a single parent, I do admit to getting frustrated at requests for time off from ANY parent. We have a job to do and targets to deliver. In my experience, some people abuse the system, others work hard to deliver. The ones who abuse betray those who work hard.

surreysaver

cazziebo wrote: »

The law doesn't discriminate in favour of women.

Yes it does! Women get a year off when a baby is born. If they go back to work, a man cannot then take the rest of the year off. And women can use the 'indirect discrimination' route - men do not have this option.