on mat leave and at risk!!!

Jarndyce

cazziebo wrote: »

Just to clarify - employees on maternity leave can not be discriminated against, but neither can they be subject to positive discrimination ie treated more favourably than others.

This is not true - this is one area where, surprisingly perhaps, employees on maternity leave may be treated more favourably than others.

Where there is a suitable vacancy available, it MUST be offered to the employee on maternity leave in preference to any other employee who is similarly affected but not on maternity leave.

Edit: Duh - just seen original thread date!

SarEl

Jarndyce wrote: »

Duh - just seen original thread date!

In that case, this is going to offend even more - believe it or not it is no longer this simple! There was a recent-ish EAT ruling that undermines reg 10., because it says that it may be sex discrimination to treat a woman on maternity leave more favourably by automatically giving her preference for a job.

Jarndyce

SarEl wrote: »

In that case, this is going to offend even more - believe it or not it is no longer this simple! There was a recent-ish EAT ruling that undermines reg 10., because it says that it may be sex discrimination to treat a woman on maternity leave more favourably by automatically giving her preference for a job.

Ooh really? That has passed me (and Daniel Barnett afaik) by. What's the name of the case do you know?

At least the advice would have been correct in 2009 then!

SarEl

Jarndyce wrote: »

Ooh really? That has passed me (and Daniel Barnett afaik) by. What's the name of the case do you know?

At least the advice would have been correct in 2009 then!

I will have to get back to you on that - reserach on an android is not practicable and off the top of my head I have fogotten. Two weeks of sabbatical and my brain has gone squishy. eem to recall it was a lawyering firm!

SarEl

Remembered! http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2011/0352_10_0604.html. If you read the judgement you will see it was very cleverly constructed - an employer must not impose criteria which gives a woman on maternity leave a disproportionate advantage. In this case it was a slection criteria, but by implication this should be extended to automatically favouring a woman for appointment over a man, prely because she is on maternity leave.

Jarndyce

SarEl wrote: »

Remembered! http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2011/0352_10_0604.html. If you read the judgement you will see it was very cleverly constructed - an employer must not impose criteria which gives a woman on maternity leave a disproportionate advantage. In this case it was a slection criteria, but by implication this should be extended to automatically favouring a woman for appointment over a man, prely because she is on maternity leave.

Thanks - bit of bedtime reading

SarEl

Jarndyce wrote: »

Thanks - bit of bedtime reading

I prefer Kathy Reichs myself!

getmore4less

Remember in the workplace you are interested in geting what you want.

Employers often hope that employees believe what they get told and won't check.

Works both ways, many employers and employees really don't know the real laws.

Tell them you think they have to give you preference for any positions because you are on matenity(common held believe) and can they please check, unless they take legal advice from someone on top of legislation there is a good chance they will go for it or think twice about automatic non selection.

If they don't and still want competative selection chances are it won't go against you if you keep it as an "I thought"