Is my company being unreasonable?

rupee99

mikey72 wrote: »

That's probably not a valid reason,

They do not need a valid reason, they can simply refuse to grant leave. It is not discrimination, of any kind or sort, unless it can be shown that another employee in exactly or largely similar circumstances was granted leave. In which case the OP would have to o to an Employment Tribunal by which time the dates would have been far gone and he would, probably, have irrevocably soured his relationship with his employer. Hardly worth it over the timing of a couple of days leave however aggrieved he may feel at the moment.

midnight_ninja

I can see where your employer is coming from , most companies expect 6 weeks in advance for any holiday request or paid leave , the only day you might suceed in getting is the 8th as that would be classed a parental leave if no one else can look after your daughter , this may be paid or unpaid hope this helps

COOLTRIKERCHICK

i would expect all the family visits etc to have been done in the 2 weeks perternity leave you had.

how many staff work at your place of work?

i have 3 staff, and i know if someone was having days off here and there it would put added pressure and work load on the other workers...

It would be easier for me if someone had a week off, so then i could make other arrangements for cover... ( hubby to take holiday's from where he works:rotfl:)

I personally dont think they are being un-reasonable, as you took time off before christmas too, so without the parternity leaves by the time you add up those 3 days, plus the time off before christmas, it soon mounts up, and as another poster as said..... surely you should keep your holiday entitlement days for those days when you REALLY need them... baby or mum ill etc...

Please remember you are a new dad the world does not revolve around you....welcome to the real world of family life...:rotfl:

rupee99

mikey72 wrote: »

Maternity leave, paternity leave, parental leave?

He has had his paternity leave, and none of the reasons quoted above would constitute the necessity of granting extra.

mikey72

rupee99 wrote: »

Reasonable or unreasonable does not come in to it. The only statutory right is that you are entitled to a minimum of 28 days annual holiday, to include bank and public holidays, a year. Your employer is entitled to restrict when you take your holiday provided those restrictions do not prevent you taking them over the course of the year.

You may be upset and you may think that your employer has a duty to accomodate your wishes because of your personal circumstances. Unfortunately for you neither of those has a basis in law. It is up to you to negotiate with your employer, if he thinks your recent, although perfectly proper, absences have disrupted his workflow then he is entitled to refuse you leave now. It is up to you, by calm reasoned, argument to pursuade him otherwise.

Maternity, paternity, and parental, are all statutory, they have a duty to allow parental unpaid leave.
I wouldn't push it though, but that's a different arguement.

nickyhutch

NorhternMonkey wrote: »

Dont you think we would if it was practical! :mad: I have a very big family and nowhere to put them.

They don't all have to come at once :j

Zazen999

I think what you need is a workaround; if you can't get leave then speak to the family about other arrangements [meeting them on a saturday halfway and spending the day with them] and of course - childcare for when the missus has to attend meetings.

ceridwen

dehaani wrote: »

What sort of new-age nonsense is that?

<cant find the confused smilie>

Well - whats New Age about saying its better for employees to be happy? I'd say its sound commonsense to make reasonable efforts to keep employees happy actually.

The only reason for upsetting employees (in the eyes of employers) is as a deliberate attempt to make them so unhappy that they resign - a common tactic by employers unfortunately....

O.P. has a very low holiday allocation anyway and there isnt much time left he CAN take - "when its gone its gone" - so might as well let him have it and then know that there is very little holiday time he can request later (as he has used most of it up).

Nothing to do with having children or no - I certainly dont believe in favouring those with children. But - as he says no-one else is off and its a time of year when few people would even want leave - then might as well give it to him is the view I would take as an employer personally.

sandiep

ceridwen wrote: »

<cant find the confused smilie>

Well - whats New Age about saying its better for employees to be happy? I'd say its sound commonsense to make reasonable efforts to keep employees happy actually.

The only reason for upsetting employees (in the eyes of employers) is as a deliberate attempt to make them so unhappy that they resign - a common tactic by employers unfortunately....

Does this apply equally balanced the other way around - that all employees should try as hard as they can to make they employers happy.

And that the only reason that employees should upset employers is if they're trying to get themselves sacked, which is unfortunately a common tatic by employees??:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Employers are trying to run a business, many of them are generating simply enough to cover the wages. Not being mean, but honest. In such circumstances there are probably many employers out there that have a lot of things of higher priority that when your family get to see your baby, and if that means saying no to holiday leave if its unsuitable then they probably will.

jdturk

buglawton wrote: »

If an employer is unwilling to be flexible (as OP's seems) the I would put in a formal application for Flexible Working. After all, who know what other extra issues might arise in the future, and why should the mother take all the strain?

there is a tool to check of you have a statutory right to apply:
http://direct.gov.uk/en/Diol1/EmploymentInteractiveTools/DG_10028440

if you pass the test it will put big pressure on your employer, and all because they could not be more flexible about a handful of days.

If UK employers carry on like this, Parliament will eventually start listening to the EU's ideas that we should have a massive parental leave like 9 months, legally protected and flexibly shareable between mother and father.

So please explain why companies should have to fork out for this extra cost? I wouldn't mind unpaid leave but at the expense of the government or the parents and not the companies who lets face it have enough costs as it is anyway!

As for flexible working you have a right to apply but businesses can easily refuse this on business reasons which again lets face it can be very loose