Time off for Eid

ceridwen

Cheeky_Monkey wrote: »

AFAIK, the answer to your original question is no. Employers can legally deny any leave request for a business reason.

As has previously been said, if the employee is unable to get someone to cover and they decide to go AWOL, they can, and probably should be, dismissed.

I thought that Jarndyce was a lawyer/solicitor so am surprised that he/she didn't give you a legal view rather than just a hissy fit

Well - actually if Jarndyce is indeed a lawyer/solicitor and is just going in for a hissy fit - rather than saying "The law says that would be discrimination......" then that would seem to back my view that it cant possibly be discrimination - as long as you are treating this selfish employee EXACTLY the same way as you would treat any other employee with such a short notice holiday request. If Jarndyce had had a "legal leg to stand on" I'm darn sure they would have quoted the relevant law that says said employee can get away with this...:D

*************************

Also - we do have a couple of "legal eagles" frequenting this Board and I'm sure one of them (eg SarEl) would have stepped in by now and said "You have to let him be unreasonable and have this leave - or he MIGHT be able to have you for discrimination (even though it isnt)" IF that was the case. They havent done so - therefore I would take it that they also dont believe the employee would have a leg to stand on if they try this.

************

Personally - it sounds to me like the employee themselves knows they dont have any legal right to insist on this - but are trying to frighten O.P. into thinking that they do and giving them the leave just in case....

....so, frankly, if I were Apples, then I would be feeling "bullied" by the employee and would remember that fact......and be keeping a weather eye open to see if there were any further attempts to bully me or, alternately, bully my other staff and action would be swift and sharp if I spotted it..

APPLES - I'm far from the most likely person to be on an employERS side - but it does look a lot like this employee thinks you're a soft pushover and is "testing" to see if you are. You come over to me as someone who is trying to be very fair to their employees - but there will always be the odd person who mistakes decent/fair for "pushover" and it sounds like this employee is that "odd person" and is trying it on.

tizerbelle

apples1 wrote: »

We have recently recruited a new person who has been employed about a month. He didn't give any pre-booked hol and when we published the rota to mid November he (along with all other staff) approved their shifts and working days.

He has today asked for 3 days off for eid on 7-9 Nov. We publish our rotas with about 6 weeks notice so all staff can plan days out, family commitments etc round knowing their days off and so I told him I will look at it but as rota already approved it will depend on whether colleagues can swap/cover. His reply was ok but I will have to take it off.

Do I have to give it?

In short, no. There is no statutory right to time off work (paid or unpaid) for religious observance (regardless of which religion).

As a new employee, he may not have understood that approving the rota meant things were fixed - I know, unlikely but getting to grips with a new system of working can be a steep learning curve. So you may want to cut him some slack this first time.

As has previously been said, do the same for him as you would do for anyone else wanting time off at short notice. If however you can't get cover to allow him the time off then you do not have to approve his leave.

If he threatens that he will take the time off anyway, explain to him what the consequences of such a decision will be and then make a written record of this conversation (and no he does not have to sign it) and then wait and see what happens.

If he comes to work, all well and good. If he goes AWOL or sick, then deal with it as you would with any other employee.

Jarndyce

Jarndyce has never said whether he/she was a solicitor/lawyer or not. But in any case that does not mean he/she cannot have views which are not legal advice or opinion.

My comments on this thread are from someone who abhors racism and intolerance in any guise, and recognises bigotry when he/she sees it. Equally - those of you who disagree are welcome to your views - it speaks volumes however about those who can't properly articulate a counter view and have to resort to insults.

The legal position is clearly that having sought the leave in plenty time the employee should be granted it unless there are sound business reasons for not doing so. Frankly the OP's leave policy does not allow the law to be followed in this area if it does not take account of people joining mid-year or the literally movable feasts that we are discussing.

Again, obviously, the employer needs to treat the employee fairly and lawfully, and take care not to treat them less favourably on the grounds of their religion. Would they treat someone who asked for time off for a christening, for example, in the same way?

Equally, if having met the terms of the law in these areas, the employer cannot grant the leave and the employee, having been made aware of the genuine business reasons why they cannot, takes the leave anyway, then that is clearly unauthorised absence and can be dealt with as such, again, providing that is how the employer would deal with the christening situation, for example.

Finally, for those of you making assumptions about the motives behind SarEl's non-appearance on this thread, I can assure you it is for no other reason than she is otherwise engaged at present. It is simply wrong and quite dangerous to assume that by not commenting she is somehow endorsing any of the views expressed here.

Uncertain

Jarndyce wrote: »

My comments on this thread are from someone who abhors racism and intolerance in any guise, and recognises bigotry when he/she sees it. Equally - those of you who disagree are welcome to your views - it speaks volumes however about those who can't properly articulate a counter view and have to resort to insults.

I couldn't agree more. We have seen far too much of this in a number of threads recently.

hawk30

The idea that there can be no discrimination just because everyone is treated the same is a very dangerous one to propose. You CAN discriminate against someone even if you treat everyone the same. It's called indirect discrimination - if you apply a practice to everyone that puts an employee at a particular disadvantage because of his/her protected characteristic (race, religion, sex, etc) and you cannot justify it, then there is discrimination.

VfM4meplse

Jarndyce wrote: »

My comments on this thread are from someone who abhors racism and intolerance in any guise, and recognises bigotry when he/she sees it.

I don't think this forum is frequented by racists, but I do think it is easy to hurl accusations of intolerance when someone who is from a BME group doesn't get their own way. It paints the rest of us - who are Brits in all respects but skin colour - in a very poor light. I'm sick of this victim mentality and I would not wish to be tainted by association.

From a beautifully tanned but strict VfM.

magenta22

Firstly may I ask you.... what do you do when someone is off sick? you must cope somehow then with the staff shortage.
Whilst he should have perhaps mentioned that he would need some holiday but, didn't perhaps know the date and so yes could have said roughly when, but he has given you a fair amount of notice also of his intended time off. Yes you give rota's 6 weeks in advance, sometimes things are last minute and cannot be pre-planned and you will sometimes find yourself in the position of two people needing the same time off. You do need to have a back-up plan.

I think that your one person off on holiday at one time is a little out-dated, however and why should the longest serving people have priority over dates? I have worked at a very small company with staff of 6 - there were times where two of us wanted holiday which overlapped - we all booked the holiday before booking off work so that you then have the dates - they coped.

Sometimes though some people are scared to ask for time off for what ever reason. You may think you are a good employer but are you actually as approchable as you think? Can you ask him to take it as unpaid and get a temp in to cover? perhaps the part-timers could do a little overtime?

FYI - Ceridwen, here is where the OP said about holiday.

apples1 wrote: »

We released the 2011 holiday in Nov 2010. At this time they can all put in two weeks (or two lots of one week etc) on the planner starting with the longest serving employee first (no overlapping) and it goes through the team (pro-rated for part time staff). Once all done it goes back to the person at the top of the list to do another week and once all done it goes back to the person at the top of the list to do a fourth week and so on until everyone has requested their four or five weeks (depending on length of service). If they choose to hold back some holiday and not request it then they can request it during the year but it will not be given if someone else is already off.

A fairer system could be first come, first served as someone else also suggested. I assume that you only employ one person who has children - what do you do in the school holidays?

Why do you 'release' holiday dates, surely all your staff know the holiday year runs from xxx to xxx or do you change it every year?

Perhaps you did not make policies clear to the new starter when they joined regarding the rota etc....

scheming_gypsy

Jarndyce wrote: »

Jarndyce has never said whether he/she was a solicitor/lawyer or not. But in any case that does not mean he/she cannot have views which are not legal advice or opinion.

My comments on this thread are from someone who abhors racism and intolerance in any guise, and recognises bigotry when he/she sees it. Equally - those of you who disagree are welcome to your views - it speaks volumes however about those who can't properly articulate a counter view and have to resort to insults.


.

when you posted there weren't any racist or bigoted comments. Remove the words Eid and Muslim and you'd have got the same responses if an ignorant employee tried to dictate what was happening.

Jarndyce

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

when you posted there weren't any racist or bigoted comments. Remove the words Eid and Muslim and you'd have got the same responses if an ignorant employee tried to dictate what was happening.

I don't agree on either score. I mentioned the comments I thought were unacceptable in my first post, and I don't believe those comments would have been made had the subject of the thread not been Muslim.

scheming_gypsy

mine would as they were based on the employees attitude; and you did mention some of the things were what I had said.
I don't care what religion people are, nobody has a right to dictate that they're having a working day off, they have a right to ask and help to resolve the issue; not to tell them that they're having it off regardless.
If you had an office with Christians, Jews, Muslims, Seiks, Hindus, Pagan's, Scientologists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Buddhists, those tamborine banging lot who's name escapes me and Rastafarians... and then you pandered to all their religious holidays and festivals; you'd never have your full staff in!

If you want your shifts changing because of a religious festival you ask nicely and try to help resolve the situation. If you turn around and say 'i'm having the time off anyway' then why should anybody help you?