Supervisor being horrible about having time of with toddler (Long)

iceicebaby

OK i stand corrected

BusyLizzie_3

Parental leave is no help for hospital appointments:

Leave must be in blocks of full weeks, so if you want time off in odd days - for example, to take your child to the dentist - you should ask your employer if you can work flexibly or use your holiday allowance. [from the link you posted above]

When I was at work, our company requested that time off to take dependents to appointments was taken as holiday, unpaid leave or that the hours were made up at a different time.

sexy_fufu

if they will let me do that then fair enough because at east then i dont lose money...

At the min ive lost £150 taking time off, but at the end of the day my daughters health is alot more important than any money....

cannyscot_2

I disagree with all the people on here saying you should think of your colleagues etc. Work is about team and life is long -sinle childless people fall ill as or can be attcked as one of my colleagues was on a slightly illadvised adventure holiday -I covered for him happily. I have a child with a slight disability and I need to go to a lot of appointments.

Economically the UK needs to ensure that single mothers are in employment. I applaud you for ensuring that you do that and care for your child. The same people who would say take annual holiday probably do not realise that statistics back the fact that working mothers take on average less sick and so compensate for the time off with children.

My employer does not bat an eyelid to my time off, I have over my working life taken my baby/child to work if I have had to but then I make myself available when my single childless Boss fancies doing some work at the weekend or phoning at 6.30 am or whatever I can accomodate.

I employ a large no of woman and I am always encouraging them to make their jobs as flexible as they can and to encourage job share or whatever arrangements they can come to or devise to make their working life more workable. It reaps benefits as they are more committed and they generally find their own ways to work it.-sorry should have said men too -as oftenthese days they have 50% or in some cases 100% childcare responsibility.

I just don't believe anyone benefits from not pulling together and from the attitude -you have children so you are different -we are all human and vulnerable -many times I find it is younger single people who take the !!! and don't come in on Monday -or Friday or have hangovers etc etc.

CFC

How true, cannyscot the younger generation are often absolutely appalling to employ! I can't count the number of first or second job employees which I have terminated in probation or had to extend their probation to see if they can manage to get their act together.

The government dictates that parental leave and unpaid time off for dependants is strictly governed. Yes, parents find it inconvenient - but that's the employment law!

However, the fact that you and fac73 work in industries which can offer flexible working or give ad hoc time off - that's exactly what I was saying to sexyfu fu - she needs to find an employer that can offer flexitime. In a tight margin, productivity measured workplace, you can't afford to be your employee's best mate, your first duty is to the business and ensuring your EBIT target is reached. That's business. It's not a moral superiority on the part of your employers - it's just that yours have enough fat that it can bear the costs, and therefore the benefits to the business outweigh the costs.

The same people who would say take annual holiday probably do not realise that statistics back the fact that working mothers take on average less sick and so compensate for the time off with children.

It's not about people's opinions - that's what employment laws state - that annual holiday or any other arrangement which the employer will permit, needs to be used. And if it's inconvenient for the employer, you can't go to that appointment or look after your child. If you don't agree with the laws, then lobby to get them changed!

Fac 73 - As I type this, one of these women hasn't made it to the office yet - her son's nursery was closed (because of the snow) and she's sorting out some alternative arrangements. I know she'll be in soon, and I know when she does she'll be more apologetic than necessary and will probably offer up half a days holiday. I'll tell her there's no need and that she can make up the time over a few days whenever she is able to.

Actually, if she doesn't mind not being paid for the time off, and doesn't want to make the time up, you cannot ask her to make the time up or take holiday from her. This is a good example of what time off for dependants is used for - to make emergency alternative arrangements. She has a legal right to unpaid time off in this situation if she wishes to exercise it

cannyscot_2

I don't know where you get your info CFC but as an employer I would check your facts.

The OP has a child under 5 -she is entitled by law to have 13 weeks UNPAID off to look after the child-up to 4 weeks a year. She can take this in single days. She last year took 10 days ie 2 weeks off in a combination of preplanned single days and emergency leave for when her child has been ill.

OP-print the law from the DTI website if they fuss again or suggest you are not within your rights stick it in front of them and ask exactly how you are not within the law

You have the right to parental leave if you:

have been employed by the same company for a year or more
are an 'employee', with a contract of employment (most agency and casual staff don't have the right to parental leave)


It is a RIGHT if you have a child under 5 -CFC above confuses the issue for genuine enquirers like to OP as what he is talking about is if your child is over 5.


PS I know I shouldn't add this but I will anyway-I'm so glad I don't work for you CFC! Is your staff turnover high along with your recruitment costs?

CFC

Cannyscot, parental leave MUST be taken in blocks of at least one week (unless the employer chooses to be generous, of course). It CANNOT be automatically granted in single days. Read the government's own website for yourself if you don't believe me.

QUOTE:

Parental leave schemes

Wherever possible, employers and employees should make their own agreements about how parental leave will work in a workplace, but if this is not possible the following 'fallback scheme' applies automatically.

One week blocks

Leave must be in blocks of full weeks, so if you want time off in odd days - for example, to take your child to the dentist - you should ask your employer if you can work flexibly or use your holiday allowance.


http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Workingparents/DG_10029416

I employ 100 staff and 4 managers. My recruitment costs could be better, but as I employ so many staff I have to bite the bullet and pay agencies a finder's fee. If advertising costs were not so high, I'd prefer to recruit without the finder's fee.

I treat my staff as fairly as I can, staying within the law, using no dirty tactics, and try to reach a balance between the welfare of 100 people and the needs of the business. My attrition rate is fine, thanks for asking!

daphne_descends

CFC wrote:

Fac 73 - As I type this, one of these women hasn't made it to the office yet - her son's nursery was closed (because of the snow) and she's sorting out some alternative arrangements. I know she'll be in soon, and I know when she does she'll be more apologetic than necessary and will probably offer up half a days holiday. I'll tell her there's no need and that she can make up the time over a few days whenever she is able to.

Actually, if she doesn't mind not being paid for the time off, and doesn't want to make the time up, you cannot ask her to make the time up or take holiday from her. This is a good example of what time off for dependants is used for - to make emergency alternative arrangements. She has a legal right to unpaid time off in this situation if she wishes to exercise it

Thanks CFC - I did check this with my HR contact a while back, but both colleagues have always preferred to make up the hours so it's the first offer I make. (Something to do with extortionate childcare!) But yes I should try to bear in mind that mightn't always be the case. I don't want to look like I'm forcing them into one choice rather than the other.

And, in my limited experience you're absolutely right about sick leave - when one of my colleagues has come into the office poorly before I've practically had to force her to go home and rest! When I come in unwell (pg but no children) I don't need telling twice to go home, you don't see me for dust!

3plus1

At the end of the day, business is business. If a company needs someone to work X hours a week and you can't, because of your child, you're no longer fitting that company's needs, and they're within their right to find someone else. Assuming that you have the right to take time off whenever you need it, because you have a child, is the sort of attitude which makes employers wary to hire women.

That said, I do sympathise entirely. When I was younger, I needed to go to hospital a lot, and you're right: there isn't a single hospital in the world that offers appointments at times that working parents can feasibly attend without incurring the wrath of their employers.

If you want to keep your current job, I would suggest offering to make up any missed time by working through lunch breaks, unpaid. (Make sure you stress the unpaid part!) I'm not sure if coming in earlier or leaving earlier would be appropriate, as you seem to have a job which offers a service to others between fixed hours. I think you're unfortunate here, in that the nature of your job is impacting upon your ability to get flexitime. Perhaps it would make more sense to start looking for another job, which does offer this possibility?

Don't get me wrong, I do have lots of respect for you for trying to bring in an income and raise a child at the same time, but I'm not sure your current job is the right one for your personal situation.

Whatever you do, loads of luck.:)

MrsTinks

I'm sorry but as a "supervisor" of 20 people - at least a third whom have young children - then I wouldn't be happy about bending any rules for anyone. Because before I blinked I'd "have set a precedence and victimised x when z was allowed to nip off early"...
So now rules apply to all. 1 day paid leave to look after kids - after that I believe it's statutory pay? (Sorry have an HR department to deal with that) as someone said for up to 13 weeks a year.
As an employer I have targets to meet, my clients expect that what they pay us to do is done and saying "sorry 6 people were off because their kids had colds so we couldn't answer the phones and mails even though you pay us to..." wouldn't go down well... infact I expect no-one would have a job for long as the clients take their business elsewhere. So should I not employ someone with young kids? Surely that's discrimination?
I hire those most suited for the jobs - end of argument. I don't care if they are Bob or Emanuella, have 2 cats or 15 kids. But on the other hand I don't expect to give them any considerations other than what is stipulated by law... Am I a mean horrid boss? Or am I trying to employ people suited for the jobs and also trying to keep the contracts so ALL my employees have a job in 2 months time?
Just my point of view...

(btw 18 months ago I was asked to explain why there were 12 seperate complaints about me - all saying I was picking on the complaintant... my reply "well if I am picking on 12 people out of 17 (team grew since) then I'm doing my job well I think" and walked out and never heard another word about it... Sorry but supervisors have jobs to do too...)