Work refusing holiday dates

GobbledyGook

Southend1 wrote: »

I doubt she is on a term time only contract, he works in a supermarket

The fact that he works in a supermarket is one of the reasons I thought of the term time aspect. I know at least 4 people who do.

I always thought they were one of the more flexible employers? BIL never had trouble picking up loads more hours in uni holidays and I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that this tallied with flexible working for parents.

laurel7172

I can't see the employer providing a letter to say OH can't have time off in the school holidays ever...OP has said he can have time off in the summer, but holidays are too expensive then.

Spendless

laurel7172 wrote: »

I can't see the employer providing a letter to say OH can't have time off in the school holidays ever...OP has said he can have time off in the summer, but holidays are too expensive then.

I'd missed that post.

In which case, either the lady in question isn't on a term-time only contract, so why is she able to book off every half term so long in advance?

or

They find additional cover during the school summer hols to cope with both employees off at the same time, in which case why are half terms an issue?

fluffnutter

Southend1 wrote: »

He's definitely done the right thing asking his union for advice and help.

I would be considering whether a case can be made that this is unlawful sex discrimination. I.e. The female colleague is being given priority and your OH is being treated detrimentally because there is an assumption he doesn't have childcare responsibilities.

That's a very good idea. And I'm surprised that the union's not suggesting something similar. Obviously it's last case scenario to raise an equality in the workplace grievance but discrimination doesn't have to be direct and conscious - it can be far more subtle than that. Awarding women first dibs on choosing holiday because it's assumed or known that they've got kids = discriminatory just like other examples such as awarding men a pay rise because it's assumed or known that they are the main breadwinner. A good union rep will explore this.

The most worrying thing about the OP's post is her assertion that "He is taking this further with a union rep but we guarantee they will still say no". Who's saying this?