Can my boss prioritise annual leave allocation for those with kids first?

PenguinOfDeath

sangie595 wrote: »

I find it perverse that people still think other people having children is a lifestyle choice. You do know how your future pension is funded, don't you? Because it doesn't come from all those taxes you pay, which are funding things today. Your pension will be funded by the products of those lifestyle choices. So when you are 70 and have no money at Christmas, do remember not to complain about the choices you made today. Why should todays children and tomorrows workforce want to pay for you?

It cracks me up when people use this as reason to have have a pop at people without kids. So that why you have them? How very noble. But, I'm guessing it isn't the actual reason is it now? Just a convenient argument for you.

I bet you're going to ensure your offspring end up as nurses, care workers etc so they can look after the poor childless in later life :rotfl: (not aimed at you particularly, just anyone who has come out with this justification)

Yes, we as a race would be screwed is no one had any kids. It would also be screwed if every single person bred as much as humanly possible. What's wrong with a little balance?

melysion

I get fed up with the "my kids will pay for all you single peoples pensions" argument too. As someone who can't have children I find this particularly hurtful. People don't have kids pay for future generations health care etc. They have them because they want them and nothing more. And there's nothing of course wrong with that. But let's shelf the "paying other people's pension" argument every time you want to leap frog over childless people to get your own way. It doesn't wash.

theoretica

sangie595 wrote: »

Equality in law has nothing to do with even distribution.

Actually it does for indirect discrimination. For instance, being a part time worker is not a protected characteristic, but because more women than men work part time, the equality legislation has been invoked for discrimination against part time workers.

http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal-articles/part-time-workers-regs-2000.html
As statistically most part-time workers are women an employer could also face a claim for sex discrimination by discriminating against part-timers.

emsywoo123

richdeniro wrote: »

Last year she got wind that the reason I wanted a day off on annual leave was because I had plans the evening before and didn't want to come in with a raging hangover - she cancelled my leave .

This isn't the job you started in July of this year then, the one you hate? :eek:


Also post #18...........have you worked there years or 5 months?

Rebel_Cause

PenguinOfDeath wrote: »

It cracks me up when people use this as reason to have have a pop at people without kids. So that why you have them? How very noble. But, I'm guessing it isn't the actual reason is it now? Just a convenient argument for you.

I bet you're going to ensure your offspring end up as nurses, care workers etc so they can look after the poor childless in later life :rotfl: (not aimed at you particularly, just anyone who has come out with this justification)

Yes, we as a race would be screwed is no one had any kids. It would also be screwed if every single person bred as much as humanly possible. What's wrong with a little balance?

Well said. Having children IS A CHOICE and no one should be judged or penalised for not having them. Besides, the amount of people that sling their infirm parents in care homes is unbelievable because everyone is under the illusion that because you had children, they will automatically look after you, you will not be lonely and abandoned by the abundance of kids you have. I have had people at work tell me I am selfish for not procreating and ask me who is going to look after me when I am old I retort with 'the same nurse as you when you darling children put you in a home' Besides, how do you even know if your offspring will even like you when they fly the nest and start their own lives or even outlive you. I actually despise that people think their children are some sort of insurance or endowment policy they can cash in on later down the line.

I have managed to get the 24th December -5th January off. I am childless (as some people with kids like to refer to me as because they think I am missing out!:p) I managed to get this time off because I booked it back in March, plus I am the only one that does my job, I do not work in a team and the clients shut down for Christmas also. :rotfl:

bugslet

sangie595 wrote: »

I find it perverse that people still think other people having children is a lifestyle choice. You do know how your future pension is funded, don't you? Because it doesn't come from all those taxes you pay, which are funding things today. Your pension will be funded by the products of those lifestyle choices. So when you are 70 and have no money at Christmas, do remember not to complain about the choices you made today. Why should todays children and tomorrows workforce want to pay for you?

I might be childless/free, whatever anyone wants to call it, but on the other hand, I've run a business for 24 years and paid all sorts of taxes, employed people, none of which I could have done had I had a child. Does that put me in a sort of medium area? Sort of above the selfish childless, yet below the child-bearing?

Personally I guess they should want to pay for you in the same way as I am happy to pay in for children to have education and maternity care and whatever else they may need. It's society and we pay in ( hopefully) and some of us get more out, others get less out. It's imperfect but I can't see the point of 'grading' people by their choices in life.

sangie595 wrote: »

But then, if you don't have children you get vastly preferential rates from holiday companies on your travel because school holidays are charged at a massive premium which penalise parents for their limited choices. I presume you will be refusing to book a vacation at anything other than school holiday times in solidarity with parents?

Life isn't fair. Were you expecting it to be? Perhaps I am lucky because my offices close over the holiday period. But if they didn't, I'd be ashamed of myself if I were making a huge deal over parents getting some "Santa time" with their children at the very short period of their lives when they actually still believe that the world is magical and fair.

It's a bit irrelevant because I've never had a job that worked over Xmas, but to be honest, it wouldn't bother me working on Xmas Day itself so that those with children could have Xmas day with them. As you say that is when children still think the world is magical and fair. However the days between Xmas and New Year, that's different, they are just days

PS, last foreign holiday I had was '91, and apart from long weekends, of the 5 hoildays I've had, three were over Xmas and one was in August.

GlasweJen

Chatting to HR might have been risky but it's revealed a "rogue" manager who was making up policies and the system is being reverted back to how it should be, which will be fairer.

Is everyone saying that no matter how unfair the workplace is you should put up with it for 2 years before opening your mouth? Surely 2 years down the line HR would say "well you've accepted it up until now so why is it a problem".

DKLS

sangie595 wrote: »

Good luck with that. I estimate that it will take two days to reach everyone - two hours for those in work and the rest for anyone off.

I find it perverse that people still think other people having children is a lifestyle choice. You do know how your future pension is funded, don't you? Because it doesn't come from all those taxes you pay, which are funding things today. Your pension will be funded by the products of those lifestyle choices. So when you are 70 and have no money at Christmas, do remember not to complain about the choices you made today. Why should todays children and tomorrows workforce want to pay for you?

Yes, of course other people have families or even dependants. But I am pretty positive that my gran, and my two elderly aunties, don't really believe that Santa will be arriving. So being with them on any other day of the year won't really cause them much distress.

sangie595 wrote: »

Maybe adults don't think that Christmas is a time for kids and would like the same holiday choices. Of course, you are assuming that everyone even celebrates Christmas. And yes, some people may get preferential treatment for no reason other than the boss likes them. Which is still not illegal!

But then, if you don't have children you get vastly preferential rates from holiday companies on your travel because school holidays are charged at a massive premium which penalise parents for their limited choices. I presume you will be refusing to book a vacation at anything other than school holiday times in solidarity with parents?

Life isn't fair. Were you expecting it to be? Perhaps I am lucky because my offices close over the holiday period. But if they didn't, I'd be ashamed of myself if I were making a huge deal over parents getting some "Santa time" with their children at the very short period of their lives when they actually still believe that the world is magical and fair.

This is the reason my friend who has 120 staff, refuses to hire any woman under the age of 45.

Also reminds me of the times when I had had to sign off christmas holiday allocations, what a nightmare that was!. Now I only work for companies that shut down between xmas and new year.

Undervalued

DKLS wrote: »

This is the reason my friend who has 120 staff, refuses to hire any woman under the age of 45.

Which is of course unlawful and could prove very costly if he ended up on the wrong end of a discrimination claim!

[Deleted User]

richdeniro wrote: »

Is this legal? I haven't found anything in the company handbook about it but my boss has allowed everyone who has children to put their leave in for Christmas first and it has all been approved meaning that those of us who haven't gotten around to having kids yet have to come in for the three days between Xmas and New Year.

Just seems really unfair.

Bit unfair really especially for those that can't have kids.. surly this can be challange as company i work for was successful in parking arrangement as orignally parent who had to do school runs or had kids was giving parking spaces.. now dosnt work like that as most could easly get busses etc... so it now a waiting list 1st comes 1st serve...