Redundancy because a colleague is on Maternity Leave

pmlindyloo

Reading through the proposed new structure it states ‘any roles currently filled by employees on Maternity Leave are ringfenced and will not be affected’

Is this unusual?

How can the organisation be following any realistic restructuring if all roles filled by employees in maternity leave are ring fenced?

OP, do you know whether the person on maternity leave is going to return to work?

sangie595

nicechap wrote: »

Thank you, I stand corrected.

On a hypothetical note: would it be discrimination if the mutually agreed termination (voluntary in most people's books) was not available to those on maternity?

Yes it would.

seatbeltnoob

If the person on maternity is not being covered then the best thing you can do to get your own back at your employer is to look for a new job, get a new job and leave this firm ASAP so that they can struggle hard to do the work with 2 mamagers missing.

sangie595

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Reading through the proposed new structure it states ‘any roles currently filled by employees on Maternity Leave are ringfenced and will not be affected’

Is this unusual?

How can the organisation be following any realistic restructuring if all roles filled by employees in maternity leave are ring fenced?

OP, do you know whether the person on maternity leave is going to return to work?

Given this is the paperwork for the restructure now happening, rather than policy, it is entirely possible that the statement is situation specific. And the employer may have already spoken to the woman on maternity leave, knows she wishes to return, and has ring fenced the job since this role continues to exist. We do know that it is simply one manager role that is going. Shoo that is a possible scenario. And, given the circumstances, a sensible employer would have spoken to the person on maternity leave early on.

DontBringBertie

Well theres only about 4 people in the organisation currently on mat leave - the other 3 work in larger teams so ring fencing 1 role out of 6/7, say.

Shes told me she is intending on returning to work. ("I have to return for 6 months or ill have to pay back £000's")

JReacher1

nicechap wrote: »

I suspect you have misread something along the way.

I'm assuming you work for a medium/ large organisation. What you have written would be discrimination - preventing females only from being made redundant - and does not sound like the basis for redundancy decisions. Roles are made redundant.

Someone on maternity leave is entitled to return to their role or equivalent role if the original is not available.

I'd be surprised if none of those on maternity leave kicked up a fuss because they were prevented from applying for redundancy.

I don't think you as an individual have a case based on the information provided but your union would be better placed to advise and no doubt would have been consulted on the process and selection criteria.

As this statement was completely incorrect then I think it would help demonstrate that you are a valuable member of the forum if you edited it to say that what you posted was unfortunately wrong. That would prevent someone just reading this one post and making a bad decision based on your incorrect advice.

pinkshoes

A (male) friend had this same scenario a few years ago. He put in complaint for sex discrimination as they were ring-fencing two women on maternity to keep their jobs whilst the other 7 of them fought for 2 jobs.

His complaint was upheld and the redundancy process was done by an anonymous essay detailing why they were bet for the job. He kept his job.

sangie595

pinkshoes wrote: »

A (male) friend had this same scenario a few years ago. He put in complaint for sex discrimination as they were ring-fencing two women on maternity to keep their jobs whilst the other 7 of them fought for 2 jobs.

His complaint was upheld and the redundancy process was done by an anonymous essay detailing why they were bet for the job. He kept his job.

If the women lost their jobs or had to compete for them, then "fair" or not, this was unlawful.

nicechap

DontBringBertie wrote: »

Well theres only about 4 people in the organisation currently on mat leave - the other 3 work in larger teams so ring fencing 1 role out of 6/7, say.

Shes told me she is intending on returning to work. ("I have to return for 6 months or ill have to pay back £000's")

As you appear to have a good working relationship with the woman concerned, have you suggested she negotiates and applies for mutually agreed termination (voluntary redundancy) - she might get the package as well as her maternity pay? Which would leave the manager job - presumably others would be able to apply for it too.

TELLIT01

I know the law protects people on Maternity Leave but it should be up to the employer to decide who they keep and who they don't as long as they can show valid business reasons for the decision. I don't know, but suspect the law came into force when the maternity leave period was much shorter than is currently the case.
There was a situation where I worked where a woman took the maximum allowed maternity leave and when she returned announced that she was pregnant again and would be working the minimum period to protect the maternity payment and would then be going off again. How is a situation like that fair on the employer?