Odd situation at work where we have two teams, one team is mostly young people, only one of the 10 in the team has a child, whereas i work in the second team, of the 9 in that team, 7 have children of school age and one is pregnant.
We have just had an email around work, saying that they are having to cut down on having so many people off at the same times, so both teams will only allow one person off per day from that respective team.
We are arguing that as we have school age children, that we do not have a choice when we take holidays off, we have to take time off during school holidays to cover child care, we have no choice.
So as one lady in the team is super prepared, she booked off nearly every half term, and two weeks of the summer, and not one of the other 6 in my team can be off on those days, previously we could have had 3 at least out of the 9 (and this worked fine as out team is predominantly email based, whilst the other is mostly on phone and customer facing)
Anyone know where we stand legally? It leaves us all in a real difficult position to be able to try cover holidays for our children.
Sounds like whoever issued this edict hadn't thought it through. Is it global across the company or just for your team?
Maybe you could argue that your old system worked.
Good luck with that!
super prepared, or just no daft?.
Not daft, she is just the kind of person that books 2019's holidays in Jan 2018!
I've got my half term and summer 2020 holidays booked. Our dates are limited, so I have to make sure that I get in before the rest of them. Luckily i'm the only one with school age kids. My colleagues are booking their slots too.
However, we are digressing from the OP. Only 1 out of 9 away sounds draconian. I would have thought that 30% would be OK over a 6 week summer period with everybody covering for everyone else.
Sounds like whoever issued this edict hadn’t thought it through.
No shit, if everyone in either team wants the stereotypical 2 weeks off in Summer the first would need to start on the 22nd of April with the last team member returning on the 16th of September if they can never be off at the same time as anyone else on their team.
I find the best thing about lots of people wanting the same sort of dates off, is that the rest of the country, in fact large parts of the world want the same sort of dates off too, so it's generally when we're quiet anyway.
We have had something vaguely similar at work, a ban on people booking leave over the easter period with a knock on effect for those who hadn’t already booked leave and with childcare issues (and those who just wanted a break). The official line at present is sort out childcare yourselves employers can limit when leave is taken for a legitimate business need.
Legally? Depends on your contract. Many folk do not have the luxury of taking school holidays off in 24/7/365 day businesses. You could try arguing "custom and practice" and the change is thus a change to your conditions of employment but as an ex union rep I think it a weak case to argue. Does the business need a full or almost full team on every week? What does your union say?
One out of ten is not really enough tho is it unless you are on stat minimum holidays.
My workplace tries to prioritise parents during the summer holidays but it cannot work for everyone. Personally I take my hols outside of the main school summer holidays
IIRC only 15% of our staff can be off every week and we have to take between 20 and 30% of our annual leave every 1/4 of the year
Just because you have kids does not given you any entitlement to holidays, sorry.
We struggle as my wife works shifts with NHS, my daughter is Type 1 diabetic and the only person trained outside of wife and i, is my mother in law, who has leukemia!
So say summer holidays is 6 weeks, normally i take one week just with my daughter, and one week off with my wife and daughter and my wife has a week alone with her, my mother in law currently picks up the other three weeks. Now i cannot have a single week in the summer holidays as they'd already gone, leaving me no time off with my wife and daughter to go anywhere, and my ill mother in law, having my hyperactive daughter for four weeks as it stands...
It's not unusual for leave to be completely unavailable during holiday periods if you work in the likes of the tourism industry. Folk just have to work around it.
In this case, it seems that the leave request/booking procedure needs to be updated to cope with the change. For a start, that might mean; not allowing booking of holidays the following year; only allowing one week during the summer peak and having some sort of lottery system.
Sounds like a great way to demotivate your staff.
Time to blow the dust off the CV?
Its a difficult issue, but it sounds like your management are idiots, or are expecting some kind of Battle Royale action over holidays, which sounds miserable.
Anecdotally - In my office as I don't have children I was banned from having any time off during school holidays. It became quite apparent that this ban only relates to me and others (also without children) were able to book holidays at those times. It reached a head a few years ago when I'd applied for (in November 2015) and been granted 2 weeks at the beginning of June 2016 (to ride Tuscany Trails). When it became apparent in mid May 2016 that this was a half term I was told I had to give up that holiday. So I presented my resignation letter. I got my holiday.
Just because you have kids does not given you any entitlement to holidays, sorry.
Every employee in the UK is entitled to Holdidays, if their contract of employment doesn't stipulate when and in what circumstances then they're free to book them whenever they see fit.
Just because an employer decides on a new rule, it doesn't mean you have to follow it.
There's pluses an minuses to everything, except smokers of course, there's no upside to that, unless perhaps you're running a company pension scheme.
By imposing rules like this, over time you'll lose parents to other employers and you'll replace them with younger child-free people who are far more likely to change jobs which costs in recruitment and training, or older with older kids who are generally slow to change.
Surely if they made different holiday rules for those with children and those without then that’s discrimination.
To be honest I can’t wait to be free of the constraints of school holidays because airlines and travel companies definitely do discriminate against those with kids when it comes to prices .
Every employee in the UK is entitled to Holdidays, if their contract of employment doesn’t stipulate when and in what circumstances then they’re free to book them whenever they see fit.
No not quite try again.
Every employee in the UK is entitled to Holdidays, if their contract of employment doesn’t stipulate when and in what circumstances then they’re free to book them whenever they see fit.
And the employer is legally able to set rules about how many staff off at a time and other rules as they see fit so long as it still allows everyone to use their full holiday entitlement over the year.
Just because you have kids does not given you any entitlement to holidays, sorry.
Absolutely spot on.
Too many people think the world revolves round their offspring. It doesn't.
So to fulfil that criteria there will need to be one person from nine on holiday every week of the year.....
And in the team of 10 there are not enough weeks in the year for it.
Assuming 28days bookable leave for a full time employee...
My point was that those younger ones without kids are free to book holiday whenever they want, they can book cheaper flights during term time, and they can book leave 365 days of the year as they have no constraints.
If you have school age children, especially with the rules and fines of taking them out of school, you don't have the choice, you have to take the holiday in school holidays, you pay more if you go away too. I cannot leave my 8 year old daughter home alone, and i cannot bring her to work with me, i have to have the time off to take my turn to look after her.
The issue is that it hasn't been company policy since i started, it starts today....
Only 1 out of 9
It will be almost impossible for everyone to take their holiday (assuming you all get 25 days a year - that's 225 over the year and there is around 261 work days a year). It's unworkable.
Edit: Trail-rat just beat me to it LOL!
9 staff, 5 weeks each = 45 weeks ????? 52 weeks a year. so there is just enough?
And for those saying that it is tough luck if you have kids, up to now if the two members of the team that don't have kids have booked the time off first, then they got it, and i am fine with that, if they have things they need to do in school holidays and they booked the time off, i have no issue with that... the issue now is that kids or not, that each of those days in the school holidays, kids or not, only one person can be off, it is physically unworkable..
Needs relaxing a bit and rationing fairly.
Have you taken your complaint to HR yet? Union representation?
Someone is being stupid.
At a mate’s place some shit-hot super keen young manager put a block on people booking the summer holidays off to complete a project because “Who wants time off in the summer anyway, that is when all the school kids are off, right?”. Neglecting to realise that most of the people he’d just blocked had school aged kids and therefore wouldn’t be able to go away. That one soon got turned over.
Have a sensible word with your HR.
the issue now is that kids or not, that each of those days in the school holidays, kids or not, only one person can be off, it is physically unworkable..
Why?
Your employer can allocate your holidays, they can also put a !imit on the number of staff allowed off at a time. That's it pretty much in a nutshell.
Stupid rule .... How many days you are you entitled to ?
If its 5 weeks.... Are there enough working days in the year to accommodate everyone ?
Irrespective of school hols really don't see how this rule is workable.
Edit ... beaten to it by everyone lol
All workers have, from the first day of employment, the right to 5.6 weeks' paid holiday per year.
5.6 weeks is not 25 days.
Drac, i have no issue with the company restricting the time off, clearly not everyone on in the team can be off. The issue is that having 3 out of 9 off has never been an issue, we are on top of our work and we cover each other workwise.
The issue that only allowing 1 out of 9 off is just plain daft, essentially as it stands at the moment, i cannot have single day off in school holidays other than at xmas time.
So i'll be taking days to sit at home on my own....whilsy you may be a miserable loner, i like spending time with my wife and daughter.
My ill mother in law, will have to take up the slack and have my daughter 4 weeks out of 6 in the summer.
For me to get childcare for my daughter with her being T1, would mean a specialist carer at a silly day rate
It means that i now cannot take a planned summer holiday and it means that i now cannot ride Torino-Nice this year either, as my leave already booked has just been revoked!
Assuming 28days bookable leave
And
9 staff, 5 weeks each = 45 weeks
Only in practice most people get 20 +8days bh. for it their statutory 5.6 weeks. Even at 25 bookable days + 8 it still leaves 2 days in a working year where the team of 10 will all be in the office...
It's a daft level of restriction for teams of that size but certainly not discrimination.
Are your two teams abnormally large in your company (assuming the policy is company wide)
Does your company suffer with high rates of sickness?
To me unless your teams are exceptional - so the policy needs rewording to "1 in 4" or whatever - if there really is a business it should be temporary whilst they recruit more staff to cope with normal workload. Of course that happening is another thing entirely.
whilst you may be a miserable loner, i like spending time with my wife and daughter
BOOM!
@dangeourbrain - i work for a large insurers, where most team sizes are large 15 people-ish, where most of them are customer facing and on phones to customers, so predominantly young people with high rates of sickness yes.
My team deals with injury claims all over Europe, so needs to be experts in large, complex injury claims and all forms of European law, both injury, civil law and RTA, because what we do is communicate with solicitors or European insurers, 90% of our workload is email based.
So you take a week off, colleagues cover the urgent litigation and other pressing work for you and it has always worked.
as my leave already booked has just been revoked!
Revoking your previously authorised leave is not the same as restricting future application for leave. I'd be seeking reimbursement for the costs of your pre booked holiday for those dates at least, costs of child care for revoked dates and so on.
where most team sizes are large 15 people-ish
In which case their restrictions aren't legally achievable for most of the business, even at 20+8 minimum entitlement.
The issue is that having 3 out of 9 off has never been an issue, we are on top of our work and we cover each other workwise.
The issue that only allowing 1 out of 9 off is just plain daft
So speak to hr detailing that as the issue rather than misplaced accusations of discrimination or an entitlement because you have kids.
"
kilo
Subscriber
The issue is that having 3 out of 9 off has never been an issue, we are on top of our work and we cover each other workwise.
The issue that only allowing 1 out of 9 off is just plain daft
So speak to hr detailing that as the issue rather than misplaced accusations of discrimination or an entitlement because you have kids."
This.
Their new system applies to everyone equally so is not discrimination.
It may be unworkable and not required.
That's is how to argue your case.
i like spending time with my wife
Maybe drac does too. 😏
So i’ll be taking days to sit at home on my own….whilsy you may be a miserable loner, i like spending time with my wife and daughter.
Married with 2 kids thanks we rarely are all off together for a holiday as we spread them out to help with childcare and because we both work for the NHS so out holidays are restricted. Nice of you to ask.
It means that i now cannot take a planned summer holiday and it means that i now cannot ride Torino-Nice this year either, as my leave already booked has just been revoked!
Now that is a very different issue.
Also you have a bit of arguement about supporting your daughter as she has diabetes.
I feel it is discriminatory, there has to be a basic allowance to be able to take reasonable time off in school holidays? You cannot take kids out of school term time, and you cannot change the dates of the school holidays, they are set days.
As stated, you simply cannot leave your kids alone or bring them to work, there is 6 weeks in school holidays, so if 3 out of 9 people are off for the one or two weeks they want, then the holidays are easily covered.
As it stands at present, i will have either loads of leave left or i will taking it to when my daughter is at school and wife at work, so not much of a holiday?
I have done my fill of odd hours, i was a 80 hour a week chef as a lad and then a soldier away for 8 month stretches, so i've done my time and i work 50 hour weeks now...
Well you don’t get 6 weeks holiday entitlement so you are not able to book the entirety of your kids school holidays off so you have to arrange alternative care for most of the holiday anyway. This is all part of the thing about kids costing hundreds of thousands of pounds to bring up so not discrimination. My wife and I pay for holiday clubs during school holidays like many other parents and pay the holiday premium to take them away.... thou we go camping in France which is dirt cheap.
It’s a bummer but it is what it is. Some companies have compulsory shut down weeks, which is not ideal as the company I used to work for did this.
I'll say it only as nobody else has.
OP dont you have a bit of a sore throat due? feeling a bit of flu coming on? know a half decent doc to sign you off? 🙂
Not sure about a sore-throat but after email today (and it came by email, not to our faces) i may be coming down with stress....
@Drac, sorry to have a pop i am a bit p**sed off as you can probably tell! i completely sympathise with working for the NHS, my wife is a Senior Therapy Radiographer, in a team that was 12 at the start of 2018, where they have had 2 EU nationals go home, and another 2 of 20 years plus service leave as hate it now. So she used to work 7-2, now she is rarely home by 5 and is on call every second weekend (and living in rural Norfolk, being on call means being stuck at home, as we cannot guarantee mobile reception in half the county). She has pretty much had her fill now too..
I feel it is discriminatory, there has to be a basic allowance to be able to take reasonable time off in school holidays?
It's not and there isn't. Everyone is treated the same, that's not discrimination.
If you have to Care for your daughter there are specifics which relate to your legal entitlement, your employer will need to follow those specifics but be careful about what is in that can of worms before you open it.
Their policy is however wholly unworkable within the law because there aren't enough days in the year to meet the statutory requirements for holiday for the larger team, back to HR.
It's practically unworkable in your smaller teams, it's not caused an issue before. Back to HR.
What's their business case for the restriction, back to HR.
There are plenty of problems with the policy, none is discrimination.
there has to be a basic allowance to be able to take reasonable time off in school holidays?
No, there doesn't. As I've already written above, lots of folk in the tourism sector have to forego leave during the school holidays as that's when they are most required. You can argue that they probably accepted this when they took on the job/started their own business but I'm just saying that many, many folk already have to deal with this issue.
PS- they're probably being paid less than you too.
"Too many people think the world revolves round their offspring. It doesn’t."
Whereas too many of those without children tend to think the world revolves around themselves - a point amply demonstrated on this forum day in day out.
Anyways..
This is a HR issue as people leaping in to book off large chunks of holiday is certainly not in the spirit of teamwork. 9 is quite a small team and there is plenty of scope for give and take. No you can't all have 2 weeks in the summer but nobody should be able to book 'all the half terms off' etc. In any given year there needs to be a fair spread so somebody gets easter, somebody may half term etc. It seems like your HR department needs to learn their job as so many do.
It takes time to organise though.My colleague and I who both have children and can't be off at the same time spend a while sorting it all out fairly each year.
Could you have 'only one holiday at a time can be booked' added to rules. That way you stop someone calling shotgun on all the school holiday dates at once.
Odd how the grumpy childless middle-aged bell ends love to pile on a thread like this.
Draw your own conclusions.
Just because you have kids does not given you any entitlement to holidays, sorry.
One of those words doesn't ring true.
OP: You've got a right to time off work, not a right go on holiday with your family. It sounds harsh but I think what Drac was getting at is right. This isn't discriminatory because the rule is being applied evenly and fairly. You're being allowed your time off (as required by law), just not when you want it, but someone without kids could claim the same thing, "I wanted this week in particular to do a bike race" or "I wanted that week because the snow is better and I like skiing".
The way to fight it isn't to claim that you're being discriminated against, but to
go with the 1/9 rule being unnecessary and being potentially impossible given the number of days off that need to be taken.
@scotroutes i have worked in the tourism sector, i used to own a company taking people to Morocco for a living in an old converted Land Rover 101, it was a job for when i was young and it was done for the love of it, not the pay.
Again i have coached rugby for years, again done for the love of it not the money.
But i had to make lifestyle choices and i now work in a dull office, my issue is that i was employed on one basis, and there has been a set of rules that worked fine, but because of the abuses of some, now we all pay.
You know if you're a fireman you are employed to work unsociable hours, a nurse, a doctor etc, you know when you take those roles, the likely hours and pay, they are vocations
I worked unsociable hours as a soldier (work out the hourly rate for being at work 8 months a year on £17160.00.....
I would love to be still working in the tourism industry, i have MLTB qualifications, but you make life choices and take jobs suited to what is best for you and family at the time, to be away 8 months of the year now would be selfish.
So you cannot hold it against me for the choices i've made, the issue is one of the company i work for wholly changing the goalposts and leaving it near impossible to spend even a single day of the summer holidays with my family, when strictly it doesn't need to happen.
Was about to say that at 25 days holiday per person, that leaves 7 weeks of the year when you'll have a full team. Minus sickness and that'll be more like 4 weeks.
Yeah, nah.
So you cannot hold it against me for the choices i’ve made, the issue is one of the company i work for wholly changing the goalposts and leaving it near impossible to spend even a single day of the summer holidays with my family, when strictly it doesn’t need to happen.
I agree, but I'm just highlighting that you have no absolute "right". As above, it seems that you HR department needs to get the finger out and come up with something.
Everyone is treated the same, that’s not discrimination.
It *could* be, it's called indirect discrimination
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/what-are-the-different-types-of-discrimination/indirect-discrimination/
However, i think discrimination only applies to a few things, such as discriminating on the basis of sexuality or gender. It's don't think its illegal to indirectly discriminate against people with children?
All the people with kids in your team should apply to HR for Flexible working with 6 weeks off in the summer.
If you have kids it’s your right to apply and, by law, they must consider it but can , and almost certainly will, reject it.
It might focus their minds a bit.
However, i think discrimination only applies to a few things,
Indeed, that's the protected characteristic bit, of which I believe being a carer is one in certain circumstances but the op will have to be recognised as Caring for his daughter (as opposed to caring which "every" parent does).
Edit
The point is though there are plenty of reasons to seek to get the policy overturned, indirect or direct discrimination on the basis of having children isn't one of them and, complaining for the wrong reason can do more harm than good sometimes.
The biggest ball-ache to be honest that one of nine "people" is actually two ladies that job-share, so they work part time because of their children, but they are then the first to always be able to book leave, i am always a little late to the party to book leave, as i do on the orders of my wife once she has her NHS rotas.
And don't get me started on my leave year being First of July onwards...
I'll stop ranting now and annoying Scotroutes and Drac, thanks for letting this stressed old dad sound off!!
I'm right with you until...
My point was that those younger ones without kids are free to book holiday whenever they want, they can book cheaper flights during term time, and they can book leave 365 days of the year as they have no constraints
Implying that preference should be given to those with children? It's no one's business when I take my holidays, least of all those with kids and I'll be buggered if I'm going to have my life outside of work dictated to because someone decided to have offspring.
As mentioned above, you have no 'rights' as such other than what everyone else has. However you do have circumstances which were I in your shoes I'd be tempted to go speak to HR about. Might go nowhere but worth having the discussion.
At the end of the day, the company exists to make money. If they've found that having a large number of people out of office during a given period affects company performance, then they're going to make changes to stop that happening. It's a balancing act between keeping staff morale up and remaining profitable and whilst banning people from taking time off at the same time seems like a poor solution to me, it's probably more effective and cheaper than getting temp staff in.
If you go in banding words about like 'discrimination' you're probably not going to do yourself any favors. Take a deep breath, book a meeting with HR and have a chat with them about your circumstances to see if they can do anything to help. If it's the insurer I'm thinking it might be (based on your location) then from what I've heard they're pretty decent to work for and normally pretty good at the work/life balance thing...
HI @flange, i did slightly back-track on my statement above, as i did say i have no issue with when anybody takes there leave at all, if someone without kids is the first to take a day in school holidays, then that is their right. I meant to phrase it, that they don't have the ties of specific dates, it is easier for them (and when i was sans child, i would actively avoid summer holidays and places with lots of kids!)
The issue is that in the team of youngsters, there is no issue, there "spread" of leave works for them, typically they want to go when it's cheapest..
Many of the youngsters in that team are really hacked off, as many socialise etc with each other and two or three of them holiday together and they can't do that anymore too.
For our team it is the opposite, we have a commitment we can't escape, we have to be at home for a share of the holidays.
What happens if someone in the team is hospitalized for weeks? Cancel anyone else's booked leave?
If 9 is the absolute minimum of people needed to be present to run the team then you need considerably more than 10 to staff it.
@Drac, sorry to have a pop i am a bit p**sed
I guess you were venting don't worry.
What happens if someone in the team is hospitalized for weeks? Cancel anyone else’s booked leave?
No, that's sickness absence not annual leave.
@simon-g One person being off for weeks hasn't been an issue up to now, as we always covered each other, we have one member about to be off for maternity leave, and her work will be covered.. that's the issue, there hasn't been a problem with covering work that's why this new ruling has only annoyed people who have worked hard to make sure colleagues work doesn't slip when they're off, knowing they'll do the same when you're on leave, now you have the super-mums here, who are now booking their leave into 2021 to make sure they're in first, i can't do that, as i need to know my wifes NHS rota first.
As above,. The issue here is a badly thought out and badly implemented policy change. To HR it is. It would be worth a group of you making a joint letter? Certainly you need to point out the issues this policy is causing and the impracticality of it. If one colleague has booked everything off then that too is manifestly unfair. 2 1/2 whole time equivalents of leave each week would seem a reasonable amount. so not 3 full-timers but 2 of the full-timers and one of the part-timers.
who has this come from?
If you have booked trips on the basis of approved holiday then that has to be honoured in all normal circumstances
Yup TJ has it.
These changes should be implemented for next year not this year.
Its not discriminatory, its just an unsustainable HR policy. In the situation you describe, who gets the best holidays is allocated on the basis of who is the keenest to book them, or who gets earlier to the office. On the other hand, your wife working in the NHS-as does my gf so I feel for you, shouldn't affect your companies policy.
Think strategically as what an ideal outcome looks like, and then assess what is actually achievable, only after speaking to HR.
edit: just noticed you said 2021, booking up all holidays that way when you know the rest of the team also has those needs is just being a right ****. Also you shouldn't have to cover for someones maternity, the extra workload involve isn't your problem.
Sounds terrible - I don't have kids but my mrs is a teacher, so I have the same constraints. To be honest I'm only working to keep a roof over my families head and to fund holidays.
With that in mind, if I were the OP i'd leave and go work for a more reasonable company.
I’ll stop ranting now and annoying Scotroutes and Drac, thanks for letting this stressed old dad sound off!!
LOL! Not annoyed, just hoping to pass on a bit of perspective to help you aim your HR rant in the right direction 😁
If the holiday year is starting in July, then this is likely to mostly be 'next year' even though its in 4 months time, still in 2019
Grow a pair of balls.
Talk to the other people with families, book a team meeting in the calendar for this friday with the title "Unworkable New Holiday Requirements" - make sure the idiot who said it is in the meeting and say exactly this:
"Your 1 of 9 off quota is utterly unworkable for these people with families, change it, or you'll find we'll book our holidays off and manage them as we see fit ourselves".
Unless you work with a bunch of spineless tits who are so unconfident of finding other work they have to back down. If not, then go above his/her head to their boss to explain the issue (calmly).
If they don't back down, book the time off and watch them deal with the fallout.
F*ck "talking to HR". I never understood why people did that - who does HR work for?
Sort the problem out. You're an adult. Expect to be treated like one. Instead of like a child slave.
I’ll stop ranting now and annoying Scotroutes and Drac, thanks for letting this stressed old dad sound off!!
It's just like being at work. 😬
Your 1 of 9 off quota is utterly unworkable for these people with families, change it, or you’ll find we’ll book our holidays off and manage them as we see fit ourselves”.
Yeah unauthorised absence great idea.
Blimey Chevychase, say what you think...!
You are half right though, i am always the one at work who will say "hang on this isn't right and will argue what i feel is correct" whilst others would not say boo to a ghost.
I had just come out of a meeting with my bosses boss as to how i felt we were dealing with the large amounts of litigation Brexit is causing badly, when i got the email about holiday.. otherwise she would of got both barrels on that too!
Chevychase has a point though. HR is not there for the employees. If you can't work it out with the policy writer (and it might be useful to point out that it disproportionately affects thsoe with families), ,then his/her boss and or HR.
Or suggest the teams get re-organised so that the family/single balance is better.
The point of going to HR is to find out how the policy was implemented - ie. unilaterally by department boss or centrally by HR.
If the former, leverage can be applied via HR.
We all know they are there to protect the business, no need to patronise us.
HR are there for both they will stop a manager from implementing something they can't.
You might want to look up the rights on parental leave. Whilst it is unpaid 9 applications for that all at the same time would focus most employers minds!
Not daft, she is just the kind of person that books 2019’s holidays in Jan 2018!
Like a prison officer then?
We had a leave sheet to submit each October on which you had to REQUEST (not demand/expect) any block leave for the next 16 months.
Why should people who have kids have any preferential treatment over those who don't?
Run this one by them, there are 10 in the team1, min hols 5 weeks 1day including stats, 10x26= 260 days needed for hols but only 261 days max in a year to take hols so if this has been intrduced part way thru a year not enough weeks in the year for everyone to take their hols.........denying people their statutory hols is illigal
Not patronising you at all. Merely pointing out that HR may not have any interest in leveraging the boss with an issue that offers no danger to the company but which the boss has suggested that his decision is based on protecting the ability of the business to do it's business.
For the record, everyone here may understand HR's role but the broader working world really doesn't.
When there were more people with kids working in my dept, we had a"prime time" rule for holidays. All the school holidays were classed as prime time and in any one year, each person was only allowed to book three weeks of prime time, unless no one else booked it then you could have more. It was also allocated on who's turn it was i.e. you had lots of prime time last year, it's someone else's turn this year. We also can't book leave more than a year-18 months in advance. This rule was self imposed by the staff, not by management and it mostly worked.
I'm the only one with a child now so it's not really an issue, but in all likelihood there'll be more kids along over the next few years!
Hmmm... having children is not a protected characteristic, but gender is. The women with children might have a case because women tend (generalisation) to do more of the child care. Of course if the company was then stupid enough to apply their rule to the men only...
Whether your daughter’s diabetes ought to be taken into account is another interesting one that I am not qualified to comment on.
You need a good employment lawyer for a proper opinion.
What’s indirect discrimination?
The law which says you mustn’t be discriminated against is called the Equality Act 2010. Discrimination which is against the Equality Act is unlawful. This means you can take action in the civil courts.
Indirect discrimination is when there’s a practice, policy or rule which applies to everyone in the same way, but it has a worse effect on some people than others. The Equality Act says it puts you at a particular disadvantage.
Run this one by them, there are 10 in the team1, min hols 5 weeks 1day including stats, 10×26= 260 days needed for hols but only 261 days max in a year to take hols so if this has been intrduced part way thru a year not enough weeks in the year for everyone to take their hols………denying people their statutory hols is illigal
A bit of a maths fail there. The OP's team only has 9 in it (although the other team has 10 I admit).
Also, if the business is closed on bank holidays all 9 employees would be off work on the same day. That soaks up 72 leave days over 8 days of the year.
So for a 5 day a week business closed on bank holidays that's 252 working days a year. Assuming just statuary 20 days of leave (in addition to bank holidays) and a team of 9 that's 180 days leave to arrange over 252 days so not impossible. Daft, but not impossible.
I'd say for a team of 3 or 4 it is reasonable for a line manager to stipulate no more that one off at a time. Loosing 50% or 66% of your work force at one time could make a real impact on your ability to function and also the rest of the team's sanity. Another one sick and it would effectively close the business. But for a team of 9 or 10 - jog on. Both unreasonable and unrealistic.
Parents expecting exclusive rights to the peak holidays seasons is also unreasonable imo.
This may be a good place to vent, but a bad place for advice. The above link is useful.
You have the right to request leave. Your employer has the right to refuse. Both parties have to give reasonable notice.
Outside of this is an area where the employer and employee have to find common ground.
Tbh the proposal sounds stupid and weighs heavily towards the employer. Whilst not being illegal or discriminatory, it will lead to a demotivated workforce and probably a rise in authorised absence.
Are you a member of a union?