What are my rights on part time from maternity

[impartial]

I returned to work at the end of Jan 2009 after maternity leave and I have over 10 years service with the company.

I requested part time, 4 day week, in the role which was a promotion and it was accepted. I thought on trial but the letter made no mention of a trial.

Since I have been back I have physically been in the office for meetings for about half of the days I am meant to be in. On the days I am not in sometimes I take calls. I always end up working almost every evening. In effect I am working full time and being paid less (although I do get the days I am in paid).

I asked for additional resource to cover some work, which was initially agreed and then challenged at a higher level. I finally got the resource this week after about 3 months. And the resource is not at the capability level which will invariably mean I am doing more to coach and train.

I also think I am starting to make mistakes.

What is worse is the effect on my resilience and my home life. The stress has caused real problems for me.

I have flagged to those more senior that I can't carry on like this and I think they believe I should just go full time.

I am now at the end of my tether and am thinking of resigning next week.

Do I have any rights? Is this a redundnacy situation or is it just me leaving.

[flowerybeanbag]

It's not redundancy, there certainly doesn't sound like any indication that you are not needed any more if you are so busy.

So as it stands, it's just you deciding it's not working and resigning as a result. When you requested 4 days a week, discussed the ins and outs and agreed it, presumably how it would actually work in terms of meetings and workload was addressed.

If possible, I would suggest you personally think about why the change hasn't worked as everyone involved obviously thought it would, and if possible come up with a proposal for making it work to the benefit of all concerned. Think about how things could be arranged differently, tasks adjusted or similar, to ensure the job is covered adequately.

Alternatively, you could propose that as you are working as many hours as you did full time (if that is the case), you are paid as full time on a 'compressed hours' basis. But the pay doesn't actually sound like the issue here anyway, so a proposal to make it work better would probably be better.

[impartial]

Thank you for the ideas - I probably need to provide more context but I suspect from the first part of your answer that I just need to resign.

I am quite senior and although there was a conversation about me going to 4 days it was more on a - see how it goes rather than a robust this is how we will support it.

The company does not support compressed hours - it's in the policy and really it is compressed hours I am doing, not being paid for and can't continue to do.

There has been no change to the meetings etc that I am expected to do. Also there is arguably more work than the previous incumbent had with the additional projects.

[kafka]

It is not a redundancy situation.

You talk about the previous incumbent, who is that? I understood this was your old job.

It is unlawful to treat a part timer less favourably than a full timer. By the sounds of it, if you compare yourself with your previous full time self you as a part timer having a difficult time.

Issue is what do you want?
Do you want to resolve this and try and look at what could make things more bearable - in wwhich case try to resolve with your boss or are you looking to resign?

[impartial]

No the role was a new one to me. The previous person left the job.

They didn't do a great job and left lots of issues which I have picked up.

What I want to do is leave. I think I have gone past the trying to sort it out stage. I think if I continue I am going to make myself quite ill.

I had thought that as I am on a part time contract, if they require me to do a full time role then I can claim redundancy.

That seems not to be the case. Which is a real shame as it will just make it all a bit harder.

[flowerybeanbag]

But they haven't said anything about requiring you to go full time. You 'think they believe' you should go full time, but it doesn't sound as though they are telling you to do that.

Tbh it sounds as though you've asked to go part time in a full time role, and are now finding that actually this job is not possible to do part time. It may have been possible given proper structuring of the role, rather than a 'see how it goes' approach at the beginning, and obviously we don't know a lot of detail in terms of what was done by both parties to make it work, whether anything different could or should have been done.

But some jobs just aren't possible to squeeze into 4 days a week. Most people who reduce their days from 5 to 4 find themselves doing more or less the same workload, so the ability to reduce hours comes from changes in ways of working or time-saving measures, rather than any actual reduction in workload. Once you start reducing to 3 days or less, or job-sharing, it then becomes impossible to do without some workload moving elsewhere or some major adjustments being made.

But a senior full time role changing to 4 days a week on a 'see how we go' basis was always going to be difficult I'm afraid.

I think really your only options are either a) Go full time, b) Leave or c) Propose something possibly a bit more radical to make the hours you want work.

[impartial]

I think you are right.

I can't propose anything radical because we are also reducing our headcount so unlikely to get the go ahead as it would require more spend.

I feel cheated and at the moment why would they require me to go full time when they pay 0.8 and get > 1

Anything other ideas?