Restructuring at work whilst on maternity leave

[Mayandbump23]

The company I work for is in the process of restructuring the department I work for and is doing this through a preferencing process where everyone has to apply for jobs in the new structure, submit cvs, interview etc. Any people who do not get jobs they have applied for will be made redundant (there are less jobs in the new structure).

I'm currently on matenity leave and was wondering what my rights are in this process? Can they make me go through the preferencing process (which would be very difficult for me due to having a three week old exclusively breastfed baby - how do you attend interviews whilst breastfeeding?) or can they offer me one of the jobs in the new structure ahead of my colleagues?

Some of the jobs in the new structure are in a different location which would be impossible for me to commute to once I return to work due to childcare commitments. Can they offer me one of the jobs in this location and effectively force me to resign (instead of making me redundant)?

Very concerned about this.

[flowerybeanbag]

You do have some extra protection as you are on maternity leave. If your job is made redundant and there is a suitable alternative job available, you should get offered it without having to compete with others. As there is a job application process here, it sounds as though they are considering the jobs in the new structure to be new jobs, and to be vacancies so really you should be offered one of them.

A job offered you must be 'suitable', and if a job is in a different location it may not be classed as suitable in which case you will not forfeit your redundancy by not accepting it. Personal circumstances should be taken into account when deciding whether an alternative job is suitable or not.

Your extra protection is under Regulation 10 of the Maternity and Parental leave Regulations 1999 so assuming you have been told you need to apply alongside everyone else, I'd suggest you write to them pointing out this legislation and take it from there.

[slipperthief]

Last paragraph in this might help redundancy, but maybe give the working families lot a call. They may be able to help or direct you to someone useful.

I think if they have to offer you a suitable replacement then this should be something that fits in with where you are now (but I could be wrong). If they effectively force you to resign I'm sure this would count as unfair dismissal / sex discrimination.

Hope you find some good advice.

[DecorHate]

Have a look at the Maternity Alliance website. they have very good up-to-date advice on rights whilst on maternity leave, etc.

As flowery said, companies must positively discriminate in favour of women on ML when dealing with a restructuring situation and this means sorting them out first in terms of a new job. I found that my company was unaware of this even though it was a large company with proper HR dept etc

I really sympathise with you - I was called in from ML 3 days before I had dc2 to be told about a restructuring and had to attend appeals and meetings whilst BFing - very stressful. I was initially offered a job much further from home - I was able to argue that it was impossible for me to fulfil my contracted hours with the extra travelling in the time normal childcare would operate. Of course, by the time they agreed to this all the other jobs had been allocated and they kept trying to slot me into positions which I had no qualifications or experience in, just because they were the same grade.

[FutureMum]

This is very interesting. Just found out today that my role is going to be made redundant, there are other opportunities to apply for roles internally, however uncertain of outcome and dreading all the stress. Had told HR recently of expecting baby, etc., however I am not due to go on mat leave for a few months yet, so it's all a nightmare : (

[Mumpottery]

I av quoted reg.10 and about preferential treatment towards a lady on mat leave and got asked "so should your colleagues get pregnant then?"...

basically the person I spoke with disagreed that a woman on mat leave should be treated favourbly... that every1 at risk of redundancy should be treated the same- on mat leave or not.

What do you think?

[DecorHate]

Doesn't matter what they think is fair or not - the law is the law...

[flowerybeanbag]

'Disagreed' as in thinks the law doesn't in fact say that, or 'disagreed' as in just doesn't think it's fair?

Because of course it's not technically 'fair' as one group of people is being given preferential treatment, and employment law is usually concerned with ensuring that doesn't happen.

But there's a reason for it, and as Decor says, employers don't get to pick which laws they agree with and only implement those.

Mumpottery did you put your reference to Reg 10 in writing and request a formal response?

[Mumpottery]

Decorhat - sadly they claim it's not really the law, its a grey area in law and can be challenged.

Flowerbeanbag - they disagreed wid both the law and its unfair.

I just spoke 2 HR face-2-face. they said they got 2 treat us all fairly coz others av employment rights, only thing i av is just make sure i'm not disadvntaged coz im on mat leave etc.

[slipperthief]

I think you need to make sure you're not at a disadvantage through being half-nuts through sleep deprivation, being out of the loop with what's going on at work, not having the spare time to fill out job applications / preparing for interviews (which to be fair most of your colleagues will spend some of their work time doing) and generally having baby resonsibilities that are going to be really high demand on your time/concentration etc.

Try pointing that out to HR and asking them to ensure you won't be treated unfairly.

[detoxdiva]

As has been mentioned, it's not their place to disagree with the law. Take Flowerys advice and write to them referencing the following from Regulation 10 of the Maternity & Parental Leave regulations 1999;

(1) This regulation applies where, during an employee's ordinary or additional maternity leave period, it is not practicable by reason of redundancy for her employer to continue to employ her under her existing contract of employment.

(2) Where there is a suitable available vacancy, the employee is entitled to be offered (before the end of her employment under her existing contract) alternative employment with her employer or his successor, or an associated employer, under a new contract of employment which complies with paragraph (3) (and takes effect immediately on the ending of her employment under the previous contract).

(3) The new contract of employment must be such that -

(a) the work to be done under it is of a kind which is both suitable in relation to the employee and appropriate for her to do in the circumstances.

[Mumpottery]

Thanx ladies

hope my Qs help the OP 2.

problem's sum say suitable alternative vacancy - but here in reg.10 it says suitable available vacancy - y different? does it matter?

it reads clear 2 me - where ther is a suitable available vacancy it should be offered to lady on mat leave as an alternative to redundancy (ie alternative employment).

[lilabelle]

Dear Fellow Mummies - Please Help!

I am currently on OML. I have been informed that the project that I manage will undergo a restructure and have been invited to be part of the consultation process. I have attended two consultation meetings and put business reasons forward as to why I do not think my role should be split in two. There are also personal reasons why I wouldn?t want this ? it is effectively a demotion as half of my responsibility will be removed and I will receive a 5k pay cut. The person who is likely to get the other half of my job and receive a pay increase is someone that I manage who does not have the same level experience or qualifications as me. So in sum, they will be demoting me in both status and pay to give it someone else. Their justification for this is that they think my responsibilities are too much for one person. I struggle with this because before I went on maternity leave, at no point during my supervision meetings and appraisals did my boss have a problem with my performance against my JD-in fact my appraisal states that I exceed expectations and my JD and was given a 3k performance related increment. My temporary replacement (who was male) has left after six month of undertaking my role and he had suggested to my boss that the role be split. I feel as though this has come about because I am on maternity leave. Had I not have been on mat leave, and continued to do a good job, I don?t think my role would be being split. Does this amount to sex discrimination?

It is my understanding that as I am on maternity leave, I have extra protection. If there are suitable alternative jobs in the new structure, I ought to be offered them before they consider the rest of the team. I thought my employer would give me choice of the two positions given that they are my job split in two but my employer has asked me to apply along with everyone else. Are they breaching maternity regulations here?
Finally, I have been searching for a definition of a suitable alternative but can?t come up with anything concrete. Is a demotion (not being an overall project manager anymore) in status and a 5k reduction a suitable alternative?

I fear if I refuse either half of my current role, they will say that I am therefore at risk of redundancy. Would this be an unfair redundancy given that my job (as is was before the restructure) is still there to be done and there is no evidence to suggest that I am not capable of doing it?

I would appreciate any guidance on this - I am sad that whilst I am trying to enjoy my time with my baby, It is being invaded with worry about this.

[seeyoukay]

Its not sex discrimination.

They can make you apply but this is to make sure the job is suitable for you not for making you compete against others.

I don't believe they have to give you a choice as to which of the jobs they offer you as long as they offer you one.

In terms of status I don't believe this is a demotion rather a promotion for someone else so it probably is suitable.

With regards to money depends how you get paid. If your on £20k and they reduce it to £15k that's not suitable, If your on £100k and its knocked down I think you'll find it harder to argue its not suitable.