Christmas time off

With my employer (we got taken over last year), it seems to be that whoever is aware that we don’t subscribe to industry norms and stay open gets to book the time off before those who were not aware. Yes, I’m annoyed.

Personally I think that outside of essential/emergency services, employers should be more mindful about whether they really need people to be in over Christmas. I spent many years working between Christmas and New Year, pretty much the only one in, and absolutely fuck all happened. I was absolutely OK with working those days, and didn't request the time off, because I wasn't at risk of spending Christmas alone and I quite enjoyed being at work on days when fuck all was happening and I could take it easy. But really, if I hadn't been there, there would have been no consequences, and if I hadn't been willing to cover those days there was no real business need to force someone to work.

I agree. It makes no sense environmentally to heat, light a building and provide essential services for the handful of staff who will be there. I also worked between Christmas and new year for many years. It was always the same people who said they would work at the November staff meeting and then quietly booked leave. It was the best thing ever when it was decided to shut down for that period.

I worked for the same organisation for many years, and there were various processes for sharing leave. None were ideal, but management did finally at least try to be fair.

The office was closed Bank Holidays, but the time between Christmas and New Year was always sought after, and to start with around 50% of staff were allowed off.

As a young childless person I was told I had to work the first year. For the next 6 years I ended up working with different women with children. For each of those years I was asked to work, with the promise of being off the following year. It never happened.

I had to make a stand and on year 8 I flatly refused. There was much emotional blackmail, requests to share the time off, etc but I stood firm. My own manager supported me, but a more senior one threatened disciplinary action. I had followed all proper procedures and applied for leave in writing, so had written rejections for 7 years. I threatened HR and ACAS.

I got the leave and for once was able to travel to see more distant relatives.
There was more fairness after that and whilst there were exceptions for special circumstances everyone was expected to cover their share.

I feel strongly that it is up to management to manage, not pick on the weakest target. They would have to make decisions if everyone in the team had children.

I read the other post about how hard it is to get childcare at Christmas, and am not unsympathetic, it’s sometimes a similar situation for adult carers, but if a manager ( not unreasonably) accepts that as a reason for allowing leave over and above the desired level, it is similarly up to them to fill the gap or accept lower staffing levels.

Filling the gap could be by various means such as using temporary staff, or by offering financial / time inducements to actual volunteers.

The way I have always done it is
Everyone says what they want. They put their days in order of priority for them
Get confirmation of required levels.
Allocate leave proportionately to all those that have requested it. Picking the dates closest to those requested. If I cannot allocate evenly, it's picked randomly.
If more leave becomes available (people cancel or management decide) those that didn't get what they wanted get first dibs. All agreed in October so people can use up their annual leave over half term.
This avoids "last year" talk.

I think what people with children often forget is that people without children frequently need to travel to family at Christmas if they don't want to spend it alone. Some of these people also don't have cars. (Very common among, for example, 20 somethings who live in London and house share.) So if those people can't have the 24th or the 27th off because priority has been given to those with children, they risk being stuck spending Christmas completely alone because they can't get a train back to wherever they live on Boxing Day ready to go back to work on the 27th.

Personally I think that outside of essential/emergency services, employers should be more mindful about whether they really need people to be in over Christmas. I spent many years working between Christmas and New Year, pretty much the only one in, and absolutely fuck all happened. I was absolutely OK with working those days, and didn't request the time off, because I wasn't at risk of spending Christmas alone and I quite enjoyed being at work on days when fuck all was happening and I could take it easy. But really, if I hadn't been there, there would have been no consequences, and if I hadn't been willing to cover those days there was no real business need to force someone to work.

I have retired but worked in retail the last 15 years. We had one lady who only worked two days but always got the week in between off, even with different managers.
I could only ever have the days she didn't want it fucked me off no end. We can only book holidays online up to a year in advance so I got up the day after boxing day at 5 am and booked the next boxing day so nobody could say "first come first served". I always worked at least two of the special days every year, she never did any.
She always said she wanted to be with her children, both our kids are in their 30s, well I wanted to see mine.
Tell your manager to sort it, I wish I had instead of seething with resentment every year.

Speaking as someone with kids, YANBU. Everyone should do their fair share if everyone wants the time off.

You do know that even adults are someone's DC and we would like to spend Christmas with them as well. For some of us it's not just a case of them "popping round after work". My DD, for example, lives a 6 hour round trip away and we would love to spend the whole of Christmas together (it's been 6 years since the last one we had), but, apparently, our wants don't matter.

Definitely bring it up with your manager leave needs to be done fairly over Christmas break

I have children but I think I am in the minority that after the chaos of Christmas day and Boxing day I am happy to go back to work for some peace 😂but my office always closes Christmas eve

Why should they? It's up to managers to manage. People have their own reasons for wanting leave and other people's childcare isn't their responsibility. As it happens I was always happy to work to help others out as I didn't care what days I worked but I don't think there should be an expectation that parents get preferential treatment

Mostly it's a practical thing to do with childcare.

Exactly. If you literally have no other childcare options (which was the case on that other thread) you're hardly going to leave small children home alone because that would be neglect, so you won't be going in regardless 🤷‍♀️

“It takes a village” means that, on having children, you have to accept that you will not be the only influence on that child and that you will need a network of people around you who will be a positive influence on that child, and provide you with support.

It doesn’t mean that if you don’t have children, you’re in any way responsible for those who do.

You aren’t unreasonable at all.

The problem is that management haven’t taken hold of this issue - which is an issue in every workplace, every year (or most).

They can’t just “leave you to sort it out” as it just means that the dominant personalities win. They need to get a grip on this and sort out a fair system.

YANBU

People who think just because they have DC they are special really annoy me.

EVERYONE has the right to a family life. Everybody.

Bring it up with your manager, and suggest a rota, so it's fair.

I bet they also believe they have first rights to choosing their summer holiday time as well ...?

My parents want to spend Christmas with me. It goes both ways. i shouldn't have to forego a Christmas with my family because I chose not to have children.

As PP said, a rota system is the fairest thing, regardless of family make up.

No. Nobody has any obligation to a colleague because they have children. If you know there's an expectation to work over the Christmas period, you arrange things early - you don't rely on other people sacrificing their time off for you.

If someone is struggling for childcare it all depends how it's approached. If someone said "look I'm in a difficult spot, I've been rostered to work but I really can't get childcare that day, can anyone help me out with a swap" that feels very different to being told you should "do the decent thing" because you don't have kids/your kids are older or grown up. But so many parents are so damn entitled. I've had colleagues say to me I should do the on call shifts on the public holidays because mine are teenagers now so they won't care about Christmas and theirs are still little. This is bare faced entitlement, not need - I'll help a colleague out who is normally a decent contributing member of the team and is in need, but if someone comes at me with that air of entitlement, telling me what I should do for them and what they feel entitled to simply because they have children, they can get tae fuck.

Jog on.

People without kids still have families. My mother is dying, should people with kids take priority over our last Christmas together?

Mostly it's a practical thing to do with childcare. Most childcare providers will want to take Christmas off too.

Secondly, there are other people involved. Just from a point of view of maximising happiness out makes sense to do something so that parents can be with their children.

I don't think that, as a society, people should have their noses so far bent out of joint over being asked to do something generous for their colleagues. Life is better if we're all prepared to be generous for others from time to time, and people without childcare, or other caring, responsibilities have a greater capacity to give.

It's unpleasant to cause difficulties over it. A sign of how selfish society is that people wouldn't think to offer automatically.

Working over Christmas doesn't seem like that big a deal as something to help out those with children.

One or two, maybe. But your comments imply that they should always do so. 45 or 50 Christmases is a bit different. But as always with these threads, it's very easy to be generous with other people's time.

That being said, I don’t think people with children have a given right to time off over others!! I have children and I’m working 23,24,27,30 and 31st Dec.

@Nogaxeh thats very community minded of you and I read the other thread and ultimately if someone has young children and no childcare then I don’t know what they’re supposed to do really- either her or her DH is going to have to not turn up at work!

Why? Are people without children less deserving of Christmas with their families?

I dunno. I just kinda feel that children are, even in a small way, a collective responsibility for society as a whole. "It takes a village to raise a child," sort of thing. That's why we have things like social services and state-funded education.

Working over Christmas doesn't seem like that big a deal as something to help out those with children.

Well, that's a bit mean and uncaring! Obviously, there are situations that are unavoidable. Would you say 'not my problem' if it were a relatives last Christmas?

I didn't see the other post, but I think most people would be able to find chilcare for a date in two months time, or not be completely devoid of friends, family or a local babysitter, so I don't think this would be a typical problem.

Good for you. Why do you think everyone else should be expected to though?