Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Christmas leave priority

1000 replies

putmeonthebackburner · 23/09/2026 14:23

We have had an email today stating that Christmas leave will be prioritised in the following way:

  1. people with children under 7
  2. people with grandchildren under 7
  3. people with children over 7
  4. people with grandchildren over 7
  5. everyone else

AIBU to think this is utterly ridiculous? I am my parents’ child, I would like to see them over Christmas. We only get the bank holiday days off and work on Christmas Eve so if I don’t get leave I won’t see family until the 26th.

It should be first come first served

OP posts:
NotABlessedFruit · 24/09/2026 10:35

So.... Anyone expects their neighbours to sort childcare issues for them? Because they are actually closer than mkst colleagues usually....

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 10:35

putmeonthebackburner · 24/09/2026 10:24

Well if you’re so dead against child free people of course you wouldn’t think the needs are equal

Making things up out of nowhere isn't the same thing as reasoned argument.

SandyHappyPerson · 24/09/2026 10:35

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:30

Go to childcare I imagine that shock horror won't be open on Christmas Day.

OP and none of the people working there, work Christmas day. They will all break up on the 24th and go back on the 29th. They already get 4 days off which covers the Christmas festivities, so why should the parents amongst them get automatic preferential leave the rest of the days too?

Differentforgirls · 24/09/2026 10:33

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:30

Go to childcare I imagine that shock horror won't be open on Christmas Day.

Which is a public holiday...

RowsOfFlowers · 24/09/2026 10:32

ExpectMore · 24/09/2026 10:00

No.

Going to band camp is different to needing the time off to care for children.

Going to band camp is different to needing the time off to spend last Christmas with parent (however tough that is. Some seem to imply it not being “joyous” means they can avoid it which is horrid)

It’s not. Also, I’d like to sensitively remind you that some people cannot have children.

WildlyInappropriate · 24/09/2026 10:30

As a childless woman who has been working for 35 years, this plan can get in the fucking sea.

I have covered every single summer holiday and Easter holiday in that time, never any leave from mid-July to mid-September, never taking advantage of the two Easter BHs to get a longer holiday from my leave allowance, unlike all the parents, for whom the team budges up all the time. But I will have my 2 weeks at Christmas every year, or fight anyone who tries to tell me otherwise. I have a houseful of elderly relatives each Christmas, giving them a rare treat of company and some fun, for at least one of whom this year is likely to be their last, and I’ll be damned if I’m giving that up so that the parents in the team can spend another day watching a couple of moody teens scrolling through their phones and ignoring the festivities.

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:30

Differentforgirls · 24/09/2026 10:27

What do they do for the rest of the year?

Go to childcare I imagine that shock horror won't be open on Christmas Day.

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:29

SandyHappyPerson · 24/09/2026 10:19

While I understand your point, I think the carers leave is a bit of a red herring, caring for a terminally ill relative is protected under disability discrimination, your employer cannot say no without getting themselves in hot water, so you will get automatic priority backed by law.

OPs employer are just choosing a group to give priority to, which isn't a protected characteristic.. which is why it is so unfair to the people not in that group.

This isn't totally true. An employer has to legally offer you a week of unpaid carers leave. I have had employers that paid for this additional leave. It was a choice and one that wasn't legally mandated.

Protected groups are irrelevant to this. I'm not disabled myself and being a carer for a disabled person it isn't a protected characteristic.

Differentforgirls · 24/09/2026 10:27

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 10:19

Children need to have a caregiver with them when they cannot look after themselves. That's the need here.

What do they do for the rest of the year?

SandyHappyPerson · 24/09/2026 10:26

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 10:19

Children need to have a caregiver with them when they cannot look after themselves. That's the need here.

Of course the child has a need, but it doesn't have to be the parent, so that would only apply to situations where there is no alternative, or childcare provision available, like bank holidays (including Christmas day).. none of which OP works anyway, so it's moot.

Most cases, as shown here are parents WANTING to be at home with their children, and think that should take priority over anyone else, they call it a need, but really it is a want.

daffodilandtulip · 24/09/2026 10:24

When I did rotas for a ward, I would post a blank one on the wall in September and ask people to fill in their preferences. This went with a warning that I would change to cover skills and numbers where needed, and any gaps would be based on previous years to make it fair. It generally worked out well.

putmeonthebackburner · 24/09/2026 10:24

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 09:50

No, we definitely don't agree 🤣

Their needs are not equal, no.

Well if you’re so dead against child free people of course you wouldn’t think the needs are equal

OP posts:
ExpressCheckout · 24/09/2026 10:24

Quite a few PPs seem to be suggesting that raising kids is a societal responsibility. Thing is, it used to be. The expression "it takes a village to raise a child", meant that child-rearing needed a variety of people and approaches and the whole community would offer something.

This meant that children witnessed and heard good and bad. Those of us who are old enough remember the old lady who'd give them sweets without parental censure, or the crotchety old man who'd shout at you! So, we learned about 'community', 'risk', and different kinds of people. This was normal.

But in the last decade or two it's parents who've gaslit themselves into believing everyone outside their family is a threat, and anyone who intervenes in parenting is at risk of abuse or "offending" parents. Plenty of examples on MN of this, e.g. people moaning when 'strangers' have disciplined their child.

So, I'm afraid, modern parents have got what they wished for. They don't want other peoples' opinions. They only want support when it suits them and their aspirational 'parenting style', and not necessarily the needs of the child. Yet ironically, at the same time, many parents expect more and more from society.

Yes, yes, I know - 'stranger danger' etc. But the fact remains that a child is more likely to be killed, injured or subjected to physical or psychological abuse by someone in their family or close family network. A healthy, balanced child will have experience of everyone in their community, and will learn from this.

MajorProcrastination · 24/09/2026 10:21

Eek.

The priority thing is awful anyway but it's flawed too.

They're prioritising a granparent over a parent? Like an 8, 9, 10 year old is cool with not seeing a parent on Christmas day? Bloody hell.

My mum worked nights in care when my kids were little and the shifts just meant some years she got lucky and some years were sucky. But she'd never have used the grandchildren as a reason for taking the leave. Madness.

Also, I know this is Mumsnet and I am a Mum but why should people without children be shat upon in these situations? What if they want to go to stay with family at that time? What if their sibling is getting married over Christmas?

SandyHappyPerson · 24/09/2026 10:19

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:04

The carers leave is relevant because it is an example of an employee gaining an advantage over employees due to factors that aren't related to the employee themselves. Extra leave is something that most people want and is something that impacts everyone else who has to pickup the slack. Yet still as a society we generally understand that granting an employee this extra leave isn't indicating they're a more important person or giving them an unfair advantage, it's just an acknowledgement of responsibilities and dependents they have outside of work. Prioritising parents at Christmas is exactly the same. Superficially it's unfair but the driver isn't the employee but the responsibilities and dependents of the employee.

Nobody is proposing anything about annual leave in school holidays. I do think though that if child free people are desperate to slug it out to go on holiday in the school holidays and this blocks a parent from being able to go then schools shouldn't be able to fine parents for taking term time holidays.

Edited

While I understand your point, I think the carers leave is a bit of a red herring, caring for a terminally ill relative is protected under disability discrimination, your employer cannot say no without getting themselves in hot water, so you will get automatic priority backed by law.

OPs employer are just choosing a group to give priority to, which isn't a protected characteristic.. which is why it is so unfair to the people not in that group.

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 10:19

SandyHappyPerson · 24/09/2026 10:12

Saying parents needs are not equal to child free people's needs, doesn't mean one is more valid than the other, it just means they are different, which is exactly what that poster said.. you are choosing to be offended for no reason.

I actually think calling them needs is bullshit anyway, no one NEEDS to be hone with their children at Christmas, no one NEEDS to visit their relatives at Christmas, they WANT to, and EVERYONE should have the opportunity to have annual leave and spend it how they want to, calling your wants "needs" to somehow elevate you up the priority list just highlights how selfish and entitled some people are IMO.

They've already got the 25-28th off anyway! NO ONE there is working Christmas day, Boxing day, or the Sunday and Monday, so giving parents the priority over the rest of the days seems ridiculous and unnecessary.

Children need to have a caregiver with them when they cannot look after themselves. That's the need here.

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 10:16

Colourfulfairylights · 24/09/2026 09:59

I agree it would be interesting to see it tested.

I posted earlier about objective justification https://www.acas.org.uk/employer-decision-protected-characteristic/objective-justification

Again, willing to be corrected but objective justification examples are in the above link and are along the lines of "discrimination was necessary to avoid a H&S issue".

I really can't see how allowing parents Christmas with their children is an objective justification to potentially discriminate against others. It doesn't actually matter to the business where their employees spend Christmas, it's nothing to do with the business so it would be difficult for them to rely on that needing to happen.

If the business had retention issues and it would close without trying to appease parents and grandparents possibly is the only thing I can think of, but even then it would have to show that retention issues was only amongst parents /grand parents.

I'm not saying a claim would definitely be successful but I do know, it would be a risky policy because of all the potential claims and complaints it could bring.

Yes, it would have to be the retention/turnover issue wouldn't it - i.e. allowing parents to stay in work, or maybe addressing persistent abuse of sick leave or similar. Maybe it would be more legally defensible to provide childcare on site 😆 Changes in legislation would be the most straightforward way. Interesting though.

SaltyandSweet · 24/09/2026 10:15

Totally gobsmacked at this thread and how crazy so many posters sound, tying themselves into knots trying to justify blatant discrimination against childfree people. I bet these same people will be changing the goal posts to still get their way once their kids are older and the "think of the little ones!" drama doesn't quite work anymore. I say this as a mum to two. Of course I want to spend Christmas with my children. However, I also value fairness - I expect my colleagues and I to be treated fairly in all aspects. Some of the deranged parents on here really need to start thinking of more than themselves and their own.

OP, any chance of raising your concerns/lodging a complaint/asking for a sit down about the (blatant) unfairness of this policy?

SandyHappyPerson · 24/09/2026 10:12

BishBashBoshDumpling · 24/09/2026 09:55

There we have it.

Childfree people's needs are less valid.

You sound gross

Saying parents needs are not equal to child free people's needs, doesn't mean one is more valid than the other, it just means they are different, which is exactly what that poster said.. you are choosing to be offended for no reason.

I actually think calling them needs is bullshit anyway, no one NEEDS to be hone with their children at Christmas, no one NEEDS to visit their relatives at Christmas, they WANT to, and EVERYONE should have the opportunity to have annual leave and spend it how they want to, calling your wants "needs" to somehow elevate you up the priority list just highlights how selfish and entitled some people are IMO.

They've already got the 25-28th off anyway! NO ONE there is working Christmas day, Boxing day, or the Sunday and Monday, so giving parents the priority over the rest of the days seems ridiculous and unnecessary.

BishBashBoshDumpling · 24/09/2026 10:07

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:04

The carers leave is relevant because it is an example of an employee gaining an advantage over employees due to factors that aren't related to the employee themselves. Extra leave is something that most people want and is something that impacts everyone else who has to pickup the slack. Yet still as a society we generally understand that granting an employee this extra leave isn't indicating they're a more important person or giving them an unfair advantage, it's just an acknowledgement of responsibilities and dependents they have outside of work. Prioritising parents at Christmas is exactly the same. Superficially it's unfair but the driver isn't the employee but the responsibilities and dependents of the employee.

Nobody is proposing anything about annual leave in school holidays. I do think though that if child free people are desperate to slug it out to go on holiday in the school holidays and this blocks a parent from being able to go then schools shouldn't be able to fine parents for taking term time holidays.

Edited

I absolutely agree with you on your last point! 100%

Thechickenhasmypillow · 24/09/2026 10:04

Either way, if I am friends with you at work, I'll cover you.

If you're some random, whining that you want Christmas off again because it's magic for the kids, and you think i should cover you?.
No. Complete sentence. Your problem sweetie.
If it's due to religion? Also no.
Not. My. Fucking. Problem.
And my phone will be off.

Death, serious illness or accident? Yes. I'll be in like a shot. Because I'm not a complete monster 😂

Itchthescratch · 24/09/2026 10:04

BishBashBoshDumpling · 24/09/2026 09:59

Pardon me but you get annual leave whether you are a parent or not....

Your carers leave example is not relevant.

Unless you are proposing a change in the law where employees are given two different kind of annual leave? One kind which can be taken in school holidays (ALP) and another kind that cannot be taken in school holidays (ALNP)

Childfree/less people are only given the ALNP kind.....

Wait I'm giving the nutters ideas 🤣

In any case this is not how it is and annual leave is annual leave. Carers leave is carers leave.

The carers leave is relevant because it is an example of an employee gaining an advantage over employees due to factors that aren't related to the employee themselves. Extra leave is something that most people want and is something that impacts everyone else who has to pickup the slack. Yet still as a society we generally understand that granting an employee this extra leave isn't indicating they're a more important person or giving them an unfair advantage, it's just an acknowledgement of responsibilities and dependents they have outside of work. Prioritising parents at Christmas is exactly the same. Superficially it's unfair but the driver isn't the employee but the responsibilities and dependents of the employee.

Nobody is proposing anything about annual leave in school holidays. I do think though that if child free people are desperate to slug it out to go on holiday in the school holidays and this blocks a parent from being able to go then schools shouldn't be able to fine parents for taking term time holidays.

takealettermsjones · 24/09/2026 10:04

BishBashBoshDumpling · 24/09/2026 10:00

So if they are just as valid why are they not "allowed" the same chance at annual leave dates?

Fun fact: if you call people gross, they might lose all interest in engaging with you.

BishBashBoshDumpling · 24/09/2026 10:02

ExpectMore · 24/09/2026 10:00

No.

Going to band camp is different to needing the time off to care for children.

Going to band camp is different to needing the time off to spend last Christmas with parent (however tough that is. Some seem to imply it not being “joyous” means they can avoid it which is horrid)

In your opinion

(ps the fourse is not held iver Christmas because that would a massive mistake and be a sure way to get ZERO attendance. So that comparison is.... weird)

ExpectMore · 24/09/2026 10:00

BishBashBoshDumpling · 24/09/2026 09:49

Different BUT EQUAL needs.

So we agree?

No.

Going to band camp is different to needing the time off to care for children.

Going to band camp is different to needing the time off to spend last Christmas with parent (however tough that is. Some seem to imply it not being “joyous” means they can avoid it which is horrid)

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.