Time off work at Christmas

[Weeantwee]

DH has had to work every Christmas Eve and Boxing day for the past 6 years (he works in retail) and on most of these occasions he has either been happy to do so (he's a 'yes' person) or been told that there is no one else and he has to work.

This year we want to spend Christmas with my family who live nearly 300 miles away. DH has never spent Christmas away from his family and this is the first Christmas since we've been married. But he has been told yet again that he needs to work. This time the reason he has been given, by the new boss is 'priority has to be given to students whose family homes are far away and staff who have children.'

AIBU to think that DH is being unfairly treated because he is a full time employee and hasn't impregnated his wife yet?!

Maybe that's going a bit far, but I'm upset that as our first Christmas as a married couple I'm having to choose between staying with DH or going down to my mum who I don't see often and who also turns 60 on Boxing day :(

That's very true YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime

This comes down to DH's employer not having a very fair policy in place and we will just have work out what to do. He would love not to have to work there but with the way things are there is little choice so he's just having to make the most of it.

One day in the future perhaps the British public will not feel the need to do DIY over the festive period hint to the shop in question.

I still disagree with the statement people are making that Christmas is just for children though.

"a trap door to a pit with sharks with lasers on their heads."

Now that would get rid of vexatious claims sharpish!

I absolutely DETEST the 'well, you don't have kids so why would Christmas matter to you?' attitude. If being a parent isn't something acceptable to take into account when considering someone for a job (and as this is illegal I'm guessing it's unacceptable), no way should it be taken into consideration for things like working Christmas. Parents (and I am one!) get to put in flexible working requests for things like shift patterns, working hours etc, and I think that is fair consideration as otherwise some parents simply wouldn't be able to work at all, but things like the OP's situation really piss me off. If you take a job knowing that you may miss some/all of a family Christmas because of the it, you should suck it up when it's your 'turn'.

Many millenia ago I worked for the NHS pre DC's. On my ward the parents always seemed to have first dibs on school holidays, however my DH was a teacher and so we ended up never able to have any time off together. We squeezed in one proper holiday in 2 years.

But parents may also have caring responsibility for elderly parents too!

At least your DH gets Christmas Day off. Plenty don't. Medical staff and ancillary workers, police, fire, ambulance, AA/breakdown, prison officers etc. People like social workers, utilities/pipeline engineers,highway maintenance, duty solicitors etc are working and many others are on standby rota and have to be in their own area and sober.

Bearing in mind that a rota can sometimes mean a number of Christmases worked before you get one off, what do you want think a "fair" policy would look like?

You need to also bear in mind the fact that "parents" includes single parents.

I live in the US, and for more than fifteen years, I've had to work on Christmas. Usually, I'm out of town in a hotel, even. This is across three employers. In each instance, priority has been given to families with children. My elderly parents would love to have me home for the holidays, but it isn't going to happen this year, either. I am the first one up and willing to cover for a colleague when their kids are sick, or they want to attend school functions during working hours, but I admit I resent the hell out of the holiday policy.

It is unfair, but unfortunately that is the industry, and the attitude. Tbh, before I had children I was very happy to work over Christmas, as getting home in the evening I could still have quality time with my adult family. Now ds is here if I work that day I won't be home til pay bedtime, and that does make me sad. My boss thinks very much like your dh's one, and believes those with kids get priority, then everyone else gets leave on a first come first serve basis. It's sad that you won't get the whole day together. Dh family moved Xmas a week early to accommodate our work schedules, so we always get some quality family 'xmas' time, even if it's not on the 25th.

Christmas dh alternates with all the other staff, none of whom have young children. For other holidays he tends to get preference because of school holidays, but the other staff seem happy with that as they get cheaper summer holidays outside school holidays.

Maybe suggest that the manager constructs a fairer policy - either if you get Christmas you don't have new year, first year of employment you don't get a choice, other years you alternate depending on what happened last year.

Having said that we do shift the actual day if it suits us and often have two or three Christmas days - can't loose with that policy.

But parents may also have caring responsibility for elderly parents too! but is any of it anyone else's concern?

At least your DH gets Christmas Day off. yes but we can never have a term time holiday - even pre/post DC. but he knew this when he signed up for the job so it is not a problem

what do you want think a "fair" policy would look like? depends on the industry. my company uses first come first served and it works for us but it would not work for all.

single parents without family I would have the most sympathy for.

Very unfair

Single people have families and lives too

Everyone is paid to do a job and should be treated fairly.

I work in retail. No one is allowed holidays in December (before Christmas) or at Easter. It's company policy. Students either move stores for the holidays or they have to work.

We've just been told we will be opening Boxing Day and New Years Day. Voluntary this year but probably mandatory from next year.

The reason I raise the issue of parents is simply because others have mentioned it. No doubt your view would be endorsed by OP's DH's manager.

I think practical problems (e.g. no childcare) generate a lot more support from coworkers and management than a desire to be prioritised for Christmas.

What would happen at the OP's DH's company if every member of the workforce had children?

Those people claiming that they weren't upset by their parents working over Christmas, or that they're going to miss their child's Christmas because of work and using this as a reason why the OP and her DH should suck it up: doesn't that actually support the argument that it wouldn't be the end of the world for the workers with children to do the odd Christmas shift? If it was okay for you / your parents to work Christmas, why can't it be okay for her DH's colleagues to do so? Presumably they knew what they were "signing up to" when they took a retail job too, and should be equally grateful - if not more so, given they have young mouths to feed in addition to their own - to have a secure job and so should be prepared to take their turn?

OP, you have my sympathies. I HATE unfair policies like this. In all the teams I have managed, the policy is: everyone puts forward their preference for holiday over Christmas and New Year, the staffing levels are considered in the round and as many requests as possible are granted. Where there are days that don't have sufficient cover, compromises are made - so someone who wanted four days off might be granted three and have to work one. The previous years' holiday records would be referred to so that any members of staff who had consistently been granted the maximum or premium days off in previous years would be the first to be asked to compromise this time, on the basis they've had a good run at getting their first preference granted. Anyone who voluntarily offers to work to let someone else have the time off automatically gets first preference the following year, and anyone who was asked and agreed to compromise gets second preference. If someone who had previously had a lot of preferred holiday granted asked for the time off again for a reason such as visiting family overseas or a milestone celebration, it would probably be granted but on the condition they agreed to work at least a proportion the following Christmas. All decisions, swaps, compromises, conditions etc are recorded on that year's overall Christmas leave sheet.

Much fairer all round, everyone knows the score and I've found that usually, the team are more inclined to help each other out and I rarely have to step in to resolve loggerhead-type holiday disputes.

At my last work place there was a rota in place for holiday cover and it was very fair and worked well.

My current place has compulsory shut down over xmas so I am off from the 20th of Dec to the 5th of Jan, which is in addition to my annual leave.

I would suggest that he changes job to an educational establishment becauseof the compulsory xmas closure! He doesnt have to be a teacher.

I'm not sure why flowery has been held up as giving such great advice when some of it is just plain wrong. Of course it is illegal to give some people 'perks'. The equality act levels out the inequalities, it's not a reward for being disabled or pregnant or whatever. I get a swishy chair at work, not because it's a 'perk' but because my employer has a legal obligation to make reasonable adjustments to my working environment to ensure I don't have excessive pain due to sitting in a crappy chair.

Select I agree that is generally the best approach, but in retail, Christmas and Bank holidays are particularly high pressure times. Employers are more likely to use discretion - and many workers' contracts will state that it is expected.

I utterly admire flowery and hermioneweasley for their staying power on this - their advice is always spot-on and yet given in the face of opposition from the "Internet expert". That must be very frustrating but they are both a voice of reason and expertise.

One thing that might help in this or similar situations is to ask for a statement in writing on what an employer's approach is. When you have it, if you don't like it, then you can always leave, and go and get another job with another organisation, whose policy you do like. If you can find one that suits, job done! If not, then it might be worth considering whether perhaps this approach is just fine.

But he's not working Christmas Day is he??!!

What about all the paramedics, doctors, nurses, fireman, etc etc who are working Christmas Day? Lots of those have families. You're not even missing out on the main event...

I think you're making a little bit of a fuss. Mind you. He's a grown man. He should be making the point himself!

candycoated - please read flowery's actual posts. She was explaining that contrary to "advice" being give on this thread, no unlawful discrimination is taking place in this case. It may be unfair, poor practice etc, but it is not unlawful and will not give rise to a successful claim at Employment
Tribunal.

The issue of chairs was raised in a rather extreme hypothetical question. Y another poster. Disability s a protected characteristic and of course a suitable chair may well be a reasonable adjustment.

It is absolutely not unlawful (again, the term is unlawful, not illegal) to give some people "perks" provided it is not based on having or not having a protected characteristic. Most companies give perks based on seniority. Others may give them based on performance. This is fine.

I hold Flowery In high esteem because

1. in all my years on MN I have never seen her give advice or opinion I disagree with (and I am an argumentative and uppity sod), and 2). I am in awe of the amount of time she gives up to help people on MN. I frequently read threads and think "CBA with that one", and there she is, patiently asking for more information, teasing out the salient facts and helping. For me, she is the best of MN.

I never said there was discrimination in this. Clearly you didn't read my post either. I am aware that you may get a 'perk' in the respect of performance. However, I'm sure you would agree that an employer wouldn't have a leg to stand on if s/he said; "I'm giving Bob 50 days extra paid leave and a pony because I like this hair". I still disagree with the way flowery worded some of what she said but she's clearly your friend, so there's no point discussing it further.

Candy, actually I disagree. If the reason for favouring Bob is genuinely his lovely hair, then I cannot think of what grounds I would have to complain, provided that nothing is being taken away from me, only additinonal being given to Bob. What case do you think a claimant would have?

Also, I woukdn't describe Flowery as a "friend". I have engaged in some of the same threads of her and respect her professional opinion. I know absolutely nothing else about her. I happen to agree with her advice and admire her generosity.

oceansurf yes I know he's not working Xmas day but working every day around it means that he can't travel to see my family unless he learns how to teleport! So I have to choose between being with DH or my mum on the day itself.

As for your statement on the various professions that sometimes have to work on Xmas day, you clearly didn't read my post where I stated that my job involves working on Xmas day sometimes. My colleagues and I take it turns and yes they all have children.

Yes but not all professions that involve working on Xmas day take turns. The ambulance service certainly doesn't, we can end up working many xmas days in succession so that argument doesn't really apply although I do understand your annoyance.

Ultimately Wee there's nothing you can do - it's up to your DH to make a case to his employer (if you can persuade him to).

I'm sure your mum will understand if he can't get time off and you choose to spend xmas day with him. She must be quite used to it if you sometimes have to work Christmas Day. At least she won't be on her own.