Part year (term time) working in the Civil Service

[Turquoisetamborine]

I just need a rant. I have a son who is now six. When he was four and about to start school, I applied to increase my working hours during term time so I could be off (unpaid) for six weeks of the school holidays. This has been available in the Civil Service for years.

I was turned down on the grounds that the office couldn't cope with anyone else being off during the school holidays. There are three other part year workers in the office, around 40 people work there in total. The three people who already have the right to work term time have children who are 19, 23 & 26. Therefore no need for childcare during the school holidays.

One of them has changed the weeks she is off to non-school holiday weeks. The other two have the full 13 weeks school holiday plus their other annual leave. They have the full six weeks summer break then tag a week annual leave onto either side of it. My boss would not challenge them to ask if they would give it up as it was now needed by staff who had small children.

My colleague who also could do with this privilege will pay £1800 which is more than she earns for childcare over the six weeks break. I luckily have family to help but would have just liked it so I could spend time with my son.

Every summer I can barely look at these women who had this privilege all the years their children were growing up. Because they take up so much of the leave allowance for the holidays, none of the four of us who have school age children can get a full week off so we just have the odd day here and there.

So AIBU to tell them when they "break up" tomorrow that I hope they choke on their celebratory drinks that I won't be attending tomorrow?

One of the women likes to have holidays with her sister who is a teacher and who will have to take her holidays outside term time.

If it's written into their contracts under the rule that once approved flexible working arrangements permanent there is nothing either you or management can do, especially as they are taking this as unpaid time off. However I don't see why you can't swap with the lady who's now taking term time off, and management can surely veto them tacking on annual leave to either side of the summer holidays, though I don't think that would help you much.

VivienneMary

something the union should be taking up

To the disadvantage of the people, probably members of the union too, who are hogging the weeks? I don't think so!

OP, I feel your pain! Some of the women on part-time term-time contracts in my office have kids older than me! (I'm 26).

In theory it's due to become a thing of the past as flexible work patterns will be for a defined period / reviewed after a set period of time...however we have people who want to up their hours but have been told they can't. Increasing peoples hours also increases the "head count" of the office...

Are you sure termtime isnt applied for annually, rather than it being a permanent change to contract? i have worked in public sector, and it was annual request for consideration. (Also, where I have worked termtime was open to all to apply - not just parents of children. that way it was equal0Check the policy

Surely by making it practically impossible for others to take their leave entitlement - that is creating a inequality for others and is potentially discriminatory against certain groups, eg parents of children. Perhaps check your equality legislation

In my office they don't do term time only contracts anymore but you can agree term time only hours like you negotiate part time hours so they aren't in concrete and can be reconsider with notice.

How do they get 6 weeks holiday too? Shouldn't it be pro rata like part time workers? If you're part time you get your percentage of annual leave not the whole lot and that's the same for part year workers.

Also CS.

I really think the issue here is that you cannot get more than a few days off at a time - that is a huge problem. Given there are 40 staff, it seems that there is something strange going on! Surely it can be organised so that everyone can get a week off?? I was in the civil service for 10 years, until last year, and never encountered that problem.

I was part time, and had planned on staying part time for ever tbh and wouldn't have appreciated feeling pressured to go full time again in the future if I was preventing others from being part time, so I can see their point. Remember, they are losing a lot of money working those hours, it isn't like they are just getting more holidays than you! That said, in their shoes I wouldn't really want to be off over the school holidays!

Irishooley I am public-sector and yes, you have to apply for this year by year. But it was not always so, and when it was changed people who already had it were "grandfathered" - not my choice of sexist verb, it's common usage - and could keep it. I don't think any of our "grandfathers" are still there and claiming it - a lot of people are only too glad not to holiday in August once they don't need to.

I work with a lady who works term time and her children are now grown up. She would happily swap to full time hours but to do so she'd have to change to current, significantly worse, terms and conditions.

Could there be a similar problem at your office?

It's disgusting OP. it should only be for people who need it presumably those with school age children and removed after this if there are others more in need.

They are also being very selfish as they could just go part time.

People like that ruin flexible working for everyone else.

These old contracts do not have to be reviewed annually. They can be kept forever, new contracts are reviewed annually.

When i asked the women to change their weeks we needed more staff so increasing hours wouldn't have been a problem. They would now have to change to a new less favourable contract so they now use that as their excuse but that wasn't the case two years ago. I was only asking them to move their weeks not to not have part year at all.

It just causes bad feeling in the office from those of us who actually have kids. I actually hate them right now.

But the person whose sister is a teacher has valid reasons also for wanting to protect her term time working status. If they would now have to change to less favourable contract conditions I can see their point.

I can see why you are angry but the system, not them, is at fault.

Here in Ireland the expression 'term time' has been abolished and it's been changed to the 'shorter working year contract'. The idea being that the need for an shorter working year agreement should not just be confined to women with young children as all employees should be equally entitled to avail of this opportunity.

However, it should be done on a rotational basis. But I don't think parents should take preference or managers should get into the business of deciding which employee is more 'deserving' of a couple of months off than another as that is always going to be subjective.

Would they move to the new T&Cs if they gave it up, in which case no one will give it up unless they really need the increased salary, due to the erosion of our T&Cs.

The only thing that seems odd is that PY workers are not normally included in the leave allocation for the time they are not there, so if its 25% leave year round, during their non working periods it will be 25% of the remaining staff so you should be able to get leave as its usually rounded up to whole FTE.

In my bit of the civil service the agreement/contract is reviewed annually, usually when we have to notify our working days for the next year (I do this every may which is the anniversary of when I started term time).
I have been asked previously if I can change some of my weeks and was told that some people who had children over a certain age were being told that they could no longer work term time. I don't know if it happened as they were not in my immediate office.

However some if these older children may have SN and be at college so still bound by term times

I think that people may be confused. Like the OP has said contract don't have to be changed annually. Those wanting flexible working may apply every year to ask girlfriend it if there request had been turned down.

In my part of the NHS I know of two people with a term time contracts, they're very rare, but when granted they are permanent.

It sounds pretty selfish of the other employees, but if their contracts do not impose any time/age limit it doesn't sound like anything management can do.

No nice of them though.

Are they near retirement?

That is MAD.

Also, surely if you don't have school age children you want to take your leave in May, June and early September, when travel is about a billion times cheaper and everywhere's emptier, not slap bang in peak season?

Yes you are being unreasonable.

If you have a contract that doesn't work well for you, it is up to you to try and negotiate a more favourable contract with your employer and, if you fail to manage to negotiate that, then to either suck it up or start looking around for a new job that offers more favourable terms and conditions.

It is totally unreasonable to expect someone else to give up their permanently contracted post with terms and conditions that suit them, accepting a differently contracted post with terms and conditions that don't suit them, just so you can have it.

How would you feel if another employee came along and said "I am only contracted for 10 hours a week and that doesn't give me enough money to live on. Turquoisetamborine has had a 20 hours per week contract for years, yet her financial needs are less than mine. I want her to give up that contract to me and accept a new reduced hour contact". (I said that very messily, but you get the idea).

Also, as Jbck said, Part Year workers are not normally included in the leave allocation for the time they are not there. Do you get any annual leave during the school holidays? If not, then that is possibly a point of negotiation, seeking 'your share' of available school holiday allocation.