Page 4 | To think colleague is pushing it a bit with this excuse!

butterytoastandmarmalade · 09/10/2014 10:16

I think in cases like that it's best to be specific rather than general - 'I'm so sorry I'm late, our ten year old has an ongoing health condition and we have to stay up with them until all hours," would almost certainly elicit kindness from most people.

"Sorry I'm late, I've got kids!" just doesn't quite wash it in itself, I don't think. I don't live with them so obviously I don't know the intricate details and to my knowledge none have additional needs of any sort but 'kids' on their own doesn't offer a satisfactory explanation for persistent lateness.

Perfectlypurple · 09/10/2014 13:22

If you work you are in a contract with your employers where they pay you for a certain amount of hours that you are there doing the work they pay you for. If you are persistently late you are in breach of that contract. I am sure if your employer started paying you less you would be screaming about them breaching the contract.

I mean the general you not one person in particular

MexicanSpringtime · 09/10/2014 13:32

FrontForward I agree, I was also a single parent. She does sound more like a slacker.

ouryve · 09/10/2014 13:40

She was being ridiculous criticising her boss for not having kids.

However (as you have gradually revealed) she does have kids staying with her for 3 days a week and no one can assume, without knowing the kids, that they are settled and happy with the whole situation. 5yo may not sleep very well away from her bed at her mother's. For all you know, she may have issues arising from the break up of her parents' marriage and getting to know and trust a step parent, which mean that she's upset for a lot of the night. The 14yo wouldn't necessary be immune to that, but may express it by stomping around the house until 2am, then being impossible to wake up and organise for school in the morning.

Plainly, the woman concerned needs a serious (and private) conversation with her boss, but you can't dismiss her as not having problems on days when the stepkids are staying over just because she doesn't have a newborn.

Original poster

butterytoastandmarmalade · 09/10/2014 13:43

Our - specifics are better then like I say. If the youngest isn't sleeping well when she's not at her dad's then 'we have had a really bad night because S kept us up' works much better than the generic 'kids'!

OP posts:

Original poster

butterytoastandmarmalade · 09/10/2014 13:43

Our - specifics are better then like I say. If the youngest isn't sleeping well when she's not at her dad's then 'we have had a really bad night because S kept us up' works much better than the generic 'kids'!

OP posts:

Roussette · 09/10/2014 13:50

I agree with you OP. Before I had kids, I got a job in a company where me and one other girl ran a big department, both equal. It was only after I joined that I was told I could never have even a day off in school holidays as she took all of them off and I had to double my workload during that time and not take any time off as she had 2 kids. (This was a long time ago BTW, employment laws were different.) Every morning she was late "because of the kids" or left early because of them. She was a strong character and I basically picked up all her slack and left because of this after trying to complain/explain how I felt but I had no recourse because I didn't have kids and talking about how unfair it was that I had to stand in for her in the morning because she was late as the kids were playing up would be derogatory. My god I resented it big time.

Fast forward and I had my brood. I was rarely if ever late for work because of them, I just always factored extra time in for eventualities. So I do get where you're coming from.

Coumarin · 09/10/2014 14:01

Some really nasty replies on this thread. You clearly hit a nerve with some posters.

YANBU

It isn't acceptable to be consistently late because you have children. It just isn't and those of you who think it is might want to have an open and frank conversation with your managers, just to check they are in agreement with you.

Whether a colleague has children or otherwise has no relevance to someone being reprimanded for lateness. The woman was incredibly unreasonable to say that and only did so because she knows she's in the wrong.

So sorry for your loss Buttery I really hope the particularly thoughtless comments here haven't had any effect on you.

DejaVuAllOverAgain · 09/10/2014 14:16

OP YANBU

We can all be late occasionally for one reason or another but persistent lateness is not on especially when it impacts on your colleagues.

Mrsstarlord · 09/10/2014 14:29

You are entirely entitled to your own opinion OP, however

a) they aren't 'hers', they are stepchildren - she lives with their parent.

That ^ is a bitchy thing to say. Just because she didn't give birth to the kids it doesn't mean that she doesn't love them and care for them like her own. The rest of it - 'whatever' but IMHO, that one sentence has made me far less sympathetic to your view.

OfaFrenchMind · 09/10/2014 14:48

OP, YANBU, and I really respect your calm when responding to some posters. They are trying to justify using a lame excuse that should work only for exceptional events, and personnaly attacking you.
Yes, I would be annoyed by a colleague citing this "she obviously do not have children!" all the time. Ho sancti-step-Mommy of her!

JustShakeitoff · 09/10/2014 16:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Mrsstarlord · 09/10/2014 17:23

JustShake...

No idea what the law says tbh but if a child is living with a step parent I'd be astounded if that step parent didn't engage in all aspects of parenting that child.

My DSD lived with us when she was kicked out of her mum's house for not behaving in the way she was expected to, as far as we are both concerned she is my daughter and I did everything that a mum would do. Including parents evenings, looking after her when ill and driving around the streets at night looking for her if needed. My work responded in exactly the same way whether she was my birth child or step child and if they hadn't I would have been incredibly pissed off.

My point, however isn't what the law says but that the OP feels it is OK to disregard and disrespect this woman's role in the kid's lives and therefore her views but is not happy that this woman feels that someone without kids somehow has a less valid opinion.

butterytoastandmarmalade · 09/10/2014 17:36

In fairness shake that wasn't my main point really. I just found it odd that 'she doesn't have kids' was being used against the supervisor when technically (lawfully) nor does colleague. Both parents still alive and have joint custody, but I take your point.

Plus, she isn't married to the children's parent which I think may make a difference lawfully. My dad had two partners (mum died when I was little) and they certainly didn't take a parenting role in my life!

JustShakeitoff · 09/10/2014 17:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BackforGood · 09/10/2014 18:50

I think you've got a much more negative response than you would have, OP, had you put much more of the drip fed information, into the OP.

Started by saying - a colleague is regularly 30 - 40 mins late for work, which means the staff she is taking over from can't go home until she gets there.
She has a SAHP, and 3 dc who are aged 15, 11, and 5 (I think).
She's had her wrist slapped by her manager and is now being really p'd off the manager doesn't understand because she doesn't have kids herself.

It's very different from what you started with, and by then, people were already cross, and you were forced into being a bit defensive

FWIW - No. YANBU, and it's not right that she's regularly late for work, let alone late by that much time and it means others are then late leaving work.
But then, I hate lateness on a regular basis (understand anyone can have the odd nightmare).

Ilovenicesoap · 09/10/2014 19:40

She keeps her colleagues behind -30-40 minutes regularily because" she has kids"
Totally unreasonable -she would have been through the disciplinary process her and been sacked by now.
Her colleagues probably also have DC -its not acceptable.

MexicanSpringtime · 11/10/2014 05:19

It's very different from what you started with, and by then, people were already cross, and you were forced into being a bit defensive

Agree, though I suppose there is an art to writing, but certainly holding her colleagues up by 30-40 minutes is thoroughly inconsiderate and abusive.

dsteinway · 11/10/2014 05:27

yanbu

I have kids and hate using them as an excuse for being late or having to leave early etc., but sometimes it is true. But if it is consistent you have to wonder...

peasandlove · 11/10/2014 05:54

posting in aibu is pretty much a given that the OP is going to get slated. Using the kids as an excuse for being late is ok once or twice but not all the time. Plenty of parents make it to work on time (with a lot of shouting in the morning, but they do)

PunkrockerGirl · 11/10/2014 16:35

You've had a thoroughly undeserved pasting on here, OP.
Having children is not an excuse for persistent lateness. And this colleague is not struggling on her own ffs, there's a sahp.
If she can't stick to her contracted hours, maybe she should consider a job with more flexible working hours. Does she make up for her lateness by working over at lunch time or home time?

I worked 12 hour night shifts for years. It's horrible when the early shift arrive late. You've still got to hand over the patients, get changed and travel home. Hopefully in time to see the dc before they go to school. I remember driving home in tears a few time because certain persistent latecomers meant I wouldn't get home in time to see the dc before school.

Trills · 11/10/2014 16:39

Your colleague is being unreasonable.

Whether your colleague has children or not is irrelevant to the issue of her reasonableness.

Saying "supervisor doesn't understand because she doesn't have kids" is a silly and unreasonable thing to say.

Trills · 11/10/2014 16:41

Unfortunately you seemed to make the issue be about whether stepchildren who stay over count as "having kids", when it shouldn't be the issue at all.

(IMO any children who are staying in your house are equally capable of making you tired or late or stressed, no matter who they "belong" to)