"She's got the weekends off because she's a mum"

[TicTicBOOM]

I don't know if I'm being unreasonable, genuinely.

Recently DH started a new job within the company, and until now his rota has been up in the air. He took it upon himself to look at the available rotas to find a gap where he could fit in and he noticed there was an opportunity for him to work monday - friday with fixed weekends off (something that is quite rare in his line of work) and brought this up with his boss. Boss agreed that it looked like he would be able to have this shift, there was fixed cover for the weekends he'd have off, and it suited the company very well for him to do this. Boss happy, DH over the moon, all good.

DH was told he'd have his rota by the end of December with a view to start it in January.

A couple of weeks ago new colleague transferred over and is being trained to do the same job as DH. They got chatting the other day, and she mentioned how she'd been told she can have a monday - friday shift. DH spoke to his boss about this and apparently yes, she's been given the shift instead of DH, last minute decision - he just hadn't been notified yet.

When he asked why she'd been given it over him, he was told it is because 'she's a mum, we tend to give the weekends to women with children where available'

Now, I know, being a mother myself that weekends with my children mean a lot. But they mean an equally great deal to my husband.

Am I being unreasonable in thinking this is unfair on DH, and that he's basically been denied something he was told he could have, just because he's a man? Or is what they've done fair for reasons I'm not understanding?

Thanks Nick.

Andrew, Jill2015 isn't saying that, she's quoting a PP in shock!

Not RTFT

Of course this is bang out of order, people working jobs with shift patterns should get them shared around on an equal basis unless of course they agree amongst themselves that they are happy for it to work a different way.

The only thing I can imagine that would make this understandable is if her working 9-5 was what they agreed with her in order to get her to join the team.

Incidentally I think the parents thing is irrelevant too. People without children like their weekends as well. Some people without children have important things that do at weekends. With shiftwork quite frankly it's difficult / not great for lots of people and hence it should just be shared around unless there is explicit agreement for it to differ.

Sorry, my mistake!

I really hate it when people say 'well before I had children I always happily facilitated parents at Christmas time, weekends, .....'. as if non parents are one homogenous bunch who all have the same needs (or lack of needs in this case).

Well apparently I am being unreasonable

I'm not talking about holidays, just shift patterns. It makes sense to me. My employer does facilitate this because I stated the hours I was available when I started work and they only give me shifts during these times. I physically can't work at other times - it would necessitate me or DH bringing DS to work, one of us randomly dropping out in the middle of the day (super helpful I'm sure) or asking around friends to provide childcare which isn't their responsibility. Or paying for childcare at all times just in case, which is totally nuts. Ad hoc childcare isn't, generally, a thing. If you're saying employers shouldn't grant more leniency in this case (where they can) then you're basically excluding parents from a hell of a lot of jobs, careers and industries.

And I SAID not just parents but anybody with unshiftable commitments. I'm using "parents" because it's the experience I have and I assumed most would be able to relate, it doesn't just mean parents.

I think a little bit of kindness and consideration makes everything run more smoothly.

I don't think the OP's situation is fair going by the information we have - her DH asked first and they are both parents.

Yes a bit of kindness and consideration in the workplace is very desirable. eg when a colleague's husband recently had open heart surgery everyone bent over backwards to facilitate her and she was very appreciative. Another colleague recently lost a family member to an untimely death and again people did what they could to smooth the path for her.
It's deciding that a particular 'category' of worker is going to take precedence of everyone outside of that category that is utterly wrong.

Andrew, Jill2015 isn't saying that, she's quoting a PP in shock!

Thank you PoroitsMoustache

Thank you Andrew for the apology also.

Then I worded my post badly

The problem is though poirot that if parents are always given priority, it is falling to their colleagues essentially to facilitate childcare, which is not their responsibility either. Also, some people don't work in an environment where they want to reveal personal details so that someone can rate their external commitments in terms of worthiness, and nor should they have to. No one should be any more entitled than anyone else to flexible working IMO.

We've had this sort of thing recently. Dh asked for flexitime and one day a week working from home. He was told no because noone else does.. er yes they do.... oh no that's different because they're mums! Dh has argued and reluctantly he has been allowed but on a trial and his boss is doing all he can to be obstructive and make excuses for dh to be in work on his home days grrrr. We'll play the game until the end of the trial but then this nonsense needs to stop.

Would you ask your colleagues, no matter how much you knew and trusted them, to look after your children while you do the night or weekend duty?

No?

Then don't ask them to do the night or weekend duty while you o look after your children!

Also mil gets infuriated as fil cannot take holiday during school holidays as he doesn't have young children. However, mil is a teacher. They rarely get holiday together.

M0therofdragons another nasty rule. I remember in single days having to struggle for a week's leave in August (applied in early January) to go to the Three Choirs Festival. Somehow my wish to spend my holiday was there was less important than my colleagues' wish to travel with children. Being a bolshie bugger when my back is up, I won.

YANBU to be mad about the situation (I am half way through reading as I write). However, I don't think this should be about 'who is more important: parents or none parents'.

It has been noted that perhaps she accepted the role on the understanding she was doing mon - fri for whatever reason. If she took it on this understanding, then it should be honoured. If she took it then requested the hours, then it is more questionable.

Does she have priority? Under 'Equal' rights, yes, because women are more equal than men! Should she have priority? Perhaps not.

He needs to get to the bottom of it. If the bottom line is that 'she is a mum' he needs to rock the boat so all the imbeciles fall out. If it is more complex than that, then you need to take appropriate action, even if that is none.

I don't understand, how can she have more equal rights, aren't they like, equal?!!

"Does she have priority? Under 'Equal' rights, yes, because women are more equal than men! . "

This is an incorrect interpretation of uk law...

I am actually surprised that anyone can request the mon-fri shift as presumably most would prefer this (unless it's otherwise adjusted eg paid less than a weekend working role)

Well he spoke to his boss again today and told him he's very unhappy. Boss was apparently understanding, but in a 'well my hands are tied' sort of way. He asked for clarification on the reason his promised shift got given away and he didn't repeat the 'mum' comment.

Just made noises about how different circumstances are taken into consideration and that it's not easy to come to these decisions, that 'he can't please everyone at once'. Obviously didn't elaborate on the particular circumstances that led him to take the shift away and give it to someone else.

So he's taking it to his union representative, emails printed off in hand, tomorrow.

We'll see what happens.

DH is part of a smallish team of colleagues who have very specific jobs, quite apart from the rest of the company, and they all work around one small rota between them.

Just so happens that the colleague who is DH's cover (can do his job if DH isn't there) has a fixed rota with set days off in the week, which means he's always at work on the weekends to cover DH's weekends off. I don't know if that made any sense, it's difficult to explain.

Also, some people don't work in an environment where they want to reveal personal details so that someone can rate their external commitments in terms of worthiness,

I had to do EXACTLY this when i was in retail work. Years ago i was on the contraceptive injection. I had to have this done at a certain time when it was due. I had an employer.
a. ask to know why i needed an appointment at the surgery and when i said why moaned why i couldnt be flexible about it so i had to explain it was due when it was due.
There were already 2 ppl off on maternity leave thats how thick this manager was. She okayed the appointment then tried to go back on it on the day when another staff member didnt come in.
The surgery was only a 2 min walk up the road to get jabbed then i would come straight back. Yet there was all this palava over it.

However when another staff members husband was stuck in the middle of sainsburys and couldnt fold up their sons buggy she was allowed to race off with no notice. Seems there was a right to be pregnant and have babies working for this company but no right not to be.

As for having commitments to care for an older ill or disabled family member there were intimations that the person in question was a malingerer. No such accusation was levelled at the ill child of another staff member though.
I remember sarcastically asking at what age did genuine illness stop and "malingering" begin.

These sorts of divisions cause major resentment in the workplace!

I hope they can get somewhere and your DH be given his weekends back. Giving weekends off to a female employee over a male just because she's female (which sounds like it's the case here) is definitely not ok.

Good luck to your husband. I hope he fights this all the way - and wins.

OP, YANBU and I hope that your husband gets this resolved, in a fair way.

I don't think people with or without children, male or female should get preferential treatment in a job where two people are paid the same.