Work being difficult about covering child illness

[Dontnic]

Help. Tell me I am not unreasonable. I am part time, earn a lot less than my DH and have a far junior job. We have 2 children at nursery at the moment and between them I have needed to take off 12 days since July when I went back to work (I work 3 days a week) to cover illness.

They both had chicken pox, which lasted over 5 of my working days. Also, they keep getting S&D that does the rounds in the nursery. This means if they get it on my 1st day of the week, they can't go back in at all that week due to the 48 hour rule.

DH has had some days off to cover illness, but it just doesn't make sense for him to take equal time off when he has targets to hit, meetings to attend for clients/prospects etc. If his job is affected we are financially buggered. So he does take time off but I do the lions share.

Work have now had enough and said that I can no longer take my holiday at last minute notice to cover child sickness and I have to take unpaid time off for dependants.

However, the BIG sticking point is that they deem a 'reasonable' amount of time for this as up to 24 hours. So I can leave at 2pm but need to be back in the office for 9 the next day. That is the exact example they gave.

I've called my union and they said that this was correct! Apparently the law says 'reasonable' time off but various other places deem reasonable to be up to 24 hours as it is only to arrange alternative care - not to give that care yourself.

I have no family in the area and friends/neighbours are not going to want a sick child... that is if they are free as most of them work too.

What on earth do working parents do during sickness? Apparently even child minders don't take sick children so it isn't as though I can change to a child minder.

Yes,but MaCosta does it not count that she has phoned and asked to take annual leave,and they've said yes,rather than making it clear to her that she is taking unauthorized leave?

ThatBloodywoman that's not correct. She is not attending work when she should be. On the first occasion that is less likely to be gross misconduct (depending on how it is done) but after that it will become far more serious.

I have had situations where client's employees have basically said to their manager's "F off, I'm not coming in and if you want to sack me go ahead I have a sick child at home." That is going to be a far more serious situation which could warrant dismissal.

Yes for the previous occasions but they've now made it clear that it will no longer be permitted. So she now has to follow the rules or face possible disciplinary action.

This is one of the reasons I work nights, either I or DP always at home for childcare. We work opposite hours. My twins are at school, I know this would not be suitable for op with her DH working away and age of DC's. I'm trying to highlight how difficult it is to juggle illness and childcare in general.

In some ways, I think Movingon is right. We have two staff who have been off for almost 6 months. Suddenly they are fit to return, exactly at the point they would go onto half pay. Same thi g happened last year with one who ha undiagnosed stomach pan and it disappeared a couple of weeks before she would have gone onto half pay. She then had a 6 week phased return to work- where she was paid full time for working part time and went to the gym every day .

It is incredibly difficult. We're lucky in that I run a law firm and can take time off as I see fit and DH is a senior partner and has flexibility. However, the harsh reality for most people is that if you don't turn up for work then you will ultimately be sacked.

I can certainly see how the second situation you mention MaCosta would warrant far more robust consequences.

But I still don't understand how ringing up,requesting short notice annual leave,and being granted it,could be classed as gross misconduct per se.
Yes,I can see that if the phone call is made at the time,or after,work should have begun,the situation is different,but I'm talking about a request,not holding to ransom.

I do agree that now she needs to follow the rules.
That much is clear.

I think we're talking at cross purposes maybe?
Just not turning up for work isn't acceptable,but I'm not sure anyone has said it is

The thing is Bloody the employer has no choice but to grant the request. If she phones up at 9am and says I can't come in the kids sick, the employer is fucked aren't they.

I had a boss who tried to order in an employee who was refusing to come in because her granddaughter was sick. Employee refused, and said she'd take it unpaid. Employer can take all the disciplinary action they like, still leaves you up shit creek that particular day.

I have absolute sympathy for women returning to work with kids, but their comes a point where you have to put yourself in your Employers shoes. It also screws up the chances of the mothers applying for jobs after you too.

yabu my heckles go up when women always care for the sick children because dh's job is too important.

Your job is either important or not. If not then leave.

Presumably the op can't use al any more as she doesn't have much left.

But its not the case that she is now ringing and requesting short notice annual leave (which she is not legally entitled to BTW). She has now been told that she can no longer do that. So going forwards it could become disciplinary if she didn't turn up/ didn't turn up and then later tried to have it put down as annual leave/ said she was sick when she was looking after her children. She's also on notice that her absence is too high.

The OP has said that the sticking point is that they will only allow her to take up to 24 hours as dependant leave (which is more than they have to give), implying that she will need to take more than this. Again, if she does this then it becomes a disciplinary matter.

Yes,I appreciate that it can leave the employer with problems.
So they say that the employee can't take annual leave,but can take etofd -which they have now done,but didn't insist upon before.
What I am trying to say is that they could say that at any point -rather than holding the employee responsible for annual leave that they have already granted at their discretion.

Its not a male female thing though is it, it's their conscious decision as a family that the parent with the lower income must take the time off.

Actually, if they were behaving in a reasonable way as a family they would arrange alternative childcare.

OP, given that the relatives aren't suitable and you don't want to leave the DCs with a stranger, can I ask what plans you have in mind for the long holidays coming up? I'm thinking of easter and the summer hols ...

I don't believe we disagree MaCosta !
Going forward is entirely different from looking back.
I was addressing that I believe she cannot be sacked for what is past.

The OPs children are at nursery, so school holidays aren't an issue atm

My DP got fired on Monday for taking 2 days dependants to look after our DC whilst I was in hospital with appendicitis, they were unpaid and he starts work at 4am so almost impossible to arrange childcare.

ACAS have agreed this was reasonable and we have grounds for unfair dismissal but any longer and we would have been on dodgy ground.

It's difficult but we usually just try & juggle it, I make up the hours at weekend etc if I need time off

Yours was entirely reasonable NoBloody (i remember your thread)
You cannot be sacked for correctly assert

God that seem harsh NoBloodyMore

Ing a statutory right.....

I hope you can resolve it xxx

Thinking about it Macosta can a person nt claim that because their Employer has allowed a course of action in the past that it is customary therefore should continue to be permitted.

I'm thinking about a case where to minimise a fuck load of moaning a person at work was allowed an informal 10 minute tea break in the afternoon. New boss came and couldn't see why this was happening hurrah tried to stop it, but employee got on to her union yes, really and the whole thing went postal because they claimed that since it had become a "custom" it couldn't simply be changed.

In one way it isn't a male/ female thing. In another in all the examples I've personally seen of this it's the woman who takes the time off.

Christ on a bike Nomore that's brutal. Hope you're feeling better and DP gets his fighting head on.

Sorry but I dont think your work are being difficult. So far they have been way and beyond more helpful than any place I have worked before. Although I am now self employed for past 5 years I need at least 6 weeks notice before cancelling booked work. Even then it is bad for my prospects of getting future stable employment. I have been told by various prospective employees (not in interview - they know not to do that) that I would not be employed because I am a woman of childbearing age with children. So sometimes I wonder why I bother trying so hard.

You did ask what people do with sick children. Like others, after my maternity leave ended (self employed so not really "leave"!) I had to make emergency arrangements in place before going back to work, which are mainly relatives or an emergency babysitter.