Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Demoted after maternity leave

165 replies

Maisy313 · 03/11/2015 19:33

I've been back about 6 weeks, we are a small team in a big very well known corporation. Our boss is going on maternity leave, my colleague who was on the same level as me will be replacing her (all fine) but the person who was my junior and stepped up on my maternity leave to my position is now going to be deputy (promotion not an advertised position), the most junior person on the team is also being given a promotion. So all in all I'm the only person on the team not to get a pay rise or a promotion. All former appraisals have been great, never had any bad comments. Was told today by boss that they were just doing the best thing for the team. I want to hand in notice but literally can't afford to until I find something new, feel so sick. I was told that I was a valued member and they did appreciate me but that's just how things are.

OP posts:
DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 10:06

All recruitment decisions involve discrimination. Only some forms of discrimination are unlawful (as opposed to illegal) and most organisations can find their way around it.

My (very large government) employer actually wrote on the terms for a voluntary severance scheme that those on maternity at a certain date were barred from applying. Shock. I soon pointed out that error (and they accepted my application. Grin)

Taylor22 · 04/11/2015 10:23

You have been at home. They have been at work doing their job. They have clearly been doing their jobs well and deserved a promotion.
I don't know why you expect the same recognition as them when they've worked and you haven't.
You have returned to the exact same position as you left.
The business can't stand still while you're gone.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 04/11/2015 10:23

IKnow
If the only reason that the person was not up to speed was because they had been out of the office on ML you would be on potentially shaky ground. If they would have normally been considered but hadn't been because they were on maternity leave then potentially that is unfair treatment.

DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 10:43

If the only reason that the person was not up to speed was because they had been out of the office on ML you would be on potentially shaky ground. If they would have normally been considered but hadn't been because they were on maternity leave then potentially that is unfair treatment.

But in reality that's not how it works. If someone has proven themselves in work it would be unfair to deny them promotion in favour of someone that has been on maternity for a year! (Which is why that isn't what the law says.)

DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 10:44

Which is why the business would show that it considered both people and gave the other the promotion for another reason than "they weren't off on maternity".

Boosiehs · 04/11/2015 10:45

Jesus. I am shocked at the women effectively backing maternity discrimination on this thread.

Why should she be negatively impacted for something that is her legal right to do?

Yes, yes this could have possibly been the one case where there was absolutely no discrimination in the promotion process, but I very much doubt it. Employers are relying on women, like the ones on this thread, sitting back and thinking "oh it was so nice of them to let me have maternity leave, I just wont kick up a fuss".

B*llocks to that. If men could have children the world would be a much fairer place.

Taylor22 · 04/11/2015 10:48

No. She is well within her rights to take maternity leave. But I think it's ridiculous to believe that you are then at an immediate equal standing to the people who worked for that time while you were away.
I believe it's naive to think that down people can walk back into a job after a life changing year out and be at the same standard as those that never left.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 04/11/2015 10:50

Personally, for the good of the business I'd be appointing someone who had been in the office and was up to speed with what was going on as my deputy.

Why wouldn't you?

Seriously? You do realise that discriminating against someone because they have taken maternity leave is unlawful? If you read the thread you'll see that discussed with links you could read and educate yourself about Hmm

But here are some reasons:

  1. Business incur costs from people raising grievances and making claims and they can do this where discrimination is only suggested and not proven (because that's the point of the grievance procedure to investigate and resolve). This has direct costs in management and HR time, possibly also the cost of consulting the company's employment lawyer who probably charges about PS300 per hour plus VAT.
  1. The business also incurs indirect costs from unhappy employees. They are less productive and more likely to go off sick or exhibit "deviant behaviour". There are academic studies about this. Even if an employee just started working to rule that can have a massive impact depending on the nature of the work and employment environment.
  1. The legal costs of defending a tribunal claim (and did I mention that it doesn't need to be proven, just have enough to suggest there might have been discrimination) are about PS100,000. Add in an EAT and you could be looking at the best part of a quarter of a million.
  1. The cost to the business of replacing a member of staff who resigns because they feel they have not been treated fairly can be considerable, from recruitment costs, management time and lost productivity.
  1. It takes minutes to do things properly and often just having the conversation and consulting with people properly (and having a robust paper trail) saves a lot of time and money in the long run - so it's just logical to do that in the first place and avoid trouble later. A decision that can be justified is good business sense and also the defence against allegations of discrimination.

When a woman has been on maternity leave she has not left the business and taking one year out does not erase her previous good work or ability. The sooner we stop thinking of women having children as being difficult rather than normal and necessary to society.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 04/11/2015 10:52

For some reason my pound signs have appeared as PS Confused

Shutthatdoor · 04/11/2015 10:54

The truth is no one knows.

No one in here can shout it's discrimination nor can they say it isn't from a few posts on an anonymous internet forum or with out hearing what the employer has to say!

Some say working from home one day a week should make no difference, others say in their jobs it absolutely would.

Problem is with situations like this 'inference' and reading between the lines doesn't always help.

MrsCampbellBlack · 04/11/2015 10:55

I would push your boss on the 'bad timing' thing. I would actually email her saying you would very much have liked to have been considered the the promotion and asking her to clarify why you weren't.

She is crazy to have said bad timing to you.

Boosiehs · 04/11/2015 10:56

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut

applause. Exactly what she said.

As an inhouse lawyer (not specialist as I said), if the management team behaved like they have in the OP's case I would be consulting our external counsel and preparing for a serious and expensive grievance to be raised.

The cost of dealing with a data subject access request alone- even if there is nothing found - is huge. Let along a formal grievance/acas conciliation/EAT. Our lawyer charges more than PS300 per hour too!

MrsCampbellBlack · 04/11/2015 10:59

Yes I too would be very worried that this was going to cost our business PSPSPS. We tread very carefully with anyone on maternity leave and have taken a lot of legal advice in the past to ensure we treat people fairly and also of course cover ourselves from a legal perspective.

I suspect HR would be very cross if they knew what the OP's boss had said.

Bixxy · 04/11/2015 11:00

My direct manager was training me up to take over his role in the near future, when I became pregnant. When I told our boss, he swiftly persuaded my manager to take early retirement and advertised his job - the job I was training to do, and currently doing 80% of the role advertised.

I applied obviously, attended interview with other candidates, and out performed them with my experience and skills. I didn't get the role. I was told on a one to one with no witnesses sadly, that it was due to my condition and it was recommended I apply for the role next year (they changed it to a temporary contract).

Once the new manager started, it was clear they weren't going to reassess my role, so I was now twiddling my thumbs waiting for maternity leave because she now had 80%of my current role. In short, I took union action and was issued with a full apology. I left soon after mat leave.

Unfortunately it happens. It's shit. And the best thing I did was to leave. I recommend you start looking elsewhere Flowers

Bubblesinthesummer · 04/11/2015 11:03

As an inhouse lawyer (not specialist as I said), if the management team behaved like they have in the OP's case I would be consulting our external counsel and preparing for a serious and expensive grievance to be raised.

The cost of dealing with a data subject access request alone- even if there is nothing found - is huge. Let along a formal grievance/acas conciliation/EAT. Our lawyer charges more than PS300 per hour too!

If it turns out that the employer hadn't discriminated at all who then covers all of those costs.

As pp has said no one from a few posts on here can say they have!

SparePantsAndLego · 04/11/2015 11:05

MovingOnUp well said. I couldn't agree more.

DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 11:14

boosiehs

We don't even have the full story. It's as likely as not that the OP's company have done nothing wrong!

DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 11:15

5. It takes minutes to do things properly and often just having the conversation and consulting with people properly (and having a robust paper trail) saves a lot of time and money in the long run - so it's just logical to do that in the first place and avoid trouble later. A decision that can be justified is good business sense and also the defence against allegations of discrimination.

At present there is absolutely no evidence that this isn't the case here.

MrsCampbellBlack · 04/11/2015 11:33

I seriously doubt things have been done properly if the OP's boss used the words bad timing to reference maternity leave.

Boosiehs · 04/11/2015 11:34

Bubbles - the company covers the cost. Individuals even those who lose at tribunal are rarely liable for the full cost of legal fees.

However I would nearly always recommend a conversation with specialist counsel if an issue is on the horizon.

DissapointedOne. No - I wouldn't expect to have evidence presented on a board like this. However the employee is unhappy at the situation. At the very least from an HR perspective that deserves a conversation with her boss about how it arose and how/when/if she can be promoted.

Boosiehs · 04/11/2015 11:36

And if one of our managers had used the phrase "its just bad timing" I would be speed dialling our external lawyers!

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 04/11/2015 11:45

And if one of our managers had used the phrase "its just bad timing" I would be speed dialling our external lawyers!

This.

Said to a woman who has been back from ML for 6 weeks I would taking the same approach.

DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 11:47

We don't know what the boss actually said. Hmm

DisappointedOne · 04/11/2015 11:48

However the employee is unhappy at the situation. At the very least from an HR perspective that deserves a conversation with her boss about how it arose and how/when/if she can be promoted.

That I agree with.

2rebecca · 04/11/2015 11:51

It also depends on how much you like your job and where you work though and how easy you'd find it to get another job.
Once you start taking lawyers against your employer you are waving goodbye to that particular workplace. Fine if things are that bad but if it's a large company and you like it there will be other promotions in other years.
I would raise it as an issue and express my unhappiness and my desire to be considered for future promotions and that being on maty leave shouldn't have meant I was overlooked. I'd then get on with reminding them of why I was so good and getting a promotion in the future.