To be sacked due to sick children?

[Spamup]

Regular user but have NC for this!

My children, DS and DD both under 3 have several bouts of sickness before christmas and today my DS is not well which has resulted in a hospital admission - my employet has casually mentioned before about how i would probably be better off not working but nothing has been written down regarding this - ff to this evening, it has been sent to the HR department for formal disciplinary process to start and i am in bits - i am a lone parent and no family or friends to support me with emergancy childcare as they all work full time - can i really lose my job over this? I have bills etc to pay and worked a long time in this field to get to where i am now :(

I have looked through the past few pages of advice but wanted to double check that you'd got the correct advice- I'm knackered and can't read through it all.

I'm a HR Specialist btw.

Youve taken Time off for Dependants and this is a statutory right. You are exercising this statutory right and are being victimised for it by them arranging a disciplinary and/or potentially being dismissed. There is also no qualifying period (you don’t need 2 years service) to make an unfair dismissal claim for exercising your statutory rights its 'automatically unfair'. So as I see it, you may have an unfair dismissal and potential indirect sex discrimination claim (though id need more details about this).

HTH

Nannies will do a lot 1.300 a month .

OP, I really really feel for you. Good legal advice is paramount here - do please try contacting www.pregnantthenscrewed.com/how-does-the-advice-line-work/

www.gov.uk/time-off-for-dependants

As PP above says, you have a statutory right to time off for dependents.

Youve taken Time off for Dependants and this is a statutory right.

It's a statutory right to take time of for dependants, to deal with an emergency, but not to take weeks and weeks. That is simply not what it was designed for.

www.gov.uk/time-off-for-dependants

The govt website even says: "Your employer may want to talk to you if they think time off is affecting your work."

are being victimised for it by them arranging a disciplinary and/or potentially being dismissed.

They have not arranged a disciplinary and she is not being potentially dismissed. So, no victimisation.

There is also no qualifying period (you don’t need 2 years service)

She has five years service anyway.

So as I see it, you may have an unfair dismissal and potential indirect sex discrimination claim (though id need more details about this).

Except you can only have an unfair dismissal case if you've actually been dismissed. It's the second question the judge asks themselves, after "is this person an employee of the company they are complaining about", then it is "have they been dismissed". If the answer is no to either of those any unfair dismissal claim won't go any further.

As she has NOT been dismissed, this is all irrelevant.

Though you can bring a sex discrimination claim while still employed of course.

And if she were claiming indirect discrimination, the employer may be able to justify it (indirect discrimination can be justifiable in law) due to the very large amount of time she has been off work.

It makes complete sens for both parties in this case to enter into the settlement.

Are the posters on this page aware that the op has had 8/9 weeks off in a five month period......?

Your employer may want to talk to you if they think time off is affecting your work.

Is the key line. They tried to talk to OP. She didn't engage with the process.

I read it as she was being invited to a disciplinary for it and the first couple of pages discussing under 2 years service, gave up and read the last few pages where all the bitching was happening.

Reading the past few pages, I don't get why everyone gets so bitchy and snippy on here sometimes- don't you have lives to get on with? Why all the hate?

I think people can post on a forum (as you are) and have a life at the same time.

yes but why does everyone get bitchy and snippy? (as you are)

and so invested? something lacking i think....

mrspogue3 So as an HR specialist you would have no issue with the op’s level of attendance? Really?

Can you show me where I have been bitchy and so invested?

yes but why does everyone get bitchy and snippy? (as you are)

Because every time an employment law question is raisrd on aibu posters like you claim to know everything about employment law and give crap/and or dangerous advice. Or just don't RTFT.

Sorry to hear your ds is ill again. It's so stressful. Hopefully Acas give some good advice.

I also have no family near me, paid extortionate nursery fees and had 2 dc who were young and constantly ill. My work trigger disciplinary action after 3 periods of absence in 1 year. I was in constant fear of dc getting sick, getting calls from nursery at work. It's awful. You've had the worst time with dv, pnd, dc hospital admissions and no support.

I also understand from employers pov but what can you do. Maybe nanny/childminder would help. It sounds like you enjoy your career and it's good for your mental health. If you were headhunted I'd say you could get another job in your industry.

I can only speak for my dc but they had lot less sickness once they started school. I'm not sure if this would be the case for your dc but it's also positive that you're already looking at jobs with more flexible hours to suit your situation better. Hope things turn around for you. Good luck

OP, you have my sympathy.

When looking at childcare options, bear in mind that while a nanny will take care of sick children, you're also stuck with the nanny's own days off sick. Nurseries are more reliable because they are always open regardless of staff illness. Also, I know that in some more expensive areas, the rates you are paying are fairly standard.

If I were you, I would probably consider continuing with the nursery if you are happy with it, but developing a good relationship with a couple of local people who are free during the daytimes for occasional babysitting. I have two, one is semi-retired and the other is a student -- between them, I have some emergency cover.

Sorry that people on here have been dicks. You can't help the situation you're in (although obviously there are some things you might be able to do to improve it -- largely the failing here is with society for assuming that the 'default human' who works is male and has no dependents... )

I’m so sorry you’re going through this, op. I hope you manage to find some way to conclude this episode in a way that allows you to breathe. There has been some good advice among all the griping and bickering, and you’ve been very gracious in accepting the criticism you got.

I’m utterly disgusted, though, at the person who thinks that the company should hire a man to replace you. I mean, WTAF?! Do men not have children? Only, I was fairly sure that it took a man and a woman to make a baby? Have I missed some biological advancements that mean women are the only ones involved? Not to mention how highly - and rightly! - illegal that would be!

As for the victim blaming. Honestly? Women who suffer DV should be held responsible for ‘choosing that man’? Because on the first date they say “you’re very beautiful and I can’t wait to punch you in the face in a few months’ time”?!?!

The internalised misogyny on here has been astounding. Thank god the majority of MNers are not sexism arseholes.

But the person who originally commented about the partner wasn’t saying it was all his fault, either; she was responding to the comment about hiring a man next time. Her point was that men are not the automatic answer to problems caused or exacerbated by men, and that when there’s an issue with a woman it’s too easy to fall back on the institutional sexism that creates these problems in the first place.
(This isn’t the place to go in to it, but what I mean by that is that women do most of the childcare and are more likely to take time off with sick kids and are more likely to be the main carers after relationship break-ups because of the sexism built in to society - the patriarchal system that sees men in better employment, promoted over women, paid more than women, etc.)

@fabaunt you are victim blaming. I’m quite shocked to see this on MN. “I’m talking about a relationship the OP chose to be in .... & chose to have a 2nd child with....” wow oh wow.
What a load of misogynist crap 💩!!!!

Just to add, fabaunt, that you have no place commenting on women having children with abusive men. You don’t know the circumstances, and as you’ve said you don’t know much about DV I’m going to assume you’ve never considered the reasons that these pregnancies might happen. (I’m not intending to sound nasty here, I’m just passionate about making sure these things are better understood - it’s not your fault you don’t know about it, and really it’s a good thing for you!)

Some women are kept in abusive relationships by being kept pregnant and tied to small children. They may become pregnant through rape and be prevented from terminating the pregnancy, or not believe in abortion, or simply want to have the child. They may not know that the partner is going to be abusive - the pregnancy may come early in the relationship, for example, but it’s also statistically more likely for abusive behaviours to emerge during pregnancy than at other times in a relationship. Often a second pregnancy is an accident or an attempt to put a bandage on a relationship. There might be a hope that having the ‘right’ sex this time (if the partner wants a boy, for example)might make him behave more reasonably. The abuse might be due to mental health problems that have been controlled previously but have become more problematic or that the woman can no longer cope with.

It’s also just not very easy for a woman to leave an abusive man. The most likely time for a woman to be killed by domestic violence is when she has just ended the relationship. There are always reasons to stay (that the women either does believe or wants to believe) and it’s especially hard to leave when you have children.

It’s an absolutely huge area of research and more needs to be shared and understood. Please just think before you judge.

“Finally she saw sense and left him” is exactly the thinking we need to escape. This is not right. It’s not about seeing sense, it’s about so much more. Like not getting killed.

@mrspogue3

It's a long thread, you can see it's a long thread. If you can't be arsed to read it dont get snarky with people who put you right

I hope as an 'HR specialist' you pay more attention to the information your clients give you before you spraff off with I'll considered advice.

Look I genuinely don’t understand enough about domestic violence to even attempt to comment on it. I’m commenting on other aspects of the relationship, staying for years, having children with him. But I accept I don’t know enough about DV to understand the ins and outs. I would assume I would leave a man if he ever hit me, but I’ve never been hit so I don’t know for certain how id react, I’d hope I’d see sense and run.

But that’s an entirely different tangent. The original post was taken out of context and I just meant there was two of them in the relationship and that poster couldn’t blame “a man” for all of this

The thing about working from home is that it is usually a privilege that is offered after a period of time when an employee has proved themselves to be reliable.

I’d say that’s generally only if the job is office based to begin with.
My role is a field based role, my home is my office. It has been since I started over 5 years ago and that’s what it was advertised as and thats what is in my contract. The nature of my role and others in the business means I/we need to be field based.

Just depends on the line of work your in. I don’t know OP’s line of work so don’t know how feasible it is for her to obtain a role WFH. But if it’s a possibility, it’s one worth exploring if she thinks it would work better for her circumstances.