To ask if this is maternity discrimination?

[Ohtheaudacity]

I am on maternity leave and due back to work at the end of May. I have a 4yo and 8mo. When I return to work I will have had a full year of mat leave. My pregnancy was uncomplicated but my son fell very poorly at 14 weeks old. He pulled through but is now being investigated for potential cerebral palsy. I had a meeting with my manager in January and explained my personal situation and how my desire now was to reduce my working hours/responsibility (my current role is senior management with a huge workload) to have a better work life balance. They were receptive to this and went away to work on a new position for me in the company in reduced hours/responsibility.

Today I had a further meeting with them where they outlined a new position to fulfil a business need and which suited my needs. I was made aware they had offered my current role to the person who is my maternity cover currently. However, it was then explained that my new role would be on a significantly reduced salary pro-rate, almost £6 an hour less equivalent. I raised a concern that as a woman returning from mat leave I was entitled to either my old job back or a different role on the same pay. They then said in that case I could either have my old role back on my old hours & salary, or accept the new job on the reduced salary (“hourly rate”).

I spoke to ACAS who advised because my employer has verbally offered my current role to someone else, they have effectively brought my current job to an end. As this has happened while I am on maternity leave and they have offered the role to my maternity cover, it could amount to discrimination. ACAS have also advised me that verbal job offers and acceptances are legally binding. My employer is therefore obliged to offer me a job on similar terms than I was on before as they have effectively brought my current job to an end.

Does this sound right? I don’t want to raise hell unless I have to as I work for a small company and I’ve been there for 15 years. I’d really appreciate any advice and will answer any questions. Thank you.

Is it possible for them to have you both doing your current role?

@PolkaSpace yes it would be possible to do a job share but that hasn’t been suggested to either of us.

[quote Ohtheaudacity]@PolkaSpace yes it would be possible to do a job share but that hasn’t been suggested to either of us.[/quote]
Sorry I meant is it the type of job where they could employ both of you to do the same job. Ie. 2 admin assistants. 2 lawyers. So double the current people. L

Your job hasn’t automatically come to an end - it ends if there is no position there for you to fill.

If they’re unwilling to offer your old job back, the terms of any offer they make has to be no less favourable.

But they have offered you your old job back. It would only be discrimination if they told you the only job available was on £6 per hour less and that would clearly be less favourable than your original position.

And I could be wrong, but I suspect you have told your employer you can’t take your old job back on the same terms due to your son potentially being poorly. In which case, they can offer you any vacancy they like, and you would have to choose whether to accept it.

A similar thing happened to me when I wanted to go back part time after maternity, but instead of a pay cut it was being transferred to a different location an hour's drive away which kind of negated the whole point of wanting to reduce my working hours. I spoke to my union at the time and they told me that because I was choosing to end my full time contract and start a new part time one the company was acting legally and it wasn't discrimination, it would be classed under "business need" for where the company needed part time staff.

I don’t really see how this is discrimination?

You can have your job back

You want a job with less work and responsibility - surely you’d expect a lower salary in that case?

Was your expectation that you’d get a job with less work but the same money?

I agree with other posters, you could have gone back to your old role. You wanted a change to your role, they have accommodated that, but on a different role due to business needs which is a lower paid role.

That's not discrimination. You don't want your old job anymore. Well then?

Surely it doesn’t matter if they’ve offered your old job to someone else if they are still happy for you to do it as well, or do another job on your old salary for your old hours?

I can’t really see what the company has done wrong. Surely if you step back in responsibility, which you asked to do, you’re not going to get the salary of a senior manager?

If you want a role with reduced hours / responsibility, would it not normally come with reduced pay?

I think if they'd done it without your knowledge (offering the job to someone else and creating a new role for you) I'd definitely back the discrimination angle - but you've asked for a job with fewer hours and responsibilities, so isn't that what they offered you?

If your employer can show that it isn't reasonable and practical for you to return to your old job role on reduced hours and responsibility (which sounding by your request and situation it might not be) then it doesn't sound like discrimination, but obviously it's not nice to hear about a reduced salary!

Thanks everyone, I think my main issue is they’ve verbally offered my job to my maternity cover before offering me a viable alternative. Can they now rescind this offer from her and reinstate me into my old job? Doesn’t that leave them in hot water with her? Sorry if I sound clueless, it’s because I am 😂

DO NOT listen to advice on MN - you need proper legal advice, not random people's opinions.

I'm not sure this is maternity discrimination.

You asked for a role with reduced hours and responsibility. They said they would see what they could find you. And they did.

If you had put in a flexible working request for your current role then offering you a lesser role on lower salary would be wrong. But from your OP it sounded like you wanted a different job, as in most jobs, less responsibility means lower salary.

I think it would be difficult to prove discrimination when they have actually offered you your old role back (what they have offered the cover is their issue to sort out). The only way I think you could prove discrimination is if most people who do that role do part time or would have had part time agreed, its totally possible to do that role part time without any impact on the business, and the only reason they turned down your flexible working request was because you were on materntiy

But you were the one who said they didn't want your old job back? You wanted a new position with less hours and responsibility? Which they gave you.

It's my understanding that they didn't offer anyone your old job until they had offered you a new position that you asked for?

I don't see what they have done wrong. you say yourself that your new position is less responsibility, therfore I'd expect it to be less pay and for them to fill your old role.

OP, are you a union member? If so, contact them for help.

If not, go to pregnantthenscrewed.com/

They are a charity that supports women undergoing maternity discrimination, and have a helpline you can call.

You asked for less responsibility, you can't seriously think they should have to pay you the same as the previous more demanding role.

It's really none of your business how the company handle their relationship with the mat cover. They are offering you the same role and on the same t&cs as before you went on leave. There's no discrimination against you here.

When you asked for an alternative role did you say that if they couldn’t find an alternative you’d do your old job? Or did you say that you couldn’t do your old job?

If you’ve asked for a less responsibility then this usually means less pay.

DO NOT listen to advice on MN - you need proper legal advice, not random people's opinions. yup. Some Citizens Advice Bureaus have an employment specialist, so it might be worth getting in touch because they shouldn't have offered your cover your job until everything was settled with you.

my desire now was to reduce my working hours/responsibility (my current role is senior management with a huge workload) to have a better work life balance. They were receptive to this and went away to work on a new position for me in the company in reduced hours/responsibility.

You can't surely have thought you'd continue on your senior management salary with less hours/responsibility?!

I work in HR.

ACAS are the experts, not the people of mumsnet. The issue is that they’ve offered your job to someone else before you’ve agreed to a new role. If you now can’t go back to your old job (should you wish to) and they need to ensure that replacement roles don’t disadvantage you, whether that’s financially, work life balance otherwise it’s potentially discrimination.

You are entitled to make a flexible working request doing your pre maternity job but part time or compressed hours. This shouldn’t be at least pay per hour, but of course salary will be pro rata to your working hours.

A verbal job offer can be rescinded, however as the candidate is already working for them this creates a problem between those 2 parties.

They’ve really made a mess here!

OP, did you follow procedure and put in a flexible work request/ part time request?

I had a similar situation with my work place and successfully took legal action.
However, the only reason I was successful was because they failed to follow tight guidelines on how many days they must respond in etc.

Def get proper legal advice

They offered your job back, you said no

So now go back and say you want it, and they will have to sort out the maternity cover person

Once back you could ask for flexible working, but they don’t have to agree

Have you asked the Mat cover person if they would consider a job share?

You can't surely have thought you'd continue on your senior management salary with less hours/responsibility?!

What a shite comment. Most decent employers will allow senior management/senior leaders to go part time for a while if it means retaining them - kids are only tiny for a while. I'm in senior leadership and would always try to balance the needs of the business with the needs of employees - it leads to happier, more loyal staff and greater productivity (as well as being the right thing to do morally).

Part time means your salary is pro-rata, NOT being moved to a lower pay grade.

I presume they have offered it to your maternity cover only in the sense that if you don’t return to the position, she can have the role. As you (potentially) do want your original job back due to pay etc, then you can have it. No discrimination.