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.

@Ohtheaudacity

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 😂

I would guess it isn't a formal written offer they've verbally said to her look it looks like A isn't coming back in which case we would like to offer you the chance to stay permanently. That's legally v different to formal offer and they haven't taken the option off the table for you to go back to your old job

Op if I was your boss I’d just say it’s this role or none

They don’t have to find a suitable role for you

You are entitled to request

They must consider it but do not have to agree

If you need them about they’ll give roles out now and you’ll be left with your old role equivalent (allowed and within rules) or none
You are effectively shooting you self in the foot here

You can't have it all ways. You can have less hours and less responsibility and the same pay. You're entitled to an equal level/pay job but you don't want the level.

Op, a other thread said you went back on 28 hours after your first child was born. You say you are just naive and never managed an employees mat leave before, but you have managed you own.

Did you not experience a drop in income when you went from full time to part time? You also said that you requested a further reduction in hours previously and they had given business reasons (which you understood) why this would not be possible.

In addition to this you also asked for a job with less responsibilities. They have created 2 options. Both of which you have first refusal on. You have had more than 26 weeks off, which changes (slightly) what they have to offer you.

You also said you needed ro make your decision about what you were doing by 28th Feb. That's next Sunday. So you need to make the decision by the last working day before that. You were aware of that deadline. I know things have changed for you so you may be able to request to push that slightly. But they will need a decision soon if the new role is starting 4 weeks later.

You would struggle to say they are demoting you purley based on a reduction of hours. Because they have already outlined a business case that says your role can not be accompanied on less than the 28 hours you are on now. And also they supported you for several years working part time between your children, they just can't reduce it further. They have a history of supporting you where they can. And are now trying to keep you in the business by offering multiple options.

So OP - by your logic a person can be a finance director before going on maternity leave paid 200k PA, and request to come back as a project accountant, due to work life balance, for which the standard salary is 50k PA, but because they left on the higher salary they expect to be paid the higher amount. This is ridiculous - no company would pay more for a lesser grade and lesser responsibility.

Seriously take a step back, have some objectivity and give your head a wobble.

You have asked for less responsibility, they’ve offered it to you, they’ve also offered you your old job. You can’t have your cake and eat it. Pick one.

Also the constant comments of “would this help my case” make you sound self entitled and like you are determined to bring action against your employer either way.

Ok so they have offered you your old job , and the offer is still open . You asked for reduced responsibility they facilitated this , this of course comes with a lower salary.
You have been told if you take your old job back due to a restructure you will have less responsibility anyway, presume on same pay .
You need to decide what you want , I can't see how they have discriminated against you .
It does however seem you are trying to build a case against your employers as your needs have changed due to your child's health. Really sorry your son has been poorly 💐

I agree they should not have offered your role to a replacement before concluding conversations with you in relation to a new role. However your posts are a bit unclear in terms of your expectations. Are you looking for less hours or a role with less responsibility as the two are different. The former would have required you to put in a flexible working request with the assumption that it was with reference to your current role / grade. Advising them you want less responsibility indicates you want to step away from your current job grade for work life balance reasons and then it’s reasonable to assume the pay would alter accordingly without this being discriminatory.

Maybe seek legal advice if you considering going to court. It all sounds confusing.

When I went back to work after DC I asked to work 4 days a week and to step down from my Manager role back to a Rep one.

My hourly rate stayed the same, it just went to 80% and I kept my manager level car.

I was very surprised.

If the OP is an exemplar of the standard of "senior management" in the UK - unable to decide what they want, unable to articulate it, and unable to work with others to attain it, a lot of things start to make sense about the state of the country.

Yes; I did.

Goodness, OP, you still don't seem to be getting it. You stated clearly in your update that they are still saying that your old job is yours if you want it, so you don't have a case. Quite the contrary, it sounds like they have bent over backwards to give you options that they didn't have to give you. Not all employers would do that.

I also think the timescales that they have given you are very fair. You have a whole week to consider this and sort out childcare arrangements etc. They cannot keep it open indefinitely because there are other people who need to know what's going on. It isn't fair to keep them hanging while you have all the time in the world.

You seem very focused on your own needs and quite oblivious to the needs of the business. I find it really surprising that someone who has occupied a senior management role can be quite so unaware, but maybe the stress of your current situation is getting in the way of you thinking straight.

The whole thing about offering the job to the maternity cover... they have probably just said that OP has indicated that she might not want to come back to the same role, and that the mat cover can stay in the role if she doesn't. I doubt that there have been any contracts signed because they are also very clear that OP can have her old job back if she wants it.

www.acas.org.uk/your-maternity-leave-pay-and-other-rights/returning-to-work-after-having-a-baby

Read that. Specifically - If you use additional maternity leave, you still have the right to return to your job on the same terms as before you left. But if it's not possible because there have been significant changes to the organisation, you could be offered a similar job.
In this case, the job cannot be on worse terms than before. For example, the following must be the same:
• pay
• benefits
• holiday entitlement
• seniority
• where the job is

1. if you request a position with less responsibility/hours, you won't necessarily be on the same rate of pay.

2. if they've offered your old job to someone else, that's their problem to sort out. You are still entitled to go back to your own job or a similar one with the same terms as your old job (see ACAS above). This is protected in law and it would be discrimination if you aren't able to return to it.

3. ignore any of the posts that suggests that accepting your maternity rights is cheeky or stupid or greedy. These laws are there to protect women at a vulnerable time in their lives. There's so much inequality in the workplace, cling onto the rights we do have!

4. please get proper legal advice, don't try to navigate this on your own and definitely don't get swayed by some of the completely ignorant posts on this thread.

5. "a whole week* to consider this and sort childcare for a child with additional needs? Don't make me laugh. You don't need to stick to their timeframes. Stick to the legal ones.

Spudjulia

You clearly haven’t read full thread

What you are saying is what everyone has said

They are allowing her to return to old role

There is no case

She doesn’t have to decide in a week no

But then they don’t have to find her a lesser role

They could throw it back at op and say it’s your old role or none

@spudjulia

https://www.acas.org.uk/your-maternity-leave-pay-and-other-rights/returning-to-work-after-having-a-baby

Read that. Specifically - If you use additional maternity leave, you still have the right to return to your job on the same terms as before you left. But if it's not possible because there have been significant changes to the organisation, you could be offered a similar job.
In this case, the job cannot be on worse terms than before. For example, the following must be the same:
• pay
• benefits
• holiday entitlement
• seniority
• where the job is

1. if you request a position with less responsibility/hours, you won't necessarily be on the same rate of pay.

2. if they've offered your old job to someone else, that's their problem to sort out. You are still entitled to go back to your own job or a similar one with the same terms as your old job (see ACAS above). This is protected in law and it would be discrimination if you aren't able to return to it.

3. ignore any of the posts that suggests that accepting your maternity rights is cheeky or stupid or greedy. These laws are there to protect women at a vulnerable time in their lives. There's so much inequality in the workplace, cling onto the rights we do have!

4. please get proper legal advice, don't try to navigate this on your own and definitely don't get swayed by some of the completely ignorant posts on this thread.

OP has been offered her old job back and told it is still available but it will end April 2022. So needs to look at the redundancy process I think to check it's been followed.

ignore any of the posts that suggests that accepting your maternity rights is cheeky or stupid or greedy. These laws are there to protect women at a vulnerable time in their lives. There's so much inequality in the workplace, cling onto the rights we do have!

No one said she should accept her maternity rights

) "a whole week to consider this and sort childcare for a child with additional needs? Don't make me laugh. You don't need to stick to their timeframes. Stick to the legal ones.*

Op was fully aware that she needed this sorted by 28th February (though the reason isn't clear) in November

Also there no indication she has to be back at work by then. Only that she needs a devision. She has the rest of her mat leave to actually get it in place.

OP has been offered her old job back and told it is still available but it will end April 2022. So needs to look at the redundancy process I think to check it's been followed.

The role has been changed. So yes the old role, is technically redundant. But as op is on Mat leave she has been offered the new version of the role. That closer fits her needs. Which us what they need to do.

It also appears its been changed to suit op (less responsibility but at the same level) and to suit her requests. Which again further complicates it.

Of course she can stick to the legal timeliness, but then her options will be more limited. Either go back to her old job or hand in her notice. The employer is under no obligation whatsoever to keep the other option on the table beyond a week if that doesn't suit them.

And yes, a week to sort childcare probably isn't enough but the OP has presumably already started investigating options already so she won't be starting from scratch. And she will still have the rest of her maternity leave to finalise what she is doing.

@Watapalava

Spudjulia

You clearly haven’t read full thread

What you are saying is what everyone has said

They are allowing her to return to old role

There is no case

Oh I did read the thread, and every post by OP. In her update after midnight she says her current job is being 'restructured' in April and the new role is paid less. That's against the law.

Oh I did read the thread, and every post by OP. In her update after midnight she says her current job is being 'restructured' in April and the new role is paid less. That's against the law.

You missed the part where they said that she could still go back to her old job if she wanted it.

Oh I did read the thread, and every post by OP. In her update after midnight she says her current job is being 'restructured' in April and the new role is paid less. That's against the law

No it isn't. The restructured role has no indication it will not be on the same wage.

The lower wage will be if she picks the option with less hours AND a demotion. That's absolutely legal.

You really believe they are o liged to keep the same rate of pay AND give the op the demotion she has requested?

@Imdonna read the update after midnight. The restructured role is for less pay. Her old job won't exist after April.

Read my point 1 for an answer to your last question.

YABU.

This is terrible, if it’s true that simply having been on maternity leave entitles a woman to expect the same pay even if it has been their request for a change of role (including less hours, less responsibility). I can understand that coming into play if having been on maternity leave you come back to find your role has been given to someone else or substantially changed (not at your request) BUT in this instance this is a change YOU told them you wanted. They acted in good faith, I think, and tried to accommodate your request. I suspect they’ll think long and hard about doing so again after this.

I am baffled by your stance- though I suppose if ACAS says they have acted contrary to legislation then you can chose to fight it. I don’t really understand why you thought that a change of job to one with less hours, lower workload and less responsibility should be paid the same? In any other situation an employee essentially asking for a new job would not be in a position to demand and expect to be paid the same for a different job.

That makes a mockery of the system- presumably they were happy for you to come back to your job but it was YOU who I requested essentially a new role to fit around your family needs, not that your employer decided to move you without your consent. You indicated you no longer wanted the job you had. I imagine that reducing your hours and responsibility (for the same pay) did not work for your employers so they have sought to create something more suited to your needs- with a salary to match the requirements of the new role. They have accommodated your request.

Unfortunately, I suspect ACAS will be right in terms of the law and you can force your employer to give you the new job and the salary you want (though I imagine it may make things strained at work, but that may not be a consideration for you) or you can claim discrimination and get a settlement. I think it is behaviour like this which puts employers off trying to be flexible and makes some employers wary of women of child-bearing age.