To think this is not what parental leave is for?

[Friendlybreadbin]

I may well BU but interested in people’s opinions. My company offers a fairly standard 25 days plus bank holidays leave package. New colleague comes from a company where they had been for over 20 years and so had got up to 30 days, their old company also offered a ‘buy an additional 10 days leave’ package. Our company doesn’t. Having passed their 3 month probation period (where they also took a lot of leave) they are using leave days like they are going out of fashion, and have already had a skiing holiday and an all inclusive this year. As well as lots of other random days off, it’s seems rare they work a full week. Have been openly saying that they intend to take unpaid leave because they can’t see how they will possibly manage on 25 days when they were used to 40 days and asking how does anyone do that with kids? I have not dissimilar aged kids and have managed with 25 days for my whole career. There are no special needs or circumstances. Their job is flexible and from home.
AIBU that they should learn to manage within their holiday allowance that they accepted by contract? Or as the extra leave is unpaid is this an acceptable strategy? It seems to me they intend to exploit parental leave just because they feel entitled to more holiday than they are contracted to have.
Our company charges customers rates for their time and will therefore lose revenue as we can’t charge when they are OOO. I am their line manager.
I have managed people for 20 years and have never come across anyone with this attitude before, when I have managed people who have taken parental leave it has been for understandable reasons.

@PicturesOfDogs I didn’t say it was okay though did I?

It’s a dog eat dog world though unfortunately.

Judging by the replies on this thread, it's not hard to see why the UK has low productivity. People seem unaware that many industries are so global and have such low barriers to entry that if UK employees are too special to do the job, there is no shortage of employees in India and other countries who are able to do those jobs.

Do people actually still think productivity = hours in the office? I thought we left that idea in the 20th century

@GeraltsBathtub I didn't say anything about hours in the office.

I’ll clarify then - hours spent working. Better work life balance makes people more productive.

The thing is though, the 2 holidays youve mentioned that he took in his first 3 months were in all likelihood always booked before he took the job. Skiing holidays and AI holidays are not booked on a whim and were most likely planned on the basis of him having 40 days leave at that time.

Having now changed jobs, I can see why, for this year at least, he is going to be short and asking to take some unpaid for school holidays later in the year.

That being said, I would then expect him to plan his holidays and childcare within his 25 day allocation in future years.

All the posters saying YABU seem to be forgetting that there is a business at the heart of this that has need for that employee or there wouldn't be the job there for them to take leave from.
Can you suggest she goes part-time if she has that much of a need to not work a full week? 25 days + BH a year annual leave is pretty standard.
If she cracks on and takes all that leave unpaid, I suspect she won't be an employee for the next year.

yes, so they can absolutely deny unpaid leave.

But not parental leave

Wow, that seems a bit unbalanced. I'm going to check to see if I can have some. ...though my kids are way past 18 lm still a parent!

It's not. And you can't.

He should have told them up front about how much time he would need off, then they could chose to employ him, employ him on different terms, or not employ him. It's not like his circumstances changed after he was employed is it? He was underhanded about it so don't expect much respect back from the employer.

Apart from the small point that he's not legally entitled to the leave until he's been there a year, they won't be sacking him for requesting the leave, they will be sacking him because of anything they like. As he's not been there two years they can just say "he's not working out in the job, so we've decided to let him go". Don't need misconduct, as long as you give him the contracted notice you can tell him to hit the road.

Employees don't need to state their intentions to take up their employment rights and entitlements. He's obviously not entitled to the PL in his first year but he's got absolutely zero moral or legal obligation to be "up front" about the fact that he intends to take PL as per his legal entitlement in year 2 and beyond.

It's also not correct that an employer can just sack anybody for any reason they like as long as they've been there for less than 2 years. If an employee is subject to "automatically unfair dismissal" - which includes being sacked for taking up legal employment rights (potentially such as the right to Parental Leave) - they don't need to have served 2 years to bring a complaint.

But it wouldn't be automatic unfair dismissal because they wouldn't be sacking him for taking or requesting parental leave, they would be sacking him for "not working out" or some equally vague reason. They're not going to be stupid enough to admit what's really pissing them off are they? As long as they follow the correct procedure in terminating his employment, there's nothing he can do.

If parental leave is 18 weeks over the course of your child's 18 years, who keeps track of it?
Is it recorded like NIC, tax etc.?

Well no, employers are never stupid enough to admit the reason that they are unfairly dismissing an employee. That's what tribunals are for. The employee would have to demonstrate that the dismissal correlated with the request to take up his legal entitlement to Parental Leave, I imagine.

It’s children up to 18 years only. After that you’re an adult without a child snd don’t have the right to extra holidays or time off.

A company can refuse unpaid leave though, if they've hired somebody to fulfil a full time job and the leave essentially makes them part time.
They can't refuse parental leave but they can stop someone taking it at peak times when other employees are have their normal annual leave booked already, if that leaves the business short staffed.
I think the employee should be careful if he's just assuming he can have off whatever weeks he fancies (school holidays for example ) - the employer can insist PL is applied for properly and taken at non peak times if this is a problem for them.

Tbh, I think other employees will get fed up if this man gets easier clients or is expected to do less taxing work so his PL can be accommodated, or if other staff are having to cover his job in addition to their own. The employee is hired to add benefit to the company, not cause them additional work!

Thank you to everyone who contributed to the thread, even the rude ones and the ones who clearly hadn’t RTFT. It has made me think about things from different perspectives, which is why I started the thread in the first place as I did think that I might BU! So, the thread served its purpose well for me! 😀 Have a great weekend everybody!

I would imagine if he is this way inclined he will also take maximum 'sick' leave..enough to not trigger disciplinary..

Don't get your knickers in a knot about other people using their entitlement even if they're stretching the entitlement, either they're entitled to it or not. You don't make the rules.

I work with, have employed and and family of people who burn through their Annual leave by August. Their choice, they always have and always will. Im usually the one with leave to use up towards the end of the leave year and carrying the maximum through to the next year.

Op mentions the AL was spent on a skiing holiday. It's none of the employers or managers business what it was spent on, seems a bit of an odd thing to raise.

Perhaps the manager and company should offer a buy more AL policy at x1.5 the day rate.

You are unreasonable and need to look at the evidence. Regular holidays improve productivity. If they take unpaid leave it benefits the employer by having a happier healthier member of staff and reducing their wage costs. Possibly reduces sickness absence. Their children benefit from more time with their parents. Parental leave is an entitlement because it actually benefits employers as well as employees

I had absolutely no idea we could take this. I was always led to believe it was for emergency days (call from school to say they are unwell etc)! How have i missed this, bring on the parental leave!

Nobody. You’re expected to be truthful about it but it’s not kept in a central record.

So realistically, from one job to the next, there's nothing to stop someone taking the piss?

Not unless the employers keep proper records and check, no.