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.

That's understandable and fair points

This. 100%.

Parental leave is universal so yes would apply to both parents. It’s the business’ responsibility to assess whether the parental leave can be accommodated at that time they can delay due to business needs. Do individuals need to consider their colleagues before they take maternity leave/ paternity leave/ adoption leave/ request holiday/ take genuine sickness? That’s really not the employees responsibility

Yep given in his industry he previously had 40 days, that suggests 25 is on the low side. It certainly is for progressive companies in my industry. Professional employees expect 30+ these days.

As someone who used to run a consulting business, I don't think your business concerns are unreasonable. Yes, it is tough in an hourly fee business when people don't turn up. But their viewpoint is not unreasonable either. They have a right to the unpaid leave and their kids have a right to know their parents. Firstly, you should have teased this out in the job interview. Secondly, now you have to manage it. Talk to your employee and agree some ground rules, notice, etc. You didn't say if they were a good employee or not. This matters too! If they never get the job done, find someone else. But if they are good, figure it out . There is more than one way to manage a team.

I think there's a confusion between parental leave and unpaid leave. Yes, he's entitled to PL if taken in the weekly blocks with proper notice given and agreed at a convenient time for the business. But he's not entitled to take off ad hoc unpaid days whenever it suits him.

I think if you take a full time job, it's taking the pass yo try and sneakily turn it into a part time one - if the business wanted a worker who works a 4 day week, they'd have employed one!

The unpaid leave is a red herring. He's not entitled to it and they can easily just say no.

But OP's actual question is "to think this is not what parental leave is for"....and she's entirely wrong. The person wants more time off to spend with their children, that is EXACTLY what parental leave is for! What else could you imagine it is for?

I think your attitude is unreasonable but honestly it wouldn't be unreasonable to hold supervision, explain that your work doesn't have an unpaid leave policy, and tell them what bookable leave they have left for the year. They may well leave but at least everyone is being up front. She's potentially behaving in an entitled way if she is knowingly simply disregarding the leave policy and decided to take the job assuming it would just be changed for her...but equally she may just believe that unpaid leave is standard. Parental leave is 18 weeks for a child - its usually used in the maternity period as far as I'm aware and can only be used in full weeks not days here and there as it seems she's attempting. You also have to have worked for an employer for a year to even be entitled to it at all. I think she's got the wrong end of the stick about where she's at, if the absences are affecting the business you need to simply address it in a simple, clear and fair way. But I've voted unreasonable purely because of your "I did it so she can" spite. We shouldn't want the world to stay as it is because we survived our negative experiences, or expect that everyone feels the same as we do about anything.

Do you mean teased out the man's attitude to taking leave?
Or teased out his family situation and whether he was likely to want to take the parental leave he is entitled to?
Because not employing him on the basis of the latter would be illegal discrimination in the UK, so you'd have to have another, legal, watertight reason for not giving him the job, not just 'we thought you sounded likely to take parental leave and we don't want you to'