Is this workplace discrimination?

[overtimeban]

Posting for advice as I'm struggling to make sense of this and whether it's OK or not.

My partner is a public sector employee. He often works a lot of overtime shifts which are essential for paying the household bills. Without the overtime our family would struggle. It's always available so that's not an issue and never has been. He works an average of 60-80 hours a month of overtime on top of his contracted hours.

He very, very rarely cancels an overtime shift. I can count on one hand the number of times he's done this in the past couple years, and it's only ever been when our toddler has been unwell and my partner and I have had to juggle the days off between us (I also work).

The past week or so he's booked 4 overtime shifts, 3 of which there were no issues with, and one he had to cancel with only a few hours notice because our 2 year old started to vomit and had become quite unwell (doctor had already seen her earlier that day but she deteriorated by the time it got to a few hours before his overtime shift).

Today he has spoken with one of the senior staff at his work who have given him a 'warning' that if it happens again that he needs to cancel overtime at short notice, they will place him on an "overtime ban".

Can they do this?? He is a very reliable employee with a strong track record of showing up for overtime he books. He very rarely cancels shifts, and on the odd occasion he has it's because our child is unwell and I'd been unable to take anymore carers leave myself. He would never just cancel because he'd changed his mind and couldn't be bothered. He has a very strong work ethic etc.

I just don't know what they expect him to do when he has a young child to consider too? Is it not discrimination to punish someone with a "ban" on overtime because they've had to unexpectedly cancel one shift in probably hundreds he's booked and worked over the past year??

I'm just so angry at this punitive response from his work and the lack of support for a working parent with a sick child
.

Any advice welcome.

Honestly? The manager just sounds a bit ridiculous. I imagine they are reliant on people doing overtime? In which case, 'banning' them is hardly going to be helpful.

I work for a union and this is a part of what unions are there for. He should speak to his rep.

Sounds awful place to work...shocked re colleague and cast.

He's spoke to someone higher up and been reassured the ban isn't going to apply to him if it a genuine childcare reasons. Thank goodness for that! I can stop worrying now. Thanks everyone for your comments.

Does the workforce need him to do the overtime as much as you need the money? I think the boss is a shitty twat, but the reason he's got the thick hump is because he relies so much on your DP to cover overtime.

If you're brave enough, call his bluff. I'd lay money that test face will be begging DP to do overtime before too long.

They are hugely reliant on it yes!
In fact, the irony is, in this chat with the person higher up today he was told this comment was likely a knee jerk response to them struggling for staff and needing more people than had volunteered for overtime to cover shifts. Given he's constantly volunteering for overtime, they clearly need him, so banning him is just cutting their nose of to spite their face isn't it🙄

Eurgh these employers that cut their nose off to spite their face, honestly.

OP I get it, I'm the default child sickness parent and it is immensely pressured and stressful knowing your job is the one that always has to bend as there is no one else to help. When I went back to work from maternity leave with my daughter I spent the majority of my first month back being off with her again as she picked up so many bugs from nursery, and she still does a lot. It's really hard. I'd definitely speak to his union/higher ups etc as usually someone somewhere in an organisation recognises that penalising someone in a way that negatively affects business needs (as well as the employee) is stupid. If they need him doing overtime then it would be idiotic to ban him. Hopefully he can get more clarity around the situation so he can take leave with your child too if required.

Incidentally I hope he qnd others are feeding back that if they have staff shortages they need to have better employee retention approaches, for example not penalising someone for breaking their wrist when there's nothing they can do to stop it, obviously not deliberate was it?!

Well, then as you know the score regarding the company, there is no point asking our opinions, as you already know they aren't very generous employers.

No, it is not a discrimination case, as many, many people on here have told you.
The fact he always does the overtime 99% of the time is irrelevant.

You're just going to have to take it on the chin and hope your child isn't poorly again.

PS....I hope the overtime doesn't disappear for you, because to rely on your DH doing an extra 20 hours extra per week, every week is a big ask! He must be shot to pieces and beyond tired. Especially as you say it's physical work.

Is it a minimum wage job?

Is it a minimum wage job?

No

You're just going to have to take it on the chin and hope your child isn't poorly again.

She picks up every virus going and has been unwell on average once every 2-3 months since she started nursery at 9 months (she's now almost 3). It's absolutely relentless and never ending. We've taken her to the GP so many times, I've asked them if there's something fundamentally wrong with her, like a poor immune system or something, they say not (although they've never tested), and assure me it's within the realms of normal for a baby / toddler to be unwell that frequently when in childcare. I'm not convinced. The GP thinks I'm a hypochondriac, obviously. Not sure what else I can do. It's just so draining.

Unfortunately that's a very risky approach for an employer as treating people differently on a case by case basis really is a discrimination case waiting to happen. Imagine they don't impose the ban on your DH because they know he's 'genuine' but impose it on Sally because they believe she's a piss taker. Well Sally's going to be asking why a man had preferential treatment, and they're going to have to come up with some pretty good evidence to show she's a piss taker rather than an equally genuine case. Their policy protects them.

@5128gap
Ok, I see your point that it's hard to determine the genuine from the non genuine cases. In that case maybe they look at frequency of cancellations alone? How often is Sally cancelling OT shifts last minute? If above a certain percentage, we stop giving her overtime. Etc. I don't know, I just feel that for an otherwise reliable employee when they're desperate for cover for shifts, it's pretty harsh treatment. Thankfully the person my partner spoke with who's above the guy who threatened the ban agreed, and assured him it wouldn't be actioned for genuine childcare reasons.

It's so stressful isn't it. It's knowing I'm the default person if she's sick - it's on me alone. That's just a lot of pressure on my plate and my job is already quite high pressured as it is. It's stressful enough splitting the sickness with DP never mind shouldering it alone.

Yes they are notoriously bad employers and staff retention is awful. It's not hard to see why when you talk to people who work within the industry. Penalising someone for breaking a wrist in an accident with a "warning", I mean come on. Just awful.

DP just reminded me of another one of his colleagues who needed an urgent blood transfusion after falling very unwell. He spent 5 days in hospital, 2 of these were his rota'd working days and 3 were days off. He was told on his return to work that he was "lucky" his hospitalisation mostly fell on days off as this meant he avoided a "sickness warning". For being in hospital needing a life saving blood transfusion. 🤯

What use is this doing spending time talking about how shit his employer is when you are utterly reliant on not only his contracted job but a huge amount of overtime at said job.

He cancelled on OT at the very last minute and left them in the lurch (understandably as he had a sick child).

They didn’t punish him. They have him a heads up that there would be consequences re availability of OT if it happens again.

Now either he moves on to a different job or he accepts OT availability comes with strings attached.

Either way… time for a close look at family finances if so dependent on such a vulnerable source of income

This is genuinely appalling. I really hope he can plan to move jobs soon.

DH works for the NHS and in his trust, if you call in sick for any shift ( overtime or contracted ) you can't do any overtime or bank shifts for 2 weeks...

This is genuinely appalling. I really hope he can plan to move jobs soon.

It brings in good money despite how awful they are with employee wellbeing, so we weigh it up I guess. Pros and cons. And he's rarely unwell himself so it's not too bad. The only time it creates an issue is with our (frequently) sick child

What use is this doing spending time talking about how shit his employer is when you are utterly reliant on not only his contracted job but a huge amount of overtime at said job.

Erm, I'm having a discussion on an online forum, I didn't realise I couldn't talk about how shit his employer are? They are, fact 🤷‍♀️ I've given many examples as to how. That doesn't mean we don't need the money from his job to pay our bills. The two can coexist and aren't mutually exclusive - many, many people are reliant on their jobs to pay bills but at the same time can recognise areas where their employer isn't treating them well. That's quite common.

Punishment is my word, and that's how it feels. By "banning" him from overtime they're putting us into financial difficulty. And that ban would only be applied because he took time off with our sick child. Therefore it very much feels to me like a punishment for doing that

But his employer probably won't know that but even if they do thats not their problem. Relying so heavily on overtime is a bad idea. What if your husband is ill & off work for a prolonged period. I'd say you've got bigger issues to worry about

indeed. many many are reliant on their jobs to pay the bills

but many many are not reliant on the utterly variable and vulnerable over time offered with no contractual obligation to by their employer to pay the bills

There is also the possibility of:

1. the person who said did so out of frustration as a number of people canx that day
2. your partner construed it in that way because he doesn't want to take more time off

I think your DH and I work for the same organisation. First and foremost, is he in the union? If he isn't, he needs to join it today.

The warning from the detail office will be a generic one. It's kind of the opposite of discrimination, because it will go to anyone who books an overtime shift and then doesn't show up. If his place is anything like mine, we essentially run the place on goodwill and planned overtime, and yes, we are always sending out the text requests for people to do overtime.

Please do NOT let him send that letter. It will not help and will make him look daft. Get him to join the union, then speak to his rep, and then his own line manager.

Yes he's in a union

@fruity81 and? My point stands. We can still rely on the money from his job and recognise that his employer are arseholes who don't give a shit about employee wellbeing.

It's not punishment though but most likely policy applied to all regardless of reasons for late cancellation.
This policy isn't unusual in healthcare.
He may have not been aware as like you state in your OP its a very rare occurance for him to cancel a shift.
Hopefully he won't have to do it again anytime soon so it's not something that you will need to worry about.
It might be worth him checking how long such a ban would be its highly unlikely to be permanent but like others have said a fixed period