Maternity leave and pay increase

[Rainbow46567]

I’m currently on maternity leave and due to return to work in July. Iv worked for the business for 7 years and each year I have received a pay increase. I was head of a department working directly with 1 other employee who was below me, I was her line manager. Since being on maternity leave she has taken my role as a maternity cover position, she has informed me that she has received a pay increase. I emailed my manager who is also the owner of the business to ask about the annual pay increase and I was told I haven’t made the list of pay increases for this year as the business hasn’t performed well.

I’m not returning to that role but I am returning to the business part time to a lesser role and I have agreed a new salary with my employer, however I am due annual leave at the end of my maternity leave which will be paid on my current salary - should I just suck it up and it is what it is or should I fight for something that does seem unfair?

I think when you’re on parental leave you should be eligible for the annual pay review. Why have you, in particular, been identified as not eligible due to business performance? I sniff a potential bit of discrimination.

If you have decided to take another position then I would assume that the new salary included a pay-rise increment. Are you hoping to get an increment on your accrued leave pay?

I mean it certainly seems like discrimination. But I'd wonder are you benefiting from the higher paid annual leave as it is, as are they within their rights to pay your annual leave at your new reduced rate?

When is the pay increase usually implemented each year? And when do you start your new role?

I think you need a little more information to evaluate.

The role you are currently on maternity leave from (1) what is their rationale for you to not have made the cut but your stand in ? - depending on their rational this is where I think the potential breach is.

What is in the new contract and does it say anything about raises in the new role (2) ? i.e. is it treated in a different way due to custom and practice e.g. role 1 sales getting commission on closed sales and role 2 accounts getting a raise if overall company profit.

My new lesser role will start in August, I will be paid less as I will have less responsibilities. I have been offered the position and pay has been discussed but I am yet to receive and sign my new contract. It’s a privately owned business and the owner (my boss) is his own HR. My maternity ends mid July and I will be taking annual leave until the start of August. The pay increase is given out at the end of March each year, my equivalent who is covering my leave asked if I had received my pay increase letter, as she had gotten an increase, I questioned my employer and he said the business hasn’t performed well and I didn’t make the list, not everyone got one. My point is if I was not on maternity leave I would have got a pay rise but I didn’t because I’m on maternity leave…the pay rise will only benifit my few week holiday pay I’m owed, but I feel it’s the unjust I need to stand up for?

It does sound potentially like discrimination. Although more detail would be needed to be sure.

In reality they seem to have been very accomadationg with your new role so not sure its worth rocking the boat for the increase on 2 weeks pay.

This is not the hill to die on.

If pay rises are discretionary, your colleague could have been given one in recognition of stepping up, particularly as you are not going back into the role. It doesn’t necessarily mean you would have got one if you were doing the job.

The payrise is for the person not the role.

Even though Iv had one each year for 7 years except the year I’m on maternity leave? My boss said it wasn’t personal…
but yes you could be right it may not be the hill to die on, this is what I’m trying to work out…

I also think if they are paying you AL in your own salary you should suck it up. They'll be paying both the person in your old role and you at the higher wage and they don't have to. If you push this they might say when you return to work it's straight into the old role and the salary that goes with it (often budgets don't allow for double postholders). Maybe work out which is better financially for you

ahh ok, just so I understand, why wouldn’t they have to pay me my annual leave at my current salary? The annual leave has been accrued from that position? Surly if I was leaving all together they would pay me my annual leave at my normal salary..why would it be different just because I’m changing position?

I thought that al would be paid at previous salary, especially if officially you are nit starting new role until it is taken. Was your cover on same salary as yours pre ml?

When did you negotiate the new role/salary? I had this a few years ago, agreed in Dec that I would get a significant pay rise that would kick in the following April. I got that, then it rolled round to June/July when the inflationary increases were announced (we get these yearly and I realise how lucky I am!). When I asked where mine was I was told that that was factored into the new salary I’d agreed to six months earlier. How I or they could have know what the inflationary increase could have been at that stage was never explained when I asked. I wasn’t the only one who challenged it and got the same response, that these increases were only for those who hadn’t received any other separately-agreed increase in salary that year.

If they are paying you full time annual leave at your old salary I'd stay quiet. Annual leave is accrued for each week you work but most employers for ease give you the full amount at start of leave year say its Jan to Dec. You will have 2023 annual leave on ft old rate but your still accruing 2024. Strictly speaking your only earning full time annual leave is accrued until you return to pt post in July, which then you would accrued less annual leave at lower rate for 2024. Iykwim

How many days of last financial year did you work? It seems fair to me that the person who did the work gets the bonus.

You're lucky they're not making you take leave on new salary. I only had few months off first maternity. I teach & went back start of July & they made me go onto new 0.6 contract straight away rather than paying me FT over summer & allowing me to start PT start of new term. I had only been off March til end of June so had worked quite a bit of the academic year.

It seems odd your maternity cover disclosed that though - I think they're stirring a bit & trying to see if you got pay increase.

It's like getting a promotion but your boss says you accrued this leave in your old role so when you take next week off it'll be at your old salary. It doesn't matter when you accrue the annual leave. You have a paid day from your current terms and conditions.

Your old role is covered, you aren't in that role and won't be again as there's someone else in that role. You aren't returning to that position, and in my company, you'd have to return to a vacant post as otherwise we'd be effectively paying two people at the higher salary, which wouldn't have been budgeted for.

I think it's admirable and fair to not start the new contract until after you've used up the leave, they certainly don't have to do that so if the pay increase is less than the difference of your accrued leave then I'd leave it.