Angry my manager has taken away WFH perk?

[ZaHaK]

Am I unreasonable to be angry that my manager has taken away my wfh perk whilst I’m on maternity?

I have put in a proposed flexible work plan.

I used to do Tuesday - Thursday on site and Friday morning at home.

I requested to do less hours so I can drop the kids off to school and pick them up and keep my wfh Friday morning hours.

He’s rejected it and basically cornered me into just doing Tuesday- Thursday on site but I don’t want to reduce my hours too much so I’ve had to add an hour in the morning which means rushing my kids to breakfast club and nursery.

I am annoyed because on my last maternity 6 years ago, I applied for another job in another department which guaranteed wfh and my manager promised me more flexibility and wfh when I able to to keep me in his team.

But I feel like he’s used this maternity as an excuse to take it away from me. It’s not in my contract, it was an agreement between me and him.

What would you do? I feel like emailing him to say I am disappointed in him. Not many of our team like him but I used to rate him quite highly on the surveys etc because he always let me be. But I am really disappointed. I should have gone to the other team.

Do not approach HR or your manager until you have taken independent advice (PP mentioned ACAS and also Pregnant and Screwed), and considered what you want the outcome to be.

HR are there to protect the business, they act for the business.

She's put in a flexible working request - that means everything is up for negotiation.

She's put in a flexible working request to change her hours so everything becomes negotiable.
Her bosses job is to ensure the efficient running of the business. Not facilitate her childcare needs.

It’s nothing to do with working mothers - what about working fathers?

The OP had a perk which no one else had - that perk has been removed. It wasn’t contractual.

If your agreement is not contractual then the employer is within their rights to change it. You mentioned you’d asked for a reduction in hours and the suggested solution for the business is to remove the WFH time so you are still in the office in the days you worked in person anyway. Is that right?

Contractually speaking I think they are in the right. You requested something and they offered something that works for the business. If I was working 2 days a week I think I’d have accepted doing the 2 days at my old hours and find a side hustle to plug the income gap.

Approach HR without him and ask for a chat. You are concerned that you experiencing maternity discrimination. Please can they mediate/advise

If I were them I’d be very concerned about the potential for a constructive dismissal claim- although your WFH arrangement isn’t contractual, it’s longstanding and has presumably (?) been working well up until you took a period of protected leave at which point your manager has decided to revoke it. I wouldn’t fancy standing at a tribunal and trying to justify that.

This is why you don't take legal advice off the internet.

Constructive dismissal is something that is extremely difficult to prove and hardly any claims win.

If you leave your job because of this and then make a claim on the basis you have no choice you will lose.

If I were the employer, I wouldn't be concerned about a constructive dismissal claim at all, and I d be quite happy to go to the tribunal and defend any claim brought.

If WFH is not normal for the office because it makes work less effective, I can see why a manager might consider that a reduction in hours would only be feasible if it's the WFH hours that are cut. Otherwise it means fewer hours working, fewer hours in the office and a higher percentage of the time you do work being away from the office. Whether he's reasonable to be so against WFH is a different question, but it's not one we can really judge and it's probably not one you can have any push back on (other than the crude but powerful leverage that another job offer would give you).

If he's refused then he has to give one of eight business reasons and consider your request on an individual basis. As others have said, I'd speak to acas.
Flexible working isn't a perk that employers can just turn down because they don't like it. It is a right. There needs to be a genuine business reason. The fact you've done it previously for years and it's changed due to you coming off maternity leave puts them in a very precarious position. Definitely get legal advice.

So you wanted to reduce your working hours by cutting your hours each day, but instead you now have Friday off instead of a 1/2 day WFH?
It seems he has accomodated your reduced hours, but not exactly the way you wanted.
So not a case of using your maternity leave to fleece you at all. You requested a change, otherwise you'd still be WFH on Fridays. It's not like he's now making you go into office on Fridays.
You can't have everything you want, all of the time.
Apologies if I've misunderstoid.
You could just not change your hours and look for a more flexible job?

You partner can request flexible working. Maybe he could some of the school/nursery runs?

I had a similar situation where a new manager came in and wanted to recind my hybrid status which I had been working for over three years without any issue.
i worked 2 days in the office and three from home which really suited me.
At the time I called a legal helpline which dh gets free w his work (it’s for the whole family). They said the company had to demonstrate what had changed in the business to warrant this, and even if it’s not in your contract it’s your established way of working so that also counts. But they did say ultimately you can be be constructively dismissed if you say unilateral ‘no’.
In the end we came to a compromise on the hours/hybrid situation but I am soon to leave and that’s def been part if the decision for me - but not the only factor

He's only revoked it because she requested to reduce her hours further, so it was the obvious hours to get rid of.

I don’t really see an issue, the rest of your team don’t wfh you’ve enjoyed this perk for six years and now it’s ended. I don’t think it’s got anything to do with maternity more likely the whole team don’t wfh and you wanted to keep that and reduce hours to start later, he couldn’t accommodate both so now you have two full days off to do school drop offs and be with your children and three full days working and onsite.

I wonder if it’s more the case that other people at work have complained that they were being discriminated against by not being allowed to work from home when you could - you can’t be the only staff member with caring responsibilities.

Ultimately though, a lot of firms are moving away from hybrid working to office based now even for people who have been working from home for years, so I don’t think you are being singled out or that it is maternity discrimination. The needs of the business are that employees are onsite so you either adhere to that or look elsewhere for work.

I work for HR and I think the mangers proposal that your reduced hours be taken from your WFH day is reasonable to be honest OP.

Yes, exactly. Why is it that OP is doing all the drop-offs and pick-ups? It sends a strong message to her employer that her job isn't all that important if she isn't sharing the childcare with the dad so why should they prioritise her and her role when she isn't doing the same.

Your post isn't very clear, but it's quite normal to have a policy requiring a certain amount of presence at the workplace. So if you work five days a week and have to be present three days a week, that means you get two WFH days. If you drop a day and only work four days a week, that means you get one WFH day.

I think this is (understandably) an emotive post OP.

You need to be clear (and careful) what your complaint is.

You have made a flexible working request. Your manager has said your desire to reduce your hours can only be accommodated by removing your Friday wfh. So you would have gone from wfh on Friday to not working at all.

You haven't lost a perk; you've had your precise flexible working request refused and an alternative suggested. The thing to focus on is the reason why the request has been refused. If it was because you are needed for longer days Tues-Thurs (which it sounds like it is) to support the business, then that's valid. I'm sure if you want to work those hours and Friday wfh, that would be ok.

If you have had those arrangements for 6+ years, taking it away from you would be like a change in contract, surely? Seek legal advice OP (and another job).

I would say it’s unfair you are allowed to work from home and the rest of the team aren’t - he must be asked about this over and over.

I would

Look at the flexible working policy
Ask what has changed as you have worked flexibly for over 5 years
What benefit you working from home V no fridays would have
How the team would benefit from you working fridays -

I have a team member who does not work fridays and does longer hours in the week - as a team we struggle without her she has access we don’t have - so now she’s changed to 5 shorter days life is easier

What you need is facts - i’m sure there are templates somewhere - use them and fight your corner

This - you have been treated more favourably than anyone else in your area of work, and he always had the right (and, it could be argued, the obligation) to correct that. And you only dislike your manager now because he took away something that you got and nobody else did. So yes, YABU.

Given what you have said about copying in HR I suspect that there have been complaints from your colleagues.

If you then decide to look for a role that better suits you then that is fair enough and very reasonable.

If you're the only person with this perk then that could cause resentment among your colleagues. I think if you email your manager telling him how "disappointed" you are, you might find his goodwill disappears altogether.

OP has asked to change her contract. That restarts the deal. If she wishes to remain on her current arrangments rather than change her hours she might have an argument that the arrangement has become contractual - but that isn't guaranteed.

Strongly recommend contacting pregnant then screwed.