Not being replaced while on ML

[Cyclebump]

Is this normal?

I work full-time and am 28+3 with DC1. I'm going on annual leave and the ML from the beginning of March.

The company has been umming and ahhing about what to do about cover and after saying I would be replaced they've now decided there's 'no budget' to cover my work.

Their current plan is my job being split up and farmed out to several departments while a freelancer who will 'cover' me is being brought in for two days a week.

I have not been consulted at all.

I'm more than a little insulted as I'm a trained journalist with eight years' experience and some of my work is being given to non-editorial staff with no journalistic background. I also feel like I won't have a job to come back to as my role is being irreparably destroyed before I even go off.

Isn't it customary to replace like with like?

Not necessarily, no. There's not really any 'customary' when it comes to how employers address cover during maternity leave. Some muddle through without anyone at all, some distribute responsibilities elsewhere, some get a slightly different role in to replace, some get a more junior member of staff 'acting up', and some just recruit a direct replacement.

There's no need for them to consult you on what they do with your work while you are absent. Why are you so insulted?

It's just the way it's been handled and a manager said something along the lines of 'well you don't really need to be qualified to do your job'.

It's fine I was just curious as to whether it was normal. I'm a bit worried I'll have no job to come back to.

Hi Cycle, I understand where you are coming from. I wasn't replaced on my second maternity leave and I also felt "insulted" it makes you feel like your work is not that important, and can be done by anyone and doesn't recognise that you are probably performing a skilled role. I hate to tell you this, but I was made redundant while on maternity leave. One of the reasons cited was that the need for my role had diminished and I believe that had I been replaced it would not have looked like the need for the role had diminished, because the work was given out to other people it did look like I wasn't needed.

Have got a new, better job now and walked away from work with my head held high!

That's what I think they're going to do. Am trying to just let it go. My boss is an ass anyway so perhaps it'll be a good thing in the long run if I end up being made redundant. Thanks

I'm a HR Manager, I returned to work in October last year after eleven months of mat leave. I wasn't replaced either, rather the HR Advisor 'stepped up' (flowery - don't get me started ) to cover some additional responsibilities. Unfortunately, she has now been made redundant.

So, although I wasn't made redundant - my not being replaced whilst I was off was an indication of change, absolutely.

I wasn't replaced when I went on ML, people typically aren't in my industry (research) because it's hard to replace the exact skills.

I would say two days a week of a freelancer counts as partial cover. They may recognise that the amount and quality of "your" work will go down in your absence because the work will be done by non-editorial staff. Although your boss's remark about not needing to be qualified is a bit worrying.

I wasn't replaced, no-one who went on maternity ever was, my colleagues spread my work around them or on some case clients waited for me to go back (consulting). If they are paying you maternity pay over SMP, they may genuinely not have the budget to replace you!

Perhaps because it's just all been handled so badly (lots of other instances of them just being useless) that perhaps I'm just feeling a low over nothing.

Thanks everyone. TBH I think I'm just finding it all bamboozling. I've worked since the week before my 20th birthday and am now 28, I think the idea of having so long off is freaking me out.