new clawback clause on Additional Maternity Pay just before I started maternity leave

[AzfS]

Hello,

I would like to get your views on this:
Before I made the decision to get pregnant I have checked my employee handbook which had a section on maternity leave / pay. Company was offering Additional Maternity Pay (AML) on top of SMP and there were no clawback clause.
I told my company I was pregnant when I was required to do so. And then 2 month before I actually started my maternity leave HR updated the employee handbook and added a clawback clause stating that employee had to return to work for a period of 12 month otherwise they will ask for the repayment of the AML.
I may not return to work but I don't want to repay the full AML or to get it deducted from my final salary as I believe the clawback clause is not applicable to me in this case as it was introduced after I advised my company that I was pregnant.

Any advice will be much appreciated.

Regards

I don't think it matters that it was introduced after you advised the company that you were pregnant. It will be applicable when you take the leave. As it's company policy, ie not statutory, there's very little you can do and if you tell them you are not planning on returning they will hardly be wanting to help you out.

If it's any consolation my company removed enhanced maternity pay just before I got pregnant so I only got statutory - it was a case of sods law.

I don't think you are entitled to them removing the payback clause in your case. Things change all the time. Someone has to be the next person to get pregnant after they change the clause - it's just bad luck it happens to be you.

The clawback will apply to you as you have yet to start maternity.mits a very reasonable clause and one many have. After all, why would you pay somebody over and above the legal amount for them to take the money and not return. Extra pay is usually done to retain loyal staff.

Is it contractual? Probably not. They would not be able to apply conditions like this after the event, ie after you'd received the money, but as long as you are in a position to make an informed decision about whether to take the money on those conditions or to decline it, I don't think there's going to be an awful lot you can do.

I do think 12 months is a long clawback though. 3 or 6 months is more usual, but as long as you know about it before you receive the money there's nothing unlawful about it.

Our clawback is 2 years. You have pay all of it if you leave within 12 months (or don't go back at all), you pay half of it back if you leave after 12 months but before 24 months.

12 months is reasonable, because we do not know exactly how much the AMP is. If original poster is on a good wage, it could be a substantial sum. As others have said, the clause has come into place before you go on leave, so you are obliged to stick by it. If you are not planning on returning, just decline the AMP. Then you are not left with having to repay should you leave, or being in a position you may resent if you returned to pay back.

Azfs
I have no idea what the legal stand point is, and it seems as flowery said you'll just have to lump it, but I wanted to say that from a 'good employer' perspective, I think it would have been kind to apply the new rule to those who became pregnant after the new ruling was in place.

I feel very sorry for you - you must be livid.