Discrimination after maternity leave

[SMarie123]

Hi all,
I am having a lot of conflict with my boss at the moment. I have 14 years highly relevant experience and have always received good performance reviews etc but before I went on maternity leave I was informed they were moving someone from a different department into my role on a permanent basis (illegal I know) she is two grades more senior than me but actually only marginally better paid because I always scored well in performance reviews and recurved top pay rises. I actually didn't make a fuss before I went on maternity leave because the environment was toxic and I just wanted out...... fast forward 12 months and I come back to a totally different role in a much more strategic team, which to be honest I don't mind. However I am under qualified in this role and a bit out of my depth. I have become resentful of the person who replaced me permanently because the people she manages (and I used to manage) tell me how lazy she is eg she logs into work on time but then goes to the gym for 2 hours. She works from home one day a week and only does work if the boss is cc'ed in. She is one of those really annoying political people who brown noses senior management and they think she is great but she isn't a grafter. I feel like she gloats that she is more senior than me although she has no idea how well I am paid.... I keep that one in my back pocket.... also it has become apparent that I have a long way to develop to the next grade in this new role (there are other people in the team with more relevant experience who will get promoted before me-which I appreciate is justified).

I spoke to my boss when I was back 12 weeks and said I felt discriminated due to my redeployment. I asked what he could do to sort it and he said basically nothing. I have been given a job at the grade I was and it is like it or lump it. It all got heated and I pointed out they had behaved illegally in relation to my maternity and if it went to court it would be an open shut case. He said I was manipulative and if I wanted my d dead end job back he would get it back for me. We had some further meetings that were more professional and he said he would try and look at my grade in January. When we met for my performance review in December he seems to not remember saying he would look at my grade so I am back to square one!

My boss says I am being unreasonable to expect the same grade as the person who permanently backfilled my maternity leave, what do you think? He makes me feel about 2 inches tall every time I meet him about this topic (not at all on other topics he is a near perfect boss) but I am struggling emotionally to go back to work tomorrow

I meant to say I do actually like the new job and I like the company, team etc.

I don't really want to get a job. I am too lazy to sue them as a result of the mismanaged maternity (it takes a year and is very expensive- I couldn't handle the stress). Hr have no control of the department I work in, the partner in charge does his own thing and they are powerless to influence.

I'm not sure what the actual problem is...?

If you took more than 6 months leave it's perfectly legal for the company to permanently backfill your previous role and redeploy you to a new role at the same grade. How long were you off? And it's not really anything to do with you if the person now doing your previous role has a higher grade. Perhaps she's been demoted for some reason. Nor is it your problem if she's shit at her job. Not your circus, not your monkeys, doesn't affect you at all.

Your salary and grade have been maintained. In fact, rather than be put on the mummy track you've been given a stretch opportunity on your return, apparently. I'm not really seeing an open and shut discrimination case. If it's toxic, find a new job.

I think you need to focus on your current job, and not the gossip about who is doing your job now.

Hi I think it is really important that you get advice before proceeding any further. You may think the case is open and shut (and it is clear that your manager has behaved inappropriately arguing with you as they have) however I think that the actions they have taken to permanently back fill you is allowable, as long as they don't then make you redundant. But I may be wrong
And this does depend on things like the length of time you took maternity leave for.

Acas helpline may be a good start.

I did get legal advice, it is illegal to 1) backfill someone permanently before they go on maternity leave. 2) a suitable alternative has to be at least 50% similar to your original position. This role is entirely different (my old role was very unique). Some of the responsibilities they have taken away are deemed demotion eg I used to manage a team and now I don't.

There are some other things they miss informed me of, eg I could never get to the next grade in my old role but yet she managed to achieve it so clearly it was not impossible?

I do understand I am raising a moral grievance not a legal one but surely the legal mismanagement is not irrelevant?

Countessvonboobs

I know she has not been demoted because they confirmed that she hasn't. Also in my old role I had access to all salary files for her old department.

Can you explain, without any reference to a woman who is really nothing to do with you, in what way you are being discriminated against, and are in a worse position than if you hadn't taken maternity leave?

Countessvonboobs-

1. I was at the top of my game in the role I was in, top 5% of the organization and they told me there was no promotion prospects in that role but then they took in someone less qualified at a more senior grade. So clearly there was no cap.
2. I got redeployed with no option I my old position
3. I am now in a position where I will need to grow significantly before promotion and it will take 2/3 years

Okay. Focus on that. Although if you've ruled out changing jobs or undertaking any formal processes, I'm not sure what you're hoping can be done. I don't think you can get anywhere with #2 either unless you did come back in under 6 months - it was an internal transfer not a permanent external hire and they could always have moved her out again had you come back after 3 months. Leave out all the stuff about how you don't like this woman and think she's a brown noser and her grade etc. It's irrelevant, it makes your case look weak and it makes you look petty.

Why do I have to tolerate being under qualified and having to work my way up but she is allowed to go in unqualified at a really pretty senior grade?

Btw when I talk to my boss I don't focus on the negative things about her personality. I know that is something he needs to see for himself.

I have however asked him to map both of our skill sets to a capability framework and illustrate why she is more senior. The whole point is she was recruited permanently before I even went on maternity. They argue she would not have moved if the move wasn't permanent, which to me proves the point they had no intention of complying with legislation.... she negotiated what should have been non-negotiable.

Honestly, it sounds as if she had been promoted beyond her level and they were trying to park her somewhere safe that she couldn't do any harm, while moving you somewhere there was room to progress. She's a higher grade who has been put there, but they are telling you clearly it's a dead end role and you wouldn't progress within it, and that implies neither would anyone else.

Of course it is more challenging for you now, but if you're not stretched you would get bored, by the sounds of things. You like a challenge and you tend to rise to it.

But she didn't get promoted in your old role. She got promoted to her current grade before she ever moved to your old role. There are legitimate reasons it might make sense for someone with senior-level strategic and soft skills but less applied experience to take a lateral, and even slightly downwards, secondment. That wouldn't involve demoting them to the grade of the previous role holder. The organisation consider that she earned her extra grade before she ever stepped into the role you used to do. And they don't consider that you've earned it yet. You certainly don't earn it automatically because of HR decisions about how to develop (or minimise harm from) someone more senior.

Have you ever considered that maybe your manager is telling you the truth? That your old role was a dead end (quite likely if it was specialised) and he considers that you should be grateful to now have a stretch opportunity that has promotion potential? The only thing I think you could have legitimate grounds on is if your new role is truly totally dissimilar to your old one and as a consequence your performance rating suffered. But you like your new role apparently and don't want to move, so...? All you seem to want to do is to try and use this whole thing as leverage to get a grade bump and I really don't see that you have a case for that, and you will thoroughly piss off your manager and burn a lot of capital if you push it. Maybe your organisation isn't good at talent management and this woman actually doesn't deserve her senior grade, but do you really think you're going to upturn the way they've done things like this?

They don't have to give you the same job back after 12 months leave, they do need to give you the same grade which they have.

Never heard that the job needs to be 50% the same as your old and I think that is wrong, unless that is a very recent change (former HR worker here).

She has not been promoted in your old role - you seem to be ignoring that point. She has been redeployed by the sound of it and yes, her salary is likely to be protected in those circumstances for at least a minimum period.

You now have the chance to progress which you didn't have before.

She already had the higher grade, I don't see how you can use that to promote yourself, no matter how many capability frameworks you map! It is hard for anyone reading your posts to see how someone who already had that grade affects your grading now in a different job.

I’m a bit confused by your post. Did you want to retain your previous role? If so, the only way to guarantee that is to not take the additional maternity leave. By taking a year, you must have known that for business reasons, the company can restructure and offer you something different on equivalent t and c?

Re the protected leave period I am based in Ireland and instead of 6 months we have 26+16 and I got up to the 12 months because I took annual leave on the end of my maternity.

I honestly can’t see how this is a bad thing. This other person is senior to you because she was promoted in a different role. Totally irrelevant.

Now she is in the job with no promotion opportunities and you are being well paid in a job where you can progress. This should work out much better for you than her shouldn’t it?