"Stealing" colleague's job after her maternity leave

[JollieJullie]

I am a Comms Director in a big multinational company. My closest colleague and friend is also a Comms Director, but we have different areas of focus.

Her role was created a year ago mainly to manage a key, complex project between Dec to June. When she got the role she was 3 months pregnant and went on mat leave in November right before the big project was kicked off.

As a result, I took over her key project with my team (on top of our usual area of focus) and we are delivering it in late June. She will be back in July.

I just spoke to our manager who has decided that I should continue managing her previous area of focus (on top of mine) in an expanded role with more seniority and more compensation, while my colleague will come back to a different role looking after something totally unrelated. Her seniority and pay will be unaffected, but I think she will be really pissed off with the company and with me.

I am concerned she will feel like I stole her job which she loved so much and I feel really conflicted about this situation my manager has created. When I raised my concerns I was told by our manager and HR that my colleague knew that the key project in her role happened in Dec-June and she decided to take 8 months of leave in spite of that, so she should be ready to be flexible about what she comes back to. I was told that I can't really refuse the additional responsibilities.

What are your thoughts on this? How can I best handle the situation with my colleague when she is back?

Many thanks for your comments!

How did she expect to come back to the same role when she knew it was a temp project?

if they offer something similar theyre well within their rights-if you dont take the promotion they'll jsut give it to someone else

It’s not just the project - her area of focus is also going over to the OP on enhanced remuneration.

The job was created mainly for that project. Which will be delivered before she comes back. And wasn’t even started when before she left.

Yes - and the op will “continue managing her previous area of focus (on top of mine) in an expanded role with more seniority and more compensation, while my colleague will come back to a different role looking after something totally unrelated”. As in, previous to the project.

The whole thing is too much of a grey area not to get some advice from HR.

I agree the company need to take advice. However, after 26 weeks she has no entitlement to come to the previous role, where there have been changes. The changes are the main part of her work has been done by someone else. The part the job was created to accommodate. The rest of the role, a small part, is going to be done by someone else and the woman gets a new role.

it’s likely the small part is best sat with whoever, did the project or another good business reason for it.

They haven’t simply given her role in full, away. They have reorganised.

I would have thought it was seriously unprofessional - taking on a role which was specifically "Do XYZ from December to June" whilst knowing full well that she would actually be on maternity leave for that entire period.

I mean would you agree to decorate someone's home from 1-14 July knowing that you would be in Spain for those 2 weeks? It makes no sense.

She should be fully prepared to come back to a different role as the role she was employed for has actually ended (without her even doing it!).

We don’t know if the mat leave policy states 26 weeks (it may be more generous) and we don’t know if the previous area of focus was a small part or not. If they’ve reorganised and done away with one role that’s done by someone on mat leave to create another better paid one for another member of staff (which on the face of it sounds like it’s actually the same role) then they’ll need to show how that’s been managed fairly and with due consultation.

If I were the OP I’d be investigating further before making any decisions.

The 26 weeks isn’t a company policy. It’s part of maternity leave laws.

Ita very unlikely m, the company have a specific policy where after 26 weeks, you are guaranteed the same job back.

There’s no point speculating that one company may have one different rule, rather than assuming they use the actual regulations.

op said the job was mainly created for that project. So yes, you can assume it was the main part of the job.

i guess it’s in wording, because I think the main part of one job has finished and they are looking at how to move forward. It’s been decided that the small part of the role left can be done by Op and a new role for the other woman. It’s a standard restructure.

Op is, in part, getting promoted for her work on the project. There’s no rules around not promoting anyone while someone else is on mat leave.

I wouldn't do anything. It's not your call it's the direction of the company. Nothing for her to be annoyed either you personally for. It was additional to your own work. You might find she's grateful - coming back from maternity work is hard and having less stress is a bonus. Her pay and seniority is unaffected ted as you say and that's the main thing

The only way the OP would be caught up with her friends tribunal would be if she discloses that in her opinion her manager/HR only offered her the newly created role in a bid to remove the previous two roles. But at the moment she is not a participant in that decision making process just the sucessfull candidate.

Companies are entitled to reorganise roles.
Her employer had 2 roles. One of which was created due to the original project and have now (technically) removed 2 roles and created 1 new role. This new role has proven to work sucessfully for 8 months. So the employer has a number of options
• to make both employees interview and make one redundant.
• to hold an open interview process, pick an outside candidate and make both employees redundant
• to promote one employee and redeploy the other employee.
• etc.
none of these choices are controlled by the OP. The possible discrimination is in the process used which ended up with her friend being redeployed.

Once the OP accepts the new role in good faith, even of the tribunal ruled in the friends favour, they would not be in a position to order her employer to change her terms and conditions and have her demoted. In that instance the resolution is usually either the friend agrees to take money to seek employment elsewhere or possibly the friend has to accept the OP as her manager.

An important thing for the OP to remember is that this decision making process was above her pay grade. However she is climbing the ranks and the ethics involved in the decision making process is something she will have to consider if she is concerned about how the company would treat her if she was pregnant or unable to work for various reasons or if while managing her team, she will be expected to hire/fire staff.

The 26 weeks isn’t a company policy. It’s part of maternity leave laws. Ita very unlikely m, the company have a specific policy where after 26 weeks, you are guaranteed the same job back. There’s no point speculating that one company may have one different rule, rather than assuming they use the actual regulations

I'm aware that it's part of mat leave law - what I'm saying is 'check the mat leave policy' to be sure that's the case here. The OPs friend doesn't seem think she won't come back to the same job, so the OP needs to be sure. That's not speculating, that's common sense.

op said the job was mainly created for that project. So yes, you can assume it was the main part of the job

Again, I'd check. Was it the main part of the role which and will continue to be so, or was it a key deliverable and the role (ie main area of focus) will continue with other projects (and would have continued such with the friend in charge - but won't be able to now because the main area of focus that she's had until now has been moved to someone else).

i guess it’s in wording, because I think the main part of one job has finished and they are looking at how to move forward. It’s been decided that the small part of the role left can be done by Op and a new role for the other woman. It’s a standard restructure.
Op is, in part, getting promoted for her work on the project. There’s no rules around not promoting anyone while someone else is on mat leave.

Absolutely - it's in the wording, and I'd make absolutely sure I knew what had been agreed with management, HR and staff side (if there's such a thing there) before I agreed anything. There's nothing to suggest she's getting promoted for her work on the project - all she's been told is that she'll take on the friend's previous area of focus and that a key project in her role happened in Dec-June and she decided to take 8 months of (mat) leave in spite of that.

Notagamer, you’ve already mortified yourself on one thread today. Maybe take a break and stop dictating how someone else can seek support when they’re struggling with something.

What exactly would she be doing if she were to return to her old role, given that the project finishes before she gets back?

The OPs friend doesn't seem think she won't come back to the same job, so the OP needs to be sure. That's not speculating, that's common sense.

This thread shows people don’t know this. Loads of people believe they have the right to exactly the same job after 26 weeks. it’s one of those things people are sure or, but turns out not to be true.

a restructure or the end of a project is enough change, to bring her back in another role and still be legal.

The majority of her job doesn’t exist anymore. Her job needs changing

Other projects in her main role in her main area of focus?

We just don’t know enough about the setup, job description/role or mat leave policy - and so we can’t say for definite that this company is or isn’t doing something they shouldn’t, but if I were the OP I’d make absolutely sure I knew what the situation was, both for myself in case I went on mat leave at some point (or on sick leave) and for the sake of my friendship. Other people would obviously do things differently, judging from previous posts.

Why would she assumes she is getting her old job back? You said that her role was created for a project that coincided with her maternity leave. So I wouldn’t have thought she would be expecting that at all, she would know the project is over now.

I think you should step away from her engagement with the company and leave her to manage that, you should focus on your own next career steps.