Redundancy on maternity leave

[Chmc87]

Hi, I have just been made redundant on maternity leave - I work in sales and the company is barely making any money, so it wasn't a surprise. However, I don't think the money I am receiving is fair, and I wanted to ask if anyone else has been in this situation. I am due back to work from maternity (taking the full year) at the end of November 2025, my statutory maternity period has expired and I am no longer being paid by the government or my employer. I have been with the company 7 years, so they have given me 7 weeks notice, and are giving me 7 weeks redundancy pay. The part I am querying is the holiday - I have accrued 25 days holiday, and rather than paying those days as a seperate payment, they have asked me to take it during my notice period. So I would only get my 7 weeks notice, and my 7 weeks redunancy. To me it feels they are asking me to come back to work early, and asked me to take holiday, even though I should be on mat leave. I have done lots of research online, and I think I am right. But obviously not 100% sure, has anyone been in a simular position? Thanks

It's very common to have a clause in the contract saying that any accrued but untaken annual leave must be taken during any notice period. This is effectively giving notice of that rule right at the outset of the employment relationship and would therefore override the "notice equating to double the statutory leave rule"

However the employer cannot force the OP to end her maternity leave early.

Yes, all of that.

But when I write contracts I do also add in that the employer will give two weeks notice of any enforced leave. I'm not sure this is very unusual.

I think that is fairly unusual and is employee friendly. It doesn't give the employer the flexibility it might need for emergencies.

I don’t recall ever having seen a contract that contains specific notice provisions for annual leave from employer to employee, only the other way around - but yes, it’s theoretically possible to vary the notice requirement. Personally I’ve only ever drafted it in respect of requiring holiday to be taken during garden leave.

I don't understand your point I'm afraid. The employer can still give more than the two weeks. Obviously I haven't replicated the exact wording I use here.

It's almost never enacted but it does allow the employer to impose leave, for example if the ee isn't taking it sensibly across the year (which is a common problem, saving it all up, managers not managing, etc).

My point is that if drafting for an employer it would be better to have:

1 - a clause which says that accrued but unused annual leave is deemed to be taken during the notice period; and
2 -No clause saying that the employer will always give at least two weeks notice of enforced leave. This wording is restricting the employer unnecessarily. If an employer needs to shut down for an exceptional situation for example they might only need to shut down for a few days but wouldn't want to have restricted themselves to having a contractual obligation to provide more than the statutory "double the leave".

So say there was a flood in a pub. The employer can then say we are having to close for 14 days. We are giving you 9 days notice that you have to take 4.5 days of leave. This way the employer only has to fund 9.5 days of the 14 day shutdown. The rest is taken by the employee as leave.

Or they might need to shut for three days. They can give two days notice that the employee has to take a day's leave so they only pay for two days instead of three.

This is the statutory position.

Under your clause the employer would fund all of it since they have inserted an unnecessary minimum two week notice clause in the contract which overrides the statutory double rule.

I don't think your clause is in the employers interest at all. It just an unnecessary restriction on the employer.

Obviously this isn't relevant to the OP

That would be true if that was what the clause the said, but as I says, I've not included the full wording.

Plus, if the employer shuts down, that would be covered by the short term lay off clause and employees could request leave during that period.