Change of contract regarding paid maternity leave - legal?

mumofthree,

i'm in a similar situation to yours , I was wondering if you are on any of the pregnancy websites so I could "pm" you. i'm on rollercoaster.

unfortunately in my case the maternity leave isn't in my contract just staff handbook.

thanks
 
Sorry, jo123, I am not on any of those websites. You can pm me here if you need to but to be honest I am a bit wary of giving any more details than I have done for reasons of anonymity, hope you understand.

I hope my findings so far have been of use to you.

If you have any info that you can share please put it on this thread.

Without wanting to go off the original topic too much, I would have thought (only my opinion though) that the staff handbook effectively forms part of your contract so I would think that whatever benefits and Ts and Cs it contains would be legally binding.

Do you have any other information on change of contract regarding maternity benefits that has not been covered yet?
 
If mat leave is not mentioned in your contract then provision as in the staff handbook is what you have. The staff handbook is as far as I understand, part of the contract of employment unless specifically varied (and then there has to be good reason).

To the OP, please make sure that you are keeping dates and records of communications on this in case it goes to tribunal at some point.
 
If contract of employment states company handbook stores these terms, its fine up to a point.


A contract can only be changed with your approval, with company handbooks, they can be changed unilaterally, you may have no input.
 
Am supposed to be having this meeting finally, I had to insist (it was postponed several times). I am absolutely clear now, based on NERA advice, that they can not change my contract without my agreement, even given that I went part time.

It's basic employment law that you can't take away a benefit just like that.

Also, that you can't treat a PT person any different than a FT person unless there is some good and relevant reason.

So, right is on my side, legally and morally.

I have reason to believe they will try to force the issue.

I can insist that they don't.

If we can't agree, then mediation is next.

After that, rights commissioner.

Legally, I would win. Morally, I know I would be in the right.

But here's the kicker: It would probably cause a loss of goodwill from their side. I could put my job, in this small company, at risk. I know they "can't" sack me for doing this, but then again.....do I really want to go down that road? Would it be a hollow victory? Also, I don't think that the stress would be good for my baby.

I hate to think that someone could treat me unfairly, put their hand in my pocket and take what is mine, and that I would let them 'win'.

But I have to see the big picture even if they can't.

I reckon all I can do is point out my rights, state my case, and appeal to their sense of fair play and integrity, and hope for the best.

It's a bad state of affairs in the year 2008, but what more can I do?

Anyone got any thoughts please?
 
Just one final question:

If I do refuse to agree, point blank, the next step would be for this to go to mediation.

Can someone tell me what that actually is?

i.e. who is the mediator?

Is it a solicitor?

who pays for this?

If it is the company then how can they be independent?

Hope someone can please clarify this.
 
If I were you I would NOT rock the boat, especially in the current climate.

If you want a career, have a career. If you want kids, have kids.

Don't expect the employer to keep on picking up the tab.

Sorry if this sounds harsh but its probably what they are thinking.
 
Last edited:
berlininvest said:
If I were you I would NOT rock the boat, especially in the current climate.

If you want a career, have a career. If you want kids, have kids.

Don't expect the employer to keep on picking up the tab.

Sorry if this sounds harsh but its probably what they are thinking.
Click to expand...

This is complete and utter tosh in my opinion. There are laws in this country to protect employees. The employer is not picking up the tab, they are simpy being asked to treat the OP according to the law.

For the OP, mediation has to be agreed to by both parties, it is not obligatory or unilateral. Typically the employer would pay the mediator. There are trained mediators (often solicitors) who do this work and your own solicitor wold have details.

I think whatever you do, you have drawn a line in the sand. If they do not back down, you probably won't like to stay working there. So not rocking the boat is probably not an option - the boat was rocked when they decided to amend your contract.
 
berlininvest - I can only assume you are trying to take a rise out of me, if so, nice one :D.

diziet, thanks for explaining about the mediation, great to know what to expect if they propose it (when i refuse to budge).

Wish me luck :)
 
berlininvest said:
If I were you I would NOT rock the boat, especially in the current climate.

If you want a career, have a career. If you want kids, have kids.

Don't expect the employer to keep on picking up the tab.

Sorry if this sounds harsh but its probably what they are thinking.
Click to expand...

Speaking as an employer I think that this is very bad advice. Equality legislation is there for a reason.
mumofthree, I think that your attitude and the way you have handled this in a clear-headed and logical way is absolutely superb. If this is a reflection of your attitude and ability in your work (and I have no reason to suspect otherwise) I think your employer is very lucky to have you.
 
Purple, thank you so much for your words of support and encouragement! If only my own employer felt that way. Thanks again!
 
berlininvest said:
If I were you I would NOT rock the boat, especially in the current climate.

If you want a career, have a career. If you want kids, have kids.

Don't expect the employer to keep on picking up the tab.

Sorry if this sounds harsh but its probably what they are thinking.
Click to expand...


Does,nt sound harsh , just pure dopey ...
 
Diziet said:
This is complete and utter tosh in my opinion. There are laws in this country to protect employees. The employer is not picking up the tab, they are simpy being asked to treat the OP according to the law.

For the OP, mediation has to be agreed to by both parties, it is not obligatory or unilateral. Typically the employer would pay the mediator. There are trained mediators (often solicitors) who do this work and your own solicitor wold have details.

I think whatever you do, you have drawn a line in the sand. If they do not back down, you probably won't like to stay working there. So not rocking the boat is probably not an option - the boat was rocked when they decided to amend your contract.
Click to expand...

Mediatiors are generally former IBEC / ICTU employees on a jolly, they listen to both sides of the argument and generate a report. This report has no legal standing, but may br useful at a later stage.

Company suggested mediation , they of course pay.

Have a representative present, a friend or someone just to note down minutes.

Cannot see mediation working, but at least allows you to present your case in front of a third party.
 
crumdub12 said:
Mediatiors are generally former IBEC / ICTU employees on a jolly, they listen to both sides of the argument and generate a report. This report has no legal standing, but may br useful at a later stage.
Click to expand...

Mediators do a lot more than that and to be honest the above description is a bit misleading. I have direct experience of mediation - the mediator brokered a legally binding agreement, signed by both parties. He was certainly not 'on a jolly' and did a hell of a lot more than listen and write a report. The whole thing was very professional and the outcome was good.

Are you thinking of an independent HR person who provides an opinion, rather than a mediator perhaps? If you are, then I agree with you!
 
Just to be clear - I am not in a union.

(If I were, this whole issue would never be allowed to get this far).
 
Diziet said:
Mediators do a lot more than that and to be honest the above description is a bit misleading. I have direct experience of mediation - the mediator brokered a legally binding agreement, signed by both parties. He was certainly not 'on a jolly' and did a hell of a lot more than listen and write a report. The whole thing was very professional and the outcome was good.

Are you thinking of an independent HR person who provides an opinion, rather than a mediator perhaps? If you are, then I agree with you!
Click to expand...


Diziet,

The experience I described above comes from a Labour court issue, where they recomend Union / Employer get a mediator involved, LC have a list of approved mediators, and Union / Company came to agreement on issue.

The recomendation made was not binding, and was eventually ignored.
 
crumdub12 said:
Diziet,

The experience I described above comes from a Labour court issue, where they recomend Union / Employer get a mediator involved, LC have a list of approved mediators, and Union / Company came to agreement on issue.

The recomendation made was not binding, and was eventually ignored.
Click to expand...

I see - the Labour court decisions are not binding, so now that you mention Labour court, I understand the context. My experience of mediation was different, so it's good to have a sample of different outcomes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top