Force Majeure Leave

DB74 said:
It's not immediate as tallpaul clarified above
Click to expand...


truthseeker said:
Because by day 2 and 3 you have had time to make alternative arrangements, its not the employers issue if you do not have family or friends to make those arrangements with.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but that doesn't mean that alternatives are possible and realistic. There are times when a parent just has to be with a child, or with an older relative.


Bob_tg said:
If you disagree with the HR dept., then push back on them, and use your internal appeals process. It should be no big deal really, unless you're doing this every other week.
Click to expand...
You won't be doing it every other week - the legislation allows for 3 days in any month and five days in every three years.
 
truthseeker said:
Which is why you should use paid or unpaid leave and not FM.
Click to expand...
There is no entitlement to unpaid leave, and paid leave is generally by arragement with the employer. It is also not really the purpose of holidays, as Bob has pointed out.

This is 'force majeure' leave, not 'force urgence' leave.
 
Lots of people have to use up some of their annual leave allowance for non holiday type stuff eg attending funerals, bringing elderly parents to hospital appointments.

Force majeure is intended for sudden, unexpected events. Obviously, if someone has a seriously ill child in hospital any reasonable boss would be as flexible as possible but they are not covered by force majeure for the duration.
 
Complainer said:
Indeed, but that doesn't mean that alternatives are possible and realistic. There are times when a parent just has to be with a child, or with an older relative.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing the rights or wrongs of it, just that it couldn't be classed as immediate IMO thereby disallowing the claiming of force majure leave
 
DB74 said:
I'm not arguing the rights or wrongs of it, just that it couldn't be classed as immediate IMO thereby disallowing the claiming of force majure leave
Click to expand...

I do not think this would be the opinion of a "reasonable" employer. I can't think of anything more immediate/urgent or important than having to look after a sick child. It's taking a week off for an aunt's funeral that has caused employers to be cautious - I don't know who drafted the legislation but I'm sure it was meant to cover a sick child in the absence of any other available carer.
 
We use to give 3 days in a row and only give one at a time - the employee is then expected to make other arrangements, use A/L or take unpaid leave.

When that leave was first introduced, it was without a doubt one of the most used form of leave in our workplace, much more so than parental leave. It was 3 days one year and 2 the next year and strangely enough in a lot of cases no more leave was needed.
 
It is possible to get FM for three consecutive days. I've done it. My partner had a collapsed lung earlier in the year. I applied for three days and was told I could have one and take two days leave. My HR department had brought out an employee manual which had their own take on the law. The word "Suddenly" magically appeared and "Indespinsable" disappeared.

I got the exact wording from the Cit Advice website and wrote a letter to HR explaining their interpretation was incorrect and that I wished them to reconsider. I had three days FM within an hour.
 


- Well done Nicky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register