News31 mins ago
Flexible Working Revoked
hi,
around 8 months ago my wifes employer agreed to a flexible working pattern whereby she could work a permenant 8am-4pm shift (as opposed to the 8-4,9-5,10-6 weekly rota she was on) to allow her to pick our daughter up from the childminders at half four (child minder has other commitments from 5pm onwards).
Now her work is restructuring the working patterns and have said that she can no longer work the 8-4 shift and must work the rota as she previously did.
This will cause no ends of problems with our arrangements but before we take this any further i'd like to know what kinds of rights she has regarding this matter and if anyone has any further information/links to useful sites they could provide i'd really appreciate it. i've had a quick check on direct.gov and it has some information, but nothing too specific.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
around 8 months ago my wifes employer agreed to a flexible working pattern whereby she could work a permenant 8am-4pm shift (as opposed to the 8-4,9-5,10-6 weekly rota she was on) to allow her to pick our daughter up from the childminders at half four (child minder has other commitments from 5pm onwards).
Now her work is restructuring the working patterns and have said that she can no longer work the 8-4 shift and must work the rota as she previously did.
This will cause no ends of problems with our arrangements but before we take this any further i'd like to know what kinds of rights she has regarding this matter and if anyone has any further information/links to useful sites they could provide i'd really appreciate it. i've had a quick check on direct.gov and it has some information, but nothing too specific.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by danroll. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I assume that there was nothing put in writing by the employer that suggested this arrangement might be reviewed and changed?
Assuming not, your wife could argue that she has an 'implied contract term' that she works the rota as is, because she has been doing so for 8 months now.
It might work and get them to withdraw.
At the very minimum, the employer needs to consult over this (and that means a discussion where the employer explains its side and asks for a response on what issues the employee might have in doing it - not a 'your shift changes next Friday, luv, you're OK with that I assume?'). It also needs to give notice of any change - one week per complete year of employment as a minimum.
As far as I know (and the law was changed a few years ago) the employer has a duty to consult, but it does not HAVE to agree to a change proposed by the employee as the result of childcare requests. But this is different - the employer had already agreed, but now wants to change it back. Try the 'implied term' tack - then mention the potential for constructive dismissal in passing if that doesn't work.
At the end of the day, the employer will get its wicked way over this if it wants to - even if it means being taken to an ET, losing and having to pay some readies over. The issue is how entrenched it wants to get and whether it dislikes the prospect of potentially adverse publicity.
Assuming not, your wife could argue that she has an 'implied contract term' that she works the rota as is, because she has been doing so for 8 months now.
It might work and get them to withdraw.
At the very minimum, the employer needs to consult over this (and that means a discussion where the employer explains its side and asks for a response on what issues the employee might have in doing it - not a 'your shift changes next Friday, luv, you're OK with that I assume?'). It also needs to give notice of any change - one week per complete year of employment as a minimum.
As far as I know (and the law was changed a few years ago) the employer has a duty to consult, but it does not HAVE to agree to a change proposed by the employee as the result of childcare requests. But this is different - the employer had already agreed, but now wants to change it back. Try the 'implied term' tack - then mention the potential for constructive dismissal in passing if that doesn't work.
At the end of the day, the employer will get its wicked way over this if it wants to - even if it means being taken to an ET, losing and having to pay some readies over. The issue is how entrenched it wants to get and whether it dislikes the prospect of potentially adverse publicity.
Hi Buildersmate - thank's for that we're going to look at it this weekend and put something together for monday. much appreciated.
davethedog - my wife loves her job and is a very valued employee. it was only a few months ago she was given a rise completely out of the blue because of how well she was doing.
The problem is only on two particular days each week and my wife has said in effect that she is prepared to work any shift required on the other days. but unfortunately can't be flexible on the trouble days.
thanks
davethedog - my wife loves her job and is a very valued employee. it was only a few months ago she was given a rise completely out of the blue because of how well she was doing.
The problem is only on two particular days each week and my wife has said in effect that she is prepared to work any shift required on the other days. but unfortunately can't be flexible on the trouble days.
thanks
Its like a game of poker.
With constructive dismissal, one resigns then claims at an ET that the employer acted in such an unreasonable way that one had no choice but to resign and hence the employer broke the contract. It is only potentially useful if one had decided to jack it in, but wants to try for the money.
Equally the employer might decide to back down - I'm not recommending it - just stating the potential for options.
If your wife really, really wants to keep the job a better strategy is perhaps to just refuse it and keep coming in to the original shift pattern. That forces the employer to either:
a) back off
b) suspend, investigate and contemplate disciplinary action.
The onus is then back on employer to decide what to do.
It perhaps depends on her tolerance to stress.
With constructive dismissal, one resigns then claims at an ET that the employer acted in such an unreasonable way that one had no choice but to resign and hence the employer broke the contract. It is only potentially useful if one had decided to jack it in, but wants to try for the money.
Equally the employer might decide to back down - I'm not recommending it - just stating the potential for options.
If your wife really, really wants to keep the job a better strategy is perhaps to just refuse it and keep coming in to the original shift pattern. That forces the employer to either:
a) back off
b) suspend, investigate and contemplate disciplinary action.
The onus is then back on employer to decide what to do.
It perhaps depends on her tolerance to stress.
1 to 8 of 8
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles36 mins ago
Businesses Warn Of Job Losses Threat As...
News82 mins ago
News84 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles92 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles101 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.