discrimination in the workplace??? need advise

U1D2C3

i am working with a girl who is having a disciplinary meeting this friday for being an average of 5 to 10 minutes late some days. this may seem fair enough but the thing is - she is a part time worker - works 3 days a week - and is a single mother to a 3 year old little boy who goes to play school 3 days a week. which days she works varies every week and she is only late on the days her little boy is in school. she says she cant leave her child at the school before 8.55 because there is no one there to take him before his day starts. our day starts at 9.30 and she lives about 30 minutes away from work. on the days she works when her child isnt in school, she is always early for work. she has tried comprimising with our manager by asking him if she can take 15 mins off her lunch break to make up for the time she missed in the morning, but he has refused and took the matters to his area manager. we are a small branch in a nationwide business and there is only 4 of us working in the branch. i advised her to go to citizens information about these matters and i hope she does - but i wont be working with her until this friday of the meeting. at first i was thinking - ok she should be on time - its not the companys fault she cant make it to work on time, but the more i thought about it, the more i was appaulled by the whole situation. so im just trying to find out if there are any other managers on here that would discipline her too or what they would do in a situation like this, because if something happens this friday, id nearly advise her to take the case to the papers - because - i actually havent mentioned that our customers are 98 percent parents with small children!! thanks in advance for any replies - i really appreciate it!!!

Terodil

It really depends on the business. If your business has no flexitime or a similarly accomodating agreement with the employees, then yes you have to be on time. That is not discriminatory, it is well within the employer's rights to define, it applies to everybody the exact same, your colleague signed a contract with those conditions in mind, and failure to comply can be detrimental to group morale.

Sorry OP, but I'm with your employer in this case.

It does not really matter if I personally think that the boss could have agreed to her compensating during lunch break. Maybe it's detrimental to the business maybe not, you do not give enough detail. But even if he could have done it objectively, that may make him a bad manager, but it's no reason to pull an entire company into the dirt.

Because that's the only thing you'd achieve: By taking it to the papers you'd give the entire company a bad name and could quite probably cost it business (that's why you'd go to the papers, right) -- and in the long run see yourself or your colleague out of work.

You'd be shooting yourself in the foot there.

ladymarmalade

Is she in a union? If so she should take her rep with her to the disciplinary hearing or else she has the right to bring a colleague with her. I would advise her to look up the company's policies on grievance procedure too, she is entitled to 3 warnings one oral and one written before a suspension/termination of service. If it's a nationwide company they may also have a 'managing harrassment in the workplace' policy too.

However, your boss has the right to expect an employee to turn up to work on time.In fact if she has a contract her working hours should be written into it. Is she in a permanent or temporary position? If all employees were 15 minutes late 3 days per week anarchy would ensue. As a manager I would look to compromise on the issue with her paying time back as she suggested. She should also compile a list of dates she was late and dates and details of conversations with her manager where she has offered to compromise.

I hope it goes well for her, it's not easy being a single working mum. You should also be careful in such a small firm not to fall into the trap of taking sides publicly, your manager will see it and not thank you for it.

Overheal

Its not so much 15 arbitrarial minutes, its 15 minutes first thing in the morning. Frankly, theres a difference to it.

I really dont see how its discrimination. This isnt exactly a Maternity issue. She really needs to find an arrangement that works for her Personally. Her employer is at no obligation to accomodate her with this. Cant a family friend drop the son off? Cant she make friends with a neighbour that can be trusted to watch the child for 5 minutes?

Lollipops23

OP even if the individual is in a union there's not much they can do about it.The simple matter is that she cannot make it in time to work 3 days a week.They;re not being unreasonable in asking her to be on time.

It is a crappy situation,and perhaps in times passed they would have been more accommadating to her needs and situation, but I honestly think she needs to make alternative arrangements.

dazberry

This exact thing has gone on where I work - and it was simply one manager picking on one employee. If other people are afforded the flexibility as they are where I work then all should be (subject to not taking the p1ss of course).

Firstly there was in our case a HR policy that could facilitate the person in question, but that was never explained to her and any flexibility she asked for was immediately denied. She learned this after the routing through group policies. As she said her mistake was asking her manager, she should have gone straight to HR.

Secondly she wrote down everything, from times she started and left work, to meetings details etc., and 95% of the issues raised turned out to be "pasting errors". I have been in work at 9am talking to this person and have seen reports of her not arriving into work at 9.30am that very day.

D.

AARRRGH

U1D2C3 wrote: »

she should be on time - its not the companys fault she cant make it to work on time

That's it in a nutshell.

If her contract says she must be in by X o'clock, that's what she has to do. It is unreasonable of her to expect special treatment.

I suspect she would find it unacceptable if her employer started breaking her conditions of employment on a consistent basis.

artful_codger

my advice is to stay the hell out of it

trustno1

AARRRGH wrote: »

That's it in a nutshell.

If her contract says she must be in by X o'clock, that's what she has to do. It is unreasonable of her to expect special treatment.

I suspect she would find it unacceptable if her employer started breaking her conditions of employment on a consistent basis.

+1, no flexitime - so no excuses, I am sorry - but if I was working with someone who was late every morning especially when they only work 3 days a week I would go bananas!.. single mother or not, she should make arrangements for someone else to drop her child off to school.

Maglight

Parental leave may apply as her child is under the age of eight.

Unless she has received formal warnings already then this meeting on Friday will probably constitute a formal verbal warning. However, at that meeting her manager will be obliged to give her a reasonable opportunity to improve her performance and a timeframe within which to do so. Perhaps at that point she could request that she uses half an hour per day parental leave to allow for the overrun between play school and work.

Not sure of all the details of parental leave so she would have to check that out.

kittenkiller

We used to have a guy working for us who practically demanded special treatment so he could spend time with his kids.
It was very difficult to justify this to his other team members, who all did the same work and we entitled to the same treatment.

You never know maybe someone else in the company has noticed this pattern of behaviour and has reported it.
From a management point of view you can't tell them to just grin and bear it.
Action must be taken.
Your colleague should also formalize any agreement for arriving late on certain days or arrange alternate care for her child.
I know, easier said than done, but it's only fair!

tricky D

There's no discrimination here, but the local management does seem to be lacking the willingness to entertain any compromise. Some managers tend to make a big deal about lateness but will overlook any earliness. Too many of both managers and workers view contracts as being set in stone. While legally they are, having a bit of commonsense and flexibility under normal day to day conditions makes for a better working environment. The old not in my contract to change a lightbulb scenario springs to mind.

By the sounds of it, there isn't too much of a problem for coworkers. A little compassion and compromise, instead of warnings, can go a long way when managing people and lead to a better working environment. Hopefully the Area Manager will be more of a people person and arrange some compromise.

my 2c

mikemac

It certainly isn't discrimination.
Now maybe the managers could be flexible, she offered to work during her lunch break and that seems fair

But I'm guessing the manager fears making an exception. If she can't/won't work at 09:30 what's to stop other team members looking for arrangements to suit them?
Either everyone gets flexitime or nobody does, you can't do this for people with children.
I know she isn't looking for flexitime but it could well lead there in the future. And that's why the area manager needs to be involved

AARRRGH

mikemac wrote: »

Either everyone gets flexitime or nobody does

I would say that is the managers concern, rather than some evil "screw the employee" agenda.

Kaybe

Maglight wrote: »

Parental leave may apply as her child is under the age of eight.

Not sure of all the details of parental leave so she would have to check that out.

This is incorrect - parental leave does not apply in this situation. Parental leave is a statutory entitlement that all parents of young children are entitled to avail of , but there are rules around it's application. It absolutely cannot be invoked by the employee to cover themselves when they are running late for work.

There is no discrimination in the situation described.
It doesn't matter to the company whether the employee is late on these mornings because she goes to the gym those days, or because her bus only runs 15mins late on specific days, or whether it's because her neighbour gives her a lift those days and is late, or because her child has to be dropped to school.
It doesn't matter.

If every parent in the land were given permission to be late for work because they had to drop their child to school, can you imagine the farcical situation that would apply?
This particular employee is very simply being asked to turn up for work on time every day. No more and no less. Hardly a big ask.

The company in this instance has to be fair to ALL of it's employees, and the way to do that is to ensure that the Time & Attendance policy and the Disciplinary Policy are applied fairly and consistently to ALL employees.

Frowzy

artful_codger wrote: »

my advice is to stay the hell out of it

And this comment sums up why unions don't always work..... If employees can't stand together then we're at nothing!

This is a really hard situtation and I feel for the person involved. It didn't surprise me that the manager in question is a man because most men don't understand what a responsibility it is to look after small children. In addition, I wonder if another worker put in a complaint?

It's hard to know what advice to give as obviously you'd need to know the full story, however I'd like to add the following to all the other advice:

- Please, Please do not mention discrimination. This is not discrimination, it's possible that the manager would also take this stance if the employee were male. Although he may seem rigid in his approach he is actually working within the guidelines. Hours of work are fixed and should be adhered to. There are only certain criteria under which you can be discriminated against, race, creed, gender, age etc etc

- ensure she does not go to the meeting alone. Someone should accompany her, she's entitled to that. This person preferably should have some knowledge of the companies policies and if possible some Industrial Relations Experience.

- As another person said, it is extremely important to point out early in the meeting that she has already offered to be flexible in taking shorter lunch hours.

- She should also point out the mornings that she is early and if there are any evenings that she has left late and has not been credited for. Has her work day ever spilled over and encroached into her lunch hour? If management is going to pick on particular shortcomings then it is important that this is balanaced by her willingness to help out during busy periods.

- It's mentioned in the OP that she works different days each week. Is this pre-arranged or at short notice? I'm just wondering if this lady actually is on-call and therefore extremely flexible to the needs of the company. It would also be helpful to point out to management that as she works different days each week that it is extremely hard to organise childcare on and ad-hoc basis.

- How do your work colleagues feel about this lady? are they aggrieved that they are "picking up the slack" or are most of them ok and understanding of her situtation? If everyone is supportive it might help for you to get together and write a letter to your Area-Manager stating that as it's only a few minutes each day that you are happy to provide cover should she choose to start at 9.45am and take a shorter lunch-break.

- As a last resort she could envoke the companies family-friendly work ethic. Most companies have one of these written up and filed away somewhere. It was a huge this a few years ago and most companies bought into it. By mentioning this it may shock them into realising that they are actually pressuring a mother and this indeed is bad practice and is frowned upon by labour relations.

- It might be worth pointing out to other staff members that if this lady is being disciplined for this that it could have a knock on effect on everyone. Ok while this lady is late on a regular basis, what if someone's car broke down, busses went on strike, whatever. Would everyone be treated the same? Without saying anything if everyone is in agreement you could work-to-rule and let the manager see exactly what he is getting from staff. Most managers do not realise what exactly staff contribute to the success of a department/business. Staff that arrive at work early should drink tea until 9.30am, official start time. Down tools at 1pm (or whatever time is lunch time) and walk away to lunch even if you are with a customer. Explain to the customer that this is now your lunch time and that the Manager of the store will now help them. Then simply tell the manager that you are going to lunch and that a customer is waiting for his attention. Same at finish time. Tools down. Guaranteed he'll see the point in less than a day!!!

This obviously is only my opinion and she and other staff members should only take action that they are comfortable with.

I hope this works out for everyone involved. Best of Luck. Please let us know how Friday goes!
F

U1D2C3

Thanks for all the replies! i think i will definitely stay out of her situation!!! im going back to the way I was feeling before!then again, our appointments with customers dont start till 10.00 so we literally sit around and do nothing except maybe go get a cup of coffee or tea! i, personally, dont care if she is late or gets special attention for it because i know her situation with her little boy is hard. but i cant say so for the other girl we work with - she has never complained before or has ever said anything about it! but it is true that if someone gets special treatment - we all should! its a tricky situation but because our little 'office' space is so small and confined, a lot of problems are arising now - especially for myself - but im goin to explain that in another thread! i wish i could yell out the company i work for and tell everyone what a joke it is - but for obvious reasons i wont! ha!

AARRRGH

Frowzy wrote: »

It didn't surprise me that the manager in question is a man because most men don't understand what a responsibility it is to look after small children.

What a backwards post. Move on lady, it's not the 1800's anymore.

Eoin

Frowzy wrote: »

This is a really hard situtation and I feel for the person involved. It didn't surprise me that the manager in question is a man because most men don't understand what a responsibility it is to look after small children.

What an incredibly condescending thing to say.

Frowzy wrote: »

Please, Please do not mention discrimination. This is not discrimination, it's possible that the manager would also take this stance if the employee were male. Although he may seem rigid in his approach he is actually working within the guidelines. Hours of work are fixed and should be adhered to. There are only certain criteria under which you can be discriminated against, race, creed, gender, age etc etc

I do agree with this point though - don't cheapen the plight of those who are actually being discriminated against.

Frowzy

eoin wrote: »

What an incredibly condescending thing to say.

It wasn't my intention to insult anyone, it has just been my personal experience that most men in management do not understand the difficulties. However, I accept that I could be wrong on this and apologise!

AARRRGH wrote: »

What a backwards post. Move on lady, it's not the 1800's anymore.

While I have accepted that I may be wrong on this point I think that your use of the word "lady" equates with "Missy", "Miss", "M'am" or any other derogatory term used when addressing women. A little condescending considering the point you were trying to make.

AARRRGH

Frowzy wrote: »

While I have accepted that I may be wrong on this point I think that your use of the word "lady" equates with "Missy", "Miss", "M'am" or any other derogatory term used when addressing women. A little condescending considering the point you were trying to make.

I was being condescending. I believe it was an acceptable response to your incredibly sexist comment.

Frowzy

AARRRGH wrote: »

I was being condescending. I believe it was an acceptable response to your incredibly sexist comment.

Yes you were. Fighting sexism with sexism isn't acceptable and belittles your point!

I have accepted that I may have offended people and have apologised for same.

AARRRGH

Frowzy wrote: »

Yes you were. Fighting sexism with sexism isn't acceptable and belittles your point!

Calling you "lady" isn't sexist. Accept you were in the wrong and move on. Stop trying to deflect it onto me.

End of discussion.

shoegirl

Count yourself lucky that your managers are bothering. We have a colleague who was coming in late despite a very generous flexitime arrangement which dictated we be in the office at a certain time - he was abusing this and started coming in every day at least 15-20 minutes late but leaving early in the day without having worked the hours contracted. It was becoming so bad, he was coming in 30-40 minutes almost everyday and it finally hit a brick wall when he arrived in one day 55 minutes late and then 1.5 hours late the following week. And went home 6.5 hours later.

Our managers were ignoring the situation. We had to handle it ourselves and who knows how long until the bad behaviour starts to creep back in again.

As to this situation, it does seem a little unreasonable that your colleague has offered to work up the time missed later in the day and that this hasn't been accepted. That said, she probably agreed to that start time in her contract so she is bound by what she agreed to do.

Unless of course, they changed that condition without consulting her. I've been in a situation at work where hours were more or less changed forcibly and if that happened then yes there might be a better case. Unfortunately as it standards for her right now, her case is a little weak.

artful_codger

Frowzy wrote: »

And this comment sums up why unions don't always work..... If employees can't stand together then we're at nothing!

the OP is not her union representative, therefore my point stands - it's none of his business.

Sleipnir

Frowzy wrote: »

It wasn't my intention to insult anyone, it has just been my personal experience that most men in management do not understand the difficulties. However, I accept that I could be wrong on this and apologise!

While I have accepted that I may be wrong on this point I think that your use of the word "lady" equates with "Missy", "Miss", "M'am" or any other derogatory term used when addressing women. A little condescending considering the point you were trying to make.

Jesus. First, you say an incredibly sexist thing, then you say you apologise if you caused offence, but not for the comment itself? And then you have the nerve to accuse someone else of being derogatary?!?!?!?
Do you stand by your assertion that

most men don't understand what a responsibility it is to look after small children.

????

How about "women shouldn't be in management because they're too busy looking after kids"?
Is that sexist?
Most of the male management where I work have kids and I think they have far greater knowledge of the responsibilities of raising kids than the women in management who don't!

What absolute tosh!

Frowzy

artful_codger wrote: »

the OP is not her union representative, therefore my point stands - it's none of his business.

Fair Enough! Don't understand why you would have to be a union rep to stand by a colleague, however I can see why you'd want to stay out of getting involved.

Sleipnir wrote: »

Jesus. First, you say an incredibly sexist thing, then you say you apologise if you caused offence, but not for the comment itself? And then you have the nerve to accuse someone else of being derogatary?!?!?!?
Do you stand by your assertion that



????

How about "women shouldn't be in management because they're too busy looking after kids"?
Is that sexist?
Most of the male management where I work have kids and I think they have far greater knowledge of the responsibilities of raising kids than the women in management who don't!

What absolute tosh!

Yes, I apologised for causing offence. I don't feel that I apologise for my beliefs which are based on personal experience. If everyone here had to apologise or excuse their beliefs/experiences/opinions then there would be no point in having boards.ie.

I don't agree with your last paragraph, however as it's based on your personal experience in your workplace then I think you're entitled to it!

Frowzy

AARRRGH wrote: »

Calling you "lady" isn't sexist.

Matter of opinion!

AARRRGH wrote: »

Accept you were in the wrong and move on. Stop trying to deflect it onto me.

End of discussion.

Perhaps you should read my posts!

Sleipnir

Frowzy wrote: »

I don't agree with your last paragraph, however as it's based on your personal experience in your workplace then I think you're entitled to it!

If there's one thing I hate, it's people using the "it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it" or "that's your opinion and you're entitled to it" as some sort of argument or defence.
I'm well aware that it's my "personal experience" as I'm the one who personally experienced it; you don't need to tell me that I personally experienced it.

I will assume from your post that you are unable to defend your argument cogently so in my mind, you have no argument at all. It's great news to me that I can say;

"women belong in the home and shouldn't have the vote"

Then, announce it publicly and not have to defend my position. That, in mind mind, is the opposite of what boards.ie is about.

You do women's lib a great disservice with your attitude toward men.
"It's okay to discriminate, so long as you're not a man" ?

Utter Nonsense, with a capital 'N'.

Sleipnir

Frowzy wrote: »

Matter of opinion!

The term 'lady' is no more sexist than the term "gentleman"
Or do you disagree?

Frowzy

Sleipnir wrote: »

If there's one thing I hate, it's people using the "it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it" or "that's your opinion and you're entitled to it" as some sort of argument or defence.
I'm well aware that it's my "personal experience" as I'm the one who personally experienced it; you don't need to tell me that I personally experienced it.

I will assume from your post that you are unable to defend your argument cogently so in my mind, you have no argument at all. It's great news to me that I can say;


Then, announce it publicly and not have to defend my position. That, in mind mind, is the opposite of what boards.ie is about.

You do women's lib a great disservice with your attitude toward men.
"It's okay to discriminate, so long as you're not a man" ?

Utter Nonsense, with a capital 'N'.

Firstly I don't have an argument to defend. I stated my opinion on a discussion board. I apologised if anyone was ofended by it. You are the one making this into an pointless discussion and completely off point.

I don't understand what you are trying to get at in the second half of your post, and I don't know where the quote came from, I can only say that your post, whether intentionally or not, gives the impression that this quote (in fact your last 2 quotes" came from me, which they didn't. I would politely ask you to edit your post to reflect this. Also, please note that I am politely asking you to change before I report it to a moderator.

Frowzy

Sleipnir wrote: »

The term 'lady' is no more sexist than the term "gentleman"
Or do you disagree?

Are you asking for my opinion?

Sleipnir

Frowzy wrote: »

Are you asking for my opinion?

Was it a difficult question?
Obviously, if I ask "do you disagree?", the response will be an opinion, not a definitive, factual answer such as; "what is one plus one?"

However, I wouldn't feel the need to state that it is an opinion as that should be bleedin' obvious.

Frowzy

Sleipnir wrote: »

Was it a difficult question?
Obviously, if I ask "do you disagree?", the response will be an opinion, not a definitive, factual answer such as; "what is one plus one?"

However, I wouldn't feel the need to state that it is an opinion as that should be bleedin' obvious.

Pointless discussion!

QED

Sleipnir

Frowzy wrote: »

Pointless discussion!

QED

You do surprise me.

Frowzy

Sleipnir wrote: »

You do surprise me.

My life is complete

mikemac

Wow, in page 2 &3, this thread went downhill

Nody

Only to point out about working it in during lunch part; this would actually be illegal as the company has to ensure that the person has taken the legal breaks from work. Hence if they allowed someone to "work up the time" on breaks they would be breaking the law.

Eoin

Nody wrote: »

Only to point out about working it in during lunch part; this would actually be illegal as the company has to ensure that the person has taken the legal breaks from work. Hence if they allowed someone to "work up the time" on breaks they would be breaking the law.

I'm sure there is some leeway though. We can choose to only take a 30 minute lunch break in our office, and come in late or leave early.

Nody

eoin wrote: »

I'm sure there is some leeway though. We can choose to only take a 30 minute lunch break in our office, and come in late or leave early.

That is because 30 min is the legal minimum; if the lady in question only has 30 min in the first place she could not skip it to make up the time.

The same would go for the other breaks as well; hence my comment that the offer may be well intended but impossible for the company to run with.

Eoin

Yeah, so if she only gets a 30 min lunch break, then it would be a problem, but I can't see where the OP mentioned the lunch break they get.

shoegirl

Actually as I understand the employer is obliged to give a break for lunch of at least 30 minutes, but is not obliged to pay for it. Therefore it may or may not be considered part of the working day. Its besides the point though.

I think the key issue here is about flexibility, and possibly the precedent being set for other workers, its pretty horrible I can tell you when you work with somebody who routinely ignores simple things like coming to work on time and working their full contracted hours. (And lets not even mention the fact that a lot of the time he also smells like a dead rat, from even 6 feet away).

Maglight

Kaybe wrote: »

This is incorrect - parental leave does not apply in this situation. Parental leave is a statutory entitlement that all parents of young children are entitled to avail of , but there are rules around it's application. It absolutely cannot be invoked by the employee to cover themselves when they are running late for work.

I wasn't actually suggesting that the employee uses Parental Leave to cover ad hoc for the days she is running late. According to the OP, this is a recurring problem because her colleague's child can only be left at school from a certain time and that doesn't give her enough leeway to get to work on time. So, it's a fixed and recurring event that could be planned for with the application of parental leave.

If a valued employee of mine came to me with this problem and this proposed solution I would be inclined to faciliate them. But as I said, I'm not an expert on parental leave.

U1D2C3

hi!! know it was months ago that I posted this thread (im soo sorry, when all the sexism issues came up, i stopped following, sorry,but just being honest ) but it all worked out for the best in the end! we get an hour lunch every day by the way! i ALSO forgot to mention that when our (ex) manager corrected her for bein late, he did so in our 'host-store' (were a small business located in a big clothing shop, childrens clothing shop at that!!!) right on the floor, in front of a new trainee, and that shops customers...i suppose that would of been useful info too...sorry! but our area manager was appaulled by the way she was initially disciplined and offered her to come in at ten and take half an hour lunch break! so she was happy and a lot of stress taken off her shoulders. we are a happy workforce now, and it doesnt put me out that she gets to come in late cos im aware of her situation. plus, she mentions shes jealous of our hour long lunch breaks (jokingly). so thanks again for all the help and advice!

Denimgirl

Another case of trying to get people out of the company by going by the book. If it mentions in her contract her starting times and the manager does'nt agree with her being 10 mins late in the mornings,It looks like they are trying to get rid of her by going through procedures and not getting sued in the process maybe the manager does'nt like her and wants her out or the company need to lose a few heads on cut backs and thats what they're up to,nothing she can do really unless she drops her kid down early to a parent of one of the other kids that go to the same school so they can bring the child and then she'll make it to work on time.

RedXIV

U1D2C3 wrote: »

but our area manager was appaulled by the way she was initially disciplined and offered her to come in at ten and take half an hour lunch break! so she was happy and a lot of stress taken off her shoulders. we are a happy workforce now,

Area Manager may have gone against the book there but end justifies the means,
Fair play to Area Manager! Hurrah!

Sangre

I haven't read whole thead but it could be a case of indirect discrimination. That is a measure that appears to treat all people equally in practice has a disproportionate effect on one group e.g. women/mothers.

People shouldn't be so quick to decide what is discrimination or not.

Also, from citizeninformation:

If you make a request for part-time [/flexible time] work, your employer should have a procedure for dealing with your application which allows for consultation and discussion before a decision is made. Your employer should consider your request seriously and take factors into account such as your personal family needs, the implications for the organisation, the number of part-time employees, the equal opportunities policy and the staffing needs of the organisation. Your request should be considered on non-discriminatory grounds in accordance with employment equality legislation.

Your employer may refuse your request but should have good reasons for refusing it, for example, that it would lead to staffing difficulties in the organisation. You should be given the reasons for the refusal.

miec

Hi Op

I'm really glad it all worked out for your co-worker / friend.