Returning after Maternity Leave - change in location

I am inclined to think GG is correct.
Salvadore said:
You’re entitled to come back from maternity leave on terms no less favourable than those you would have enjoyed had you not gone on maternity leave.
Click to expand...
If you had not gone on maternity leave, would you have been moved anyway ? If so then the terms are no less favourable than had you not gone on maternity leave. It does not say, terms no less favourable than you enjoyed before you went on maternity leave. They are not the same thing.

That said I would expect if you stand your ground they company will back down if they can do so.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
If someone’s a widget maker on maternity leave and a couple of months ago, all widget production was moved from Finglas to Cherrywood, how does maternity leave give that person the right to demand that they return to work Finglas?

What happens if a company moves premises whilst someone is on maternity leave?

Surely, if the person would have been moved to Cherrywood anyway if they weren’t on maternity leave, the maternity leave is just noise and irrelevant?
Click to expand...
That would be different but That’s not the scenario the OP has presented.

Gordon Gekko said:
Most employment contracts give flexibility to the employer in terms of moving the place of work.
Click to expand...
Yes but a return from maternity leave is not the time do it. Even if there’s no intent, an employer is leaving him/herself wide open to the accusation.
 
cremeegg said:
If you had not gone on maternity leave, would you have been moved anyway ? If so then the terms are no less favourable than had you not gone on maternity leave. It does not say, terms no less favourable than you enjoyed before you went on maternity leave. They are not the same thing.
Click to expand...
Again, the issue is the exposure of the employer in relying on this distinction. You may ultimately end up discussing interpretation of the law at the WRC.
 
DannyBoyD said:
No it isn't. There are specific provisions regarding maternity leave.
Click to expand...
All of which is noise.

Widget making gets moved from Finglas to Cherrywood whilst one of the widget makers is on maternity leave. All of the widget makers are now based in Cherrywood. What has the maternity leave got to do with anything?

OP, speak with an employment law specialist.
 
Salvadore said:
I do this stuff for a living.
Click to expand...
That could mean anything from Head of Employment Law with one of the Big 5 legal firms to some intern in the HSE’s HR Department, Killybegs.

If you do, my sense is that more facts and background information is required before any definitive advice is given.

If I was the OP, I’d be double-checking the position with a professional.
 
NoRegretsCoyote said:
MPA gives returning mothers better protections than they would have otherwise enjoyed.

This is quite deliberate and holds the employer to a higher standard than for an equivalent worker who hadn't had a baby.
Click to expand...
None of which I’m disputing.

If the office or team move to a different premises whilst someone is on maternity leave, how is there any discrimination or issue?

If they weren’t on maternity leave, they’d just have moved with everyone else.

Telling someone that they’re NOT moving and that they’re being left on their own is probably closer to discrimination and a major issue!
 
Salvadore said:
What it means is that, in this instance, I know what I’m talking about.

Whether anyone chooses to believe me is their own business.

What’s so bad about Killybegs anyway??
Click to expand...
With respect I think we need more information from the OP it’s not clear to me that this change is any way related to the fact they were on Mat leave and a lot of employers retain the right to move your place of employment up to 50km.
 
Blackrock1 said:
With respect I think we need more information from the OP it’s not clear to me that this change is any way related to the fact they were on Mat leave and a lot of employers retain the right to move your place of employment up to 50km.
Click to expand...
Yes but moving a person on the occasion of their return, at the very least, leaves an employer open to the accusation that the transfer is related to their return from maternity.

I don’t know why any employer would choose to leave themselves open to the accusation.

As an employer, you could perhaps try to argue that there’s no connection, but by the time you’re required to make any such argument, it’s already cost you money and the meter has only begun to start running.
 
Last edited:
Gordon Gekko said:
If the office or team move to a different premises whilst someone is on maternity leave, how is there any discrimination or issue?
Click to expand...
Then the employee could arguably insist on a different role in same location if this is within the gift of the employer.

Gordon Gekko said:
If they weren’t on maternity leave, they’d just have moved with everyone else.
Click to expand...
Of course! But MPA gives an additional protection. I've known of redundancy schemes everyone gets the news on a given day but eligible staff on maternity leave are only formally made redundant on day of return as otherwise employer would be open to accusations of discrimination.

Anyway this is getting more and more speculative (I'm guilty too) in the absence of much concrete info from the OP.

To get back to practical matters I would think that the OP has nothing to lose by formally registering a request to return to same location as before maternity leave.
 
Exoverspender said:
What are my rights if any? I understand that things change they need to put me where they need me but if I wasn't on maternity leave this wouldn't be something I would have went for.
Click to expand...

@Gordon Gekko The OP did give us this crucial piece of information. If she was not on maternity leave she could have refused the transfer to a different location.

Thus she can not be placed in a lesser position of not being able to accept or reject a transfer because she is on Maternity leave. She is in a protected class of employee and her employer should be taking all steps to protect those rights.

The normal practice for the company seems to be that openings at other locations are offered to current employees and they can choose to take up the offer or not. That should have been the case with the OP as well.
 
That isn’t what was said. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a thread where people went off as half-baked in my life.

There is no clarity. There are minimal facts. We have no idea what happened.
 
To be fair, the OP believes if she was at work at the time, she could have refused the transfer, but that may not actually be the case

Sometimes employees think they call the shots and have the power to make decisions rather than the business owner - not saying this is the case here, just that it is a possibility. Employees fee they should get to decide things sometimes and have a right to do so, when that's just not the way business works somehow. Without the fuller facts here (and not opinion) it's impossible to say with clarity the legal position on things
 
Last edited:
messyleo said:
To be fair, the OP believes if she was at work at the time, she could have refused the transfer, but that may not actually be the case

Sometimes employees think they call the shots and have the power to make decisions rather than the business owner - not saying this is the case here, just that it is a possibility. Employees fee they should get to decide things sometimes and have a right to do so, when that's just not the way business works somehow. Without the fuller facts here (and not opinion) it's impossible to say with clarity the legal position on things
Click to expand...
“if I wasn't on maternity leave this wouldn't be something I would have went for.”

I don’t think that the above necessarily means that there was a choice and that she missed the chance to make that choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top