If you read the OP again, you'll see that that is exactly what they did. And the husband's employer is not happy with him doing that because of the short notice. And you can't really apply for holidays in advance to cover situations like illness.Here are a few solutions:-
1. Use your annual leave or time worked up to care for your child.
In a meeting today, his manager told him that this short notice for the time off wasn't acceptable and that in future he should make alternative arrangements when the children were sick. He also asked why I hadn't taken the day off. He said that the company's interest had to come first.
Employers should be as flexible as possible but it’s not unreasonable to expect employees to do what they can to put contingency plans in place. Your personal finances are not your employers concern.With all due respect Purple I think it is easy to take the high moral ground on this when you can afford to have someone employed to mind the kids at home. Not everyone is able to afford this. Obviously it is not the employers problem to sort this out but I would imagine that most employers take a reasonable line on this if they value their employee.
I didn’t say it was easy.+1
Even if you could afford it, having someone available at short notice, someone you trust, someone who will care for your children and not just 'mind' them, is a more difficult proposition.
That was a disgraceful question by your employer. It’s none of their business what your husband is doing and the comment is very sexist.A vaild question, I mean you're only a woman and obviously, the man's job is far more important yours.
Nobody is leaving jobs these days regardless of policies, there is no where to go! All that is fine and dandy in a good economy but the reality is very different.
I'm not in IT, I'm in manufacturing engineering.Fair enough, the IT sector needs people as we keep hearing but it's one of the few areas.
Take three deep breaths and let the matter rest...
Going over the Manager's head to a senior manager on a small irritation like this is not the way to go. No senior manager worth his salt will get involved with such an issue regardless of the rights or wrongs of the situation
If you are adamant that the matter should be taken further, have another word with the immediate manager and explain how the matter has irritated you and then try to come to a mutual understanding how such matters should be handled in the future.
It really worries me how some posters on here appear so militant and ready to unleash all their bullets at the first sign of an indian on top of the hill.
Employers should be as flexible as possible but it’s not unreasonable to expect employees to do what they can to put contingency plans in place. Your personal finances are not your employers concern.
No, they are not. People are paid based on the value (economic or social) that they bring to their job. Their personal financial needs or outgoings are never the business of their employer and a persons pay rate should never be influenced by their financial circumstances.They sort of are though. If your employer doesn't pay you enough to afford a nanny, they are.
Thanks everyone for all of the replies, it has been eye-opening to see all of the different viewpoints on this issue.
My husband decided that he wasn't going to let this one go and spoke to a senior manager about the issue today (calmly). There was acknowledgement that he had been upfront about the issue and that once the time was taken out of annual leave then the company should be able to manage without him for a day. (She has children herself so perhaps is more aware of family pressures than my husband's manager). We are hoping that this will be the end of it and are a bit relieved as my husband has never abused his sick leave and doesn't think that would be the way to go.
BTW, we have a wonderful childminder who is very practical and will take the children when they are not 100% (colds and flus etc.) but like most childminders will not take then when they are sick.
I have to say I am incredulous at some of the replies here.
I noticed somebody pointed out that it was not a company concern if the employee could not afford some terribly expensive childcare person willing to look after a sick child. Well this works both ways, as an employee one could also say it is not my concern if the company management need me to put in extra hours to help meet a deadline too. Inflexibility works both ways. If/ when things improve on the jobs front then the company will only have itself to blame when the better people leave and it earns a poor reputation as an employer.
If companies were to behave as some posters here suggest then they would only employ single workers with no children. I have no doubt that some people would welcome such a situation but they might change their minds when their own circumstances change.
Both companies and employees live in a real and imperfect world and a little flexibility goes a long way to keeping everyone happy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?