Families in Employment

[stacym1707]

Hi

 

I currently work for a company that has recently reduced the holiday entitlement to 23 days. I know this is suitible as Bank holidays can be included in holiday pay. ( I dont thinks fair as we not open and can't work but never mind ) The MD partner works for the firm and I questioned will her holiday chnage as well as it applies to everyone in our office. Our manager said " well I don't think so because of who she is sleeping with".

I believe this is discriminating against me because I am not in a relationship with the MD. Should she be entitled to more holidays then everyone else in the office?

[godpikachu]

Well, who the MD decides to bunk with is really nobodies business except theirs and the person concerned really, however if said person is getting special treatment off the back of it then it could be classed as discrimination.

 

The problem is proving it and having sufficient evidence to show that discrimination is taking place based on this persons relationship status.

Stuff like this has always gone off, and will always happen somewhere along the lines, and sometimes although it may feel like they are getting benefits from their relationship, most of the time they are not.

[LilyLou]

Just to clarify:

 

Holiday entitlement to include bank holidays is 24, however in April this will change to 28 days.

 

Regards

LilyLou

[stacym1707]

Hi Thankyou

 

I know in April it going up but ours isnt changing they are just going to include more bank holidays in our entitlement.

 

If though we have evidence that they are having more holidays then anyone else in the same office it is classed as discrimination.

[godpikachu]

If the person recieving them is employed in exactly the same capacity as someone else but recieves additional holidays, benefits etc that they are not contractually entitled to (such as additional holidays or pay for length of service etc), then yes it could be classed as discrimination.

[stacym1707]

Hi

 

Thank you

 

Yes same contract job employment terms.

[godpikachu]

well, remember this before you decide what to do.

 

firstly your evidence has to be factually correct, and not circumstancial, simply stating that this person is getting kickbacks based on their relationship to the MD doesnt cut the mustard unless backed up by hard facts.

 

Secondly, if you do mention the relationship, try to do it with tact, and not make it seem like a blackmail attempt.

 

A written greivance would be the first step, if there is more than one complainant, then all inolved should sign the complaint.

[p_cas]

Hold on....discrimination based on what? That a person in an office has more holidays than another person? You'd need to look at whether it's age discrimination, discrimination based on sexual orientation, race, disability etc. It can't just be discrimination because one person earns more, has more holidays, has better company perks etc etc than someone else.

 

You always get this in offices - other staff thinking that a person gets better treatment because theyre a friend (or whatever) of the boss. In most cases it unfounded but even if it were true you'd have to prove it and prove it was discriminatory on some grounds. It's not discriminatory just because someone earns more or has more holidays.

[godpikachu]

the OP states that someone in their office is geting kickbacks based on the fact that they are shagging the MD of the company, but yet this person is employed under the same terms and conditions as everyone else, ie, they only are entitled to X amount of holidays, but yet are recieving Y amount of holidays.

 

This is good old fashioned nepotism, which unless this other persons T&Cs have been altered to reflect their new status or whatever, is discrimination.