Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know how long a company legally has to consider an application for flexible working on return from mat leave? Google gives me quite a few contradictory answers on this.


I have chased and chased my application with the HR department who keep telling me they haven't been able to pin down my line manager, it's the Easter holidays so no one is around to deal with it etc etc. It's now been 9 weeks and I just need to know where I stand one way or the other!


Thanks


Princess

Hi,


I've looked at my company handbook and it states that the Company has 28 days in which to accept your application or to arrange a meeting with the employee.


The employee has the right to be accompanied etc


Within 14 days of the meeting the Company will respond in writing or either agreeing to the proposed new work pattern and it's start date or confirming any compromise agreement discussed or explaining precise terms why the application may get rejected.


You then have 14 days for the right to appeal which is done in writing.


Following the appeal the Company has 14 days in which to provide a decision.



Now this is what my company handbook states and doesn't necessarily mean it's what your company follows but maybe useful as a guide :)


Hope this help

Thanks

They have to respond to your request within 28 days unless the person who makes the decision is on leave, which might be how they're stalling - although 9 weeks seems extreme. Info here and given how they're behaving, I'd do everything by the book: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/Flexibleworking/DG_171775
I had a similar experience with my company not getting back to me for 6 weeks. I wrote an email to the person responsible for responding, copying in his boss and the CEO, 'reminding' him that government guidelines require them to reply within 28 days. I felt very annoyed, stressed and uncomfortable having to write a snotty email, but it did do the job. The statutory timeline is just as ED Newbie's staff handbook describes and can be found on direct.gov.uk.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I look to the future and clearly see that the law of unintended consequences will apply with a vengeance and come 2029 Labour will voted out of office. As someone once said 'The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money'. 
    • Labour seems to be taxing the many to get to the few in so many policies they have implemented. Look at the farmer situation: yes there are some rich farmers but the vast majority are not and they are, in my mind, the very definition of a working person - the very people this country relies upon. Most are family businesses. They were re-running some of the Simon Reeves programmes on the Lake District and it was filmed just after Covid but they featured an 18 year old farmer who was took over his parents farm after they both died of cancer within months of each other. He and his school friends were mucking in to keep the farm going and continue the family business. Today, he would have been hit by a big tax bill too. The challenge is Rachel Reeves' budget desperately needs growth and with the news today that the economy barely grew on, ostensibly, fears of what the budget was going to hit people with and the fact post budget many businesses are saying costs will have to go up due to the increases in employee NI but at the same time saying wage growth, and even jobs, will be impacted we may be heading towards a very nasty perfect storm. Public services desperately need reform not just more money. Wes Streeting said that reform was needed in the NHS and he was talking in a manner more akin to a Tory health secretary than a Labour one!
    • I'm certainly not surly - it's Friday, so I'm in a delightful mood.  As Earl Aelfheah said, the money has to come from somewhere. But Labour new that hiking fuel as well as employee NIC in would be a step too far - for businesses and consumers. It was the right decision for this moment in time. Suggesting that someone who's against fuel duty increase on this occasion is against and fuel duty full stop is quite a leap. Why do you demonise everyone who doesn't think that owning a car is a cardinal sin?  I'm not sure using Clarkson as an example of your average farmer holds much weight as an argument, but you know that already, Mal. 
    • Hope it's making others smile too! I don't know the background or how long it's been there 😊
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...