Navigating the Return from Maternity Leave: Balancing Work and Family

Hello, I am working as an Executive in HR/Admin in a corporate company. I went on maternity leave and came back to the office after 84 working days. Meanwhile, our head recruited a person in my place. Now that I am back, they have not reassigned my work. Instead, they are assigning me the work of someone who has resigned. I am not interested in this new work. I have asked my Head to assign me my previous tasks from before maternity leave, but they are not accepting my request. Is this situation acceptable? Please suggest how I can reclaim my work and workplace back.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for returning from maternity leave. I would like to inform you about the company's rules and regulations. Unfortunately, you are unable to return to your previous workplace as you have already taken 84 days of leave, which exceeds the allowable limit. Therefore, I suggest you explore opportunities at other workplaces.

Thank you.

I don't agree with Faraha. I think you must get back to your previous position and responsibilities. If your company is not doing so, then it is unethical because maternity leave is your right provided by law. You have not resigned from your position, so there should be no issue with your current posting.

Secondly, consider if your company intends for you to be free from heavy workloads for the sake of your health. Perhaps the company has decided to assign you lighter tasks so that you do not become overworked and can focus on taking care of your newborn baby.

Therefore, before making any judgments, assess the actual situation.

Arun J.

Hi,

The company can hire a person as a replacement for the individual who works on a temporary basis if the woman has gone on maternity leave. However, they need to assign the same responsibilities to the replacement. They cannot make a permanent appointment for the candidate's position. If the management remains adamant about this issue, you can consider approaching the courts.

Regards,
Ashutosh Thakre

In private organisations, they can ask you to do any work that suits your profile. What if you are transferred to another department even before you can avail maternity leave? Check the appointment letter conditions; all such clauses are typically included.

Pon

Hi,

I do not agree with Pon and Farah. You are legally entitled to get back to your work in the same workplace with the same profile. Who said that if anyone receives maternity benefits, they can be promoted to any department that suits their profile? Very funny. If an MBA-HR employee avails of maternity benefits, they may be asked to do HR-Marketing work, despite what the appointment letter states. Please upload a copy of the appointment letter in Cite HR so everyone can understand clearly.

Legally, you can fight this. If the management is unwilling to give you back your old position, write an email to the Labour Commissioner and CC HR.

Thank you.

There is no benefit in going to the Labor Commissioner. He is mainly there to deal with industrial disputes of workmen. The person concerned is not a workman, and her problem is not an industrial dispute.

Varghese Mathew

With due respect to all,

I am afraid how can one who resumes duty after such a long 84 days expect to take back charge of the exactly same work which one was doing before going on leave. The organization's management must have made some arrangement to take care of the work which was being handled by the person on leave by someone else. It might be possible the new person is performing the work better than the earlier one. It might be possible that management wants some time for re-handover/takeover.

Going to court or legal means could lead to a situation for an indefinite time period. Also, check the status of who can go to the labor court.

A mature person always settles the issue amicably.

Dear Ma'am,

My opinion is that even if, after your request, the HOD is not reinstating you to your original work, you have no option but to accept the new role that has been offered. By continuing to fight against the HOD's decision, you may spoil your relations and future prospects in the present organization. The second option would be to find a new job and quit. Based on my assessment, it appears that your HOD is satisfied with the performance of the new person who has taken over your role. Please accept this fact and decide on either of the two options I suggested above. Please refrain from fighting against the management as it could yield adverse results and harm your image in the organization. At this stage, your priority should be to take care of your baby and earn money simultaneously.

In the new role, you may have an opportunity to prove your abilities and grow. I wish you the best of luck for the future.

Regards,
Satish Akut

Pon has replied aptly. Please go through your appointment clauses, whether you can be transferred from one location to another, from one department to another department, and/or any sister concern without hampering the employment benefits. If so, then the employer can very well do the same. Moreover, if you legally fight, it will bring more stress to your health and mind. As rightly said by Satish Akut, the new employee's performance must be much better than your performance or the company does not want to give you a load/burden or any project which needs devotion as you will require nursing breaks too. So, think logically before you act.

I wish to give my perception of the case.

Instead of becoming adamant about getting back the earlier assignment after a huge gap of almost 3 months, consider the situation from a career perspective. Change is the only thing that is permanent. Assume that this change of assignment you are being offered may be something good for your career. Maybe you should be able to prove your talent in the new assignment. Because of your insistence on getting back the old assignment, your mindset is against the new task. It is always better to learn everything in life. A closed mind will close all doors in front of you. Accept it as a new challenge in front of you. Learn to excel in everything you take up.

I started my career as a Stenographer, from then on to become Personal Assistant in GOI, from there to Secretary in a private company and from then on to Executive HR, and retired as Head of HR / Sr. DGM in the same company. Had I been adamant that I will do only Secretarial work, I would not have reached this position in my career!

Best wishes

Dear friends,

It's a debatable subject.

1. Does an employee enjoy a constitutional right to a post and/or the type and nature of the job one has been appointed to or not?
2. On the contrary, whether or not the employer has the right to reassign different duties other than those for which he/she has been appointed.
3. And whether the employer should inevitably include a clause in their offer/appointment letter envisaging the reallocation of duties at their discretion. If so, the employee will have the right to refuse such reallocation while retaining the nature of the duties originally allotted to him/her.
4. If the right to the employer is upheld, can an employee claim a reallocation suo motu?

Friends, please respond to this citing decided case laws. Incidentally, we will be able to answer this pertinent query here.

Mr. Kumar has raised excellent points that will have repercussions on both the employer and employee. Certainly, this point should be debated in a larger forum comprising of HR experts!

Dear Sravanthigeda,

The sole aim of the Maternity Benefit Act is to extend financial assistance as well as protection of service during this period and also provide some protection during the pregnancy period. Accordingly, you can rejoin the position you held previously. Although it is not an industrial dispute as they have neither denied your rejoining nor forfeited your salary in lieu of maternity leave. The point is they have assigned you to an alternative position since the role you were holding has been filled.

In your case, you can address your grievance with the senior management, and if not satisfied, then you can approach the labor cum conciliation officer of the area. As pointed out by Mr. Mathew, in the Industrial Disputes Act, the definition of a Supervisor or Manager is concerned, just the designation or salary ceiling is not enough. The duties and powers vested are more important to establish.

P.K. Sharma

Hello,

Followers - Saji & NK Sundaram have provided a legal and practical approach to your issue. Please consider both views and continue with your employment without worrying too much about the nature of the new assignment. Change is always for the good; this is based on my personal experience. Demonstrate your skills in your new role and ensure that the management acknowledges your value. Remember to give attention to your new baby and find joy in both motherhood and work.

Best of luck.

AK Jain

Aditya,

What you have mentioned is wrong, and I would support the comments given by Pon and Sundaram. Do you think if she writes up to the labor department, should she be allowed to work in the department? Practically, if a company wants to send an employee out, they have a thousand ways to do it.

Sravanthigeda,

If an employee goes on maternity leave, then the company needs to fill that place without anyone in the company or a consultant outside, as someone should handle the task assigned by her. Here the company had asked another employee to handle your tasks. This might be for a temporary basis. However, think in this way, what if the present employee who is taking up the task is performing better than you.

You said that you have been assigned some other tasks. I am pretty sure that you have been assigned work in the HR department and not in any other department. I would suggest you understand what Sundaram has commented, and I would appreciate if you could take up his points, as well as what Pon has recommended.

Thanks,

Mahesh

Supreme court has given decision on the demoting of an employee
Hon’ble Supreme Court, setting aside the order of the High Court held that appointing an Enquiry Officer at the time of framing the charge-sheet was not wrong. But, an employee cannot be relegated to a post lower than the one to which he/she was appointed. Thus, ordered reinstating the petitioner to his original post, but with lowest wages applicable to the post.

Hi Aditya
Please do not jump into conclusion before repeatedly reading the post or understanding it, sorry for my language. Here the author is not demoted and also, she has not mentioned that she has been paid less than what she was drawing, so your Supreme Court decision on demoting the employee does not carry any value here. Hope that you will think logically and practically before giving any reply to those who require help/advice. It is the prime responsibility of every member to give a fair and practical views so that the thread member can come to a conclusion to act, rather than running post to pillar of any court for the sake of only satisfying the ego or for the sake of fight a legal suit.

If you were on maternity leave for 2-3 months, your organization has hired a temp worker so the work you were doing doesn't get interrupted. Please don't panic. Since you are an HR professional, find out if there is any contract end date for that temp worker. There must be one! When it comes to shuffling work, you can't really complain much. In private organizations, they may require you to do various tasks. Wait for a few days, assess the situation, then approach your supervisor to seek clarity on why you are being assigned tasks that are not part of your job profile. Sometimes, instead of speculating, it's better to hear directly from the source.

Remember, the show doesn't stop; it goes on. Don't expect everything to remain the same in your organization while you were on maternity leave. The work must continue regardless. So, relax and try to reduce your stress levels. If you still feel dissatisfied, consider seeking another job. 😊

This matter has two folds from my perspective.

On one hand, a lady is seeking the same role which she had left due to maternity leave, and she made sure that she is back to her duties exactly after 84 days to ensure that her company doesn't suffer any longer.

On the other hand, the company also tried its best to adhere to the maternity clause by paying her the salary and allowing her to join back. Like most companies, the mentioned company also has its goals that need to be achieved within a specified time and hence, was bound to hire someone to manage the crisis.

Looking at both aspects is important before making any decision because both the employee and employer have tried to benefit each other in the process. If I were the employee, I would have a clear discussion with the Head to understand the future plans for my role (whether it will be reassigned or changed). I would also take this as an opportunity to rethink my expertise and its relevance to the new role for a better career. A second discussion with the Head will surely help and is strongly recommended.

Dear Ma'am,

In your absence (leave), the company has appointed another person who has delivered better results. In this case, your management has every right to assign you a different role. Since you are not a workman, you can't file a case in the labor court. It is the management's good policy to offer you another position. Consider accepting this new role and show interest in your new assignment.

Regards,
SDP

Hello,

I am very sorry to hear that you have been placed in this position. May I ask, what country are you from? The extent of your legal protection will depend on the jurisdiction that governs your situation. I have knowledge of the legal position in the UK and Ireland, and I could help you navigate and understand the laws under which you are governed if you let me know. I cannot advise you, but I can help you understand: a) what the applicable rules are, b) what they mean, and c) where to go for further help (if such help exists in your area).

Dear friends,

For a while, let us set aside the specifics - a lady employee, maternity leave, etc. Let us discuss, for that matter, any employee, whether male or female, can claim back the same job when resuming duty after the expiry of leave (whether it be ML/SL or EL/PL). It's common practice in almost all offices, whether private or public, that a void created by an employee going on leave has to be filled by someone, either by reallocating duties or by hiring a new employee. It is at the discretion of the establishment either to allow the new recruit to continue in the same position or to ask them to leave once the term ends. The employee who took the leave has the right to resume duty in the establishment without any reduction in service conditions, pay, or status. However, there cannot be an automatic right to the same post and duties. If such a demand is made, it could lead to controversy as similar demands can be raised by new staff (unless they were hired specifically for the duration of the leave vacancy, in which case their term ends once the original employee returns to duty). This system is prevalent in government setups where the Manpower plan includes creating normal vacancies plus a certain percentage/number as leave vacancies. I have observed in some offices that existing staff members, in rotation, used to apply for leave one after the other, almost like a relay race, with the intention of artificially creating a leave vacancy to assist the 'Recruit-in-leave-vacancy' in making a living. Such individuals, acting as 'all-rounders,' end up performing a variety of roles in the same office, continuing for many years. The only difference in this scenario is in designation, pay, and permanency. In private companies as well, there are contract staff who may be engaged on a day-to-day basis, including in offices, administration, technical areas, housekeeping, services, utilities, etc. Therefore, it is natural for one to feel aggrieved upon resuming duties, but they should also consider the predicament of the Heads of Departments (HODs) who are compelled to ensure all tasks are completed without any interruptions, and they cannot make excuses for the absence of someone who has been on leave. In my opinion, similar to what many others have pointed out, there may not be a concrete legal remedy to pursue rather than compromising on certain issues and regaining the trust of the office and colleagues by meeting expectations through proficiently executing new assignments, even if it involves sacrificing personal convenience. While the concerned individual has not committed any crime, it is essential to take things with a pinch of salt too.

I hope this revised version captures the essence of your original message while addressing spelling, grammar, and paragraph formatting.

Organisations employ people to achieve the goals of the organization. Employees play a crucial role in reaching these aims. No organization can afford to keep an employee in the same position forever; it is detrimental not only to the organization but also to the employee. As part of career development, one must be open to moving up or sideways.

In the event that the position offered after a leave period is of the same grade and without a reduction in basic pay, there should be no cause for grievance. For example, if a person goes on leave while serving as a district collector, they cannot demand the same post upon their return.