4

Maternity on a funded fixed term contract

I work on a school academy. We have a member of support staff who is employed on their second, one year fixed term contract due to end 31st August 2024. The post they are employed to do is not in the school budget but is government funded therefore if the funding stops the position will also no longer exist. As far as I am aware it is envisaged the funding will continue for another year into 2025. The member of staff is pregnant and due around May time. My manager has said the school cannot afford to pay for her position and a maternity replacement. Due to the funding of the post could this come under a SOSR to terminate the contract? Thank you for any advice.

990 views
  • Welcome to the communities

    No this is not SOSR (as I read your question) but potentially dismissing her because she is pregnant. I think this would be both wrong and highly dangerous

    If you take out the funding route, for a second , if you said the school couldn't afford to keep a permanent employee and maternity replacement you simply wouldn't consider this.

    I would think again
  • Steve Bridger

    | 0 Posts

    Community Manager

    9 Jan, 2024 08:15

    Welcome to our Community,  

    Thanks for asking this question.

  • I had a similar situation (in a different environment). We had an externally funded post (part of a nationwide scheme run by a big name in the field) but the funding had no maternity funding built in, despite the roles across the country being permanent jobs! We had to swallow the cost of the maternity payments ourselves as we were the employer but managed to save some money by employing a maternity cover for fewer hours just to do the essentials for the role and cut back on the service provided for that period of time. Obviously we agreed this course of action with the funder.

  • Steve Bridger

    | 0 Posts

    Community Manager

    9 Jan, 2024 12:32

    In reply to Jacqueline:

    Thanks for that insight, Jackie. Definitely suggest Joanne has a conversation with the funding agency.

    Is there a wider issue here: the lack of maternity funding/cover/contingency built in to such arrangements?