Employer letter for shared lives with order?

[KF31]

Is it normally the case if your a working dad and pursuing a shared lives with order that Cafcass request a letter from your employer to confirm the employer would be flexible to changes in contact?

My partner has a final hearing Monday and has asked for a shared lives with order. He’s not asked for an equal share of time, just extra 2 days on top of what he is already getting and an equal share of school holidays.
Tonight Cafcass have called and informed him they are doing a report for court, all section 7’s etc are done and he’s had communication to say Cafcass no longer involved so don’t know what this report is unless they have been asked for an update by court because Cafcass will be at the hearing. They want to speak to the children again tomorrow but have pulled my partner up that he hasn’t asked for a 50/50 split share of time.

They have also said that because he’s working he will have to provide a letter from his employer to say they are willing to be flexible with his hours. He’s told them they are willing but there’s no way he will get a letter from them in time for the hearing. It kind of feels a bit like Cafcass are going to tell court not to give the shared order because he works, yet if he didn’t work they’d likely say he wasn’t able to provide for them and refuse the shared order that way.
The mother works so why should the father be punished for working?
If his job did refuse to be flexible he could look for an alternative job, thousands of mothers and fathers work a job around their children, it seems unfair that he seems to now be in a catch 22 situation.

 

[Ash]

It does seem unfair. On the positive side it sounds like Cafcass are recommending the shared care providing he has the time. But it's a bit intrusive. Technically he doesn't even need to be off work to have shared care. He could arrange for someone else to pick the kids up from school until he gets home. I am guessing it's partly because of you An ex and possibly Cafcass can gang up a bit when a stepmum is involved. That will change over time. And no reason why you can't share out pick ups and drop offs.

It's probably because it's a change - if he didn't have shared care before.

Presumably if the final hearing is on Monday, statements will already have been exchanged and submitted and all his arguments in there.

Ok so what time on Monday is the hearing? 10am. Could he contact his boss over the week-end and say - could you just do me a quick email "To whom it may concern" stating that I am able to have flexible working hours on occasion if necessary? This is apparently a requirement of a shared care order to parent my kids but I will rarely need to change my hours.

That should do - an email from the boss "To whom it may concern". Having said that, it is probably too late to submit any further evidence for this hearing.

Is he being represented at the hearing? Solicitor or Barrister? They can argue the case for him saying it's not necessary to have proof of his flexible working hours, any more than the Mother need proof. And he is perfectly able to manage this schedule.

 

[KF31]

No he’s not represented, he’s a LIP but has a McKenzie friend who has helped a lot. His company is closed for the weekend and even if he were able to contact them everything goes through their HR so I very much doubt they’d rush anything like that through for him in time.
Yes all statements etc have been submitted and given to the other party.

What I have just thought is that when they did the last section 7 Cafcass were saying for the children to live with mum but did recommend that dad was given an equal share of school holidays. Cafcass knew he was working and at no point asked if he would be able to fit that arrangement around his job or if he was even given enough holiday leave to cover that contact. It seems they are only prying into his job and wanting letters now that he has asked for extra time which involves a shared order.

He’ll obviously have to fight it in court if Cafcass try to say no shared order cause he works and put across that he shouldn’t need to prove his hours anymore than the mother does, but how likely the judge is to agree, who knows?

 

[KF31]

No he’s not represented, he’s a LIP but has a McKenzie friend who has helped a lot. His company is closed for the weekend and even if he were able to contact them everything goes through their HR so I very much doubt they’d rush anything like that through for him in time.
Yes all statements etc have been submitted and given to the other party.

What I have just thought is that when they did the last section 7 Cafcass were saying for the children to live with mum but did recommend that dad was given an equal share of school holidays. Cafcass knew he was working and at no point asked if he would be able to fit that arrangement around his job or if he was even given enough holiday leave to cover that contact. It seems they are only prying into his job and wanting letters now that he has asked for extra time which involves a shared order.

He’ll obviously have to fight it in court if Cafcass try to say no shared order cause he works and put across that he shouldn’t need to prove his hours anymore than the mother does, but how likely the judge is to agree, who knows?

Also if they wanted him to provide this letter ahouldnt they have contacted him sooner given the last hearing was a couple of months ago, so that he had time to get the letter? Instead they co tact him late evening on the last working day before the hearing and tell him that they haven’t actually even read his position statement yet which they contacted him and asked him for weeks ago.

 

[Resolute]

I agree with Ash about the positive here, they would not be asking about flexibility if not minded to recommend shared care.

If he cannot get a letter, he could get a copy of the organisation's Flexible Working Policy and demonstrate that his request would meet requirements to be approved. Grounds for refusing a flexible working request are limited:

planned structural changes

the burden of additional costs

quality or standards will suffer

they won't be able to recruit additional staff

performance will suffer

won't be able to reorganise work among existing staff

will struggle to meet customer demand

lack of work during the periods you propose to work.

He can say that none of these apply and that flexibility similar to what he needs is customarily approved within his organisation.

 

[Ash]

I believe there is a legal requirement for an employer in this situation actually - can't remember what it is and I'll see if I can find out.

The main thing now is be prepared for and focus on the hearing. Will he be allowed to cross examine his ex if he's self repping?

 

[Ash]

This should knock that argument on the head

"Time off to look after your child

If you’ve worked for your employer for 1 year you have the right to unpaid time off work to look after your children.


You can take up to 18 weeks' unpaid leave before your child is 18.


You can also take unpaid time off work to deal with unexpected problems - for example where childminding arrangements break down."

Parental rights at work

Your work rights as a parent, maternity, paternity and adoption leave and pay, as well as shared parental leave and unpaid parental leave.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk

He can just say his employer has flexible working policies and as a parent he has a right to unpaid leave from work if necessary for childcare.

 

[Resolute]

I believe there is a legal requirement for an employer in this situation actually - can't remember what it is and I'll see if I can find out.

The main thing now is be prepared for and focus on the hearing. Will he be allowed to cross examine his ex if he's self repping?

Flexible working is a statutory right, the employer's options are very limited. Policies on this are more or less identical from employer to employer. Chances are people in the court will not be aware and will take the policy as an assurance. It should be possible to get the policy from work intranet.

 

[Ash]

Main thing is though I don't think you can introduce any new evidence at this stage, but you could take it anyway and if it comes up as an issue, state the facts and then say you were only advised on Friday that evidence of flexi working may be needed - after the bundle was gone, but you have statutory rights and have a copy of the firm's policy if the Judge would like to see it. He probably won't bother and will just believe you - because he must know there are statutory rights.

It sounds to me like either Cafcass are biased towards the Mother and trying to throw an iron in the fire. Or the Mother has been badgering Cafcass who have given way to appease her. Knowing it's not really an issue.

 

[Ash]

He needs to have the Judge onside. Demeanour and presentation are important. Dress smart. Address the Judge as Sir (or Ma'am) - it sounds archaic but it's expected. And can help a judge warm to you or feel pee'd off with you. So you start with Sir, blah blah blah - you say the Sir bit first.

If it's magistrates - not sure what you call them! Anyone else know?

Don't say anything critical about the Mother. Keep it child focused.

 

[Resolute]

Sir or Madam

What do I call a judge? - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

There are many different ways to address members of the judiciary.

www.judiciary.uk

 

[Ash]

What about Magistrates though? They're not Judges. I guess it wouldn't do any harm to call them Sir or Madam! A court clerk gave me that tip once. He said - you need to address the Judge as "Sir" and say that before you say anything. The other person didn't and got a lot of black looks and the Judge got really annoyed with them! That wasn't even family court, it was another matter.

Whether you agree with it or not, it's what you're expected to do in this situation and to have a case go well.

 

[Resolute]

What about Magistrates though? They're not Judges. I guess it wouldn't do any harm to call them Sir or Madam! A court clerk gave me that tip once. He said - you need to address the Judge as "Sir" and say that before you say anything. The other person didn't and got a lot of black looks and the Judge got really annoyed with them! That wasn't even family court, it was another matter.

Whether you agree with it or not, it's what you're expected to do in this situation and to have a case go well.

Link has magistrates at bottom of list

Magistrates
Dear…
John Siddiquee, Esq JP

In court
Your Worship, or Sir or Madam

 

[KF31]

I believe there is a legal requirement for an employer in this situation actually - can't remember what it is and I'll see if I can find out.

The main thing now is be prepared for and focus on the hearing. Will he be allowed to cross examine his ex if he's self repping?

He was told by the judge at the last hearing that he will be cross examining the mother.
His McKenzie friend seems to think it will be based on submissions and he won’t be asking questions cause they haven’t stated that he’ll ask questions in the court paper but my partner said the judge specifically told the mother that he’s be asking her questions.

 

[KF31]

Main thing is though I don't think you can introduce any new evidence at this stage, but you could take it anyway and if it comes up as an issue, state the facts and then say you were only advised on Friday that evidence of flexi working may be needed - after the bundle was gone, but you have statutory rights and have a copy of the firm's policy if the Judge would like to see it. He probably won't bother and will just believe you - because he must know there are statutory rights.

It sounds to me like either Cafcass are biased towards the Mother and trying to throw an iron in the fire. Or the Mother has been badgering Cafcass who have given way to appease her. Knowing it's not really an issue.

No they’re not allowed to submit any further evidence now.
I honestly think Cafcass are biased towards mother based on other things they have said to my partner. No matter what he has spoken to Cafcass about it seems excuses have been made by the officer for the mother and he has been careful about what he has said and how he’s said it to Cafcass so it’s not like he’s just gone mouthing off about mum, cause he knew that would give Cafcass the wrong impression.

 

[Resolute]

He was told by the judge at the last hearing that he will be cross examining the mother.
His McKenzie friend seems to think it will be based on submissions and he won’t be asking questions cause they haven’t stated that he’ll ask questions in the court paper but my partner said the judge specifically told the mother that he’s be asking her questions.

My McKenzie told me that the court would not ask me to cross-examine my ex and that I did not need to prepare questions. He thought the court would be close to a conclusion based on "submissions."

I had to cross examine, from what I could tell the judge had not looked at submissions.

 

[KF31]

He needs to have the Judge onside. Demeanour and presentation are important. Dress smart. Address the Judge as Sir (or Ma'am) - it sounds archaic but it's expected. And can help a judge warm to you or feel pee'd off with you. So you start with Sir, blah blah blah - you say the Sir bit first.

If it's magistrates - not sure what you call them! Anyone else know?

Don't say anything critical about the Mother. Keep it child focused.

Luckily it’s been the same district judge throughout the hearings and he’ll have the same judge again this time. Mum has shown herself up behaviour wise in court. The judge has seemed to be understanding of my partners case for the most part and has pulled the mother up on some of the things she’s been saying to him out of court

 

[Resolute]

Judicial Continuity, that is good news!

 

[Ash]

That sounds fairly typical - I think they are biased towards Mothers. Judges usually aren't though. Depending on the Judge! It's luck - you could get a great Judge, a lazy Judge or a biased Judge, so if he's representing himself he needs to have a bunch of case law he can quote to the Judge. Judges are obliged to follow case law. Of course the other side might present some conflicting case law - so get some very recent case law! More recent is better. There is plenty of good case law out there as to why it should be shared care.

Case law is basically quoting another case in which there was a Judgement that is relevant.

I would expect he would be cross examining - so he needs to have that prepared - the aim is to undermine the Mother's statement by proving she has lied about something or contradicted herself (which means something isn't true). Mainly using her own statement or any other evidence submitted.

He also needs to know his own statement inside out as he'll be questioned on that. Does Mum have a lawyer?

 

[KF31]

My McKenzie told me that the court would not ask me to cross-examine my ex and that I did not need to prepare questions. He thought the court would be close to a conclusion based on "submissions."

I had to cross examine, from what I could tell the judge had not looked at submissions.

This is my concern cause his McKenzie friend has said similar and not advised in regards to questions. We’ve come up with questions to ask and he’ll have those with him just in case they’re needed, but he has t had to cross examine before so we don’t even know if the way we have worded the questions will be seen as acceptable by the judge.