HR Tried to Deny My Maternity Pay with a Fake Reason—Here’s How I Fought Back!
In this dramatic and frustrating account, a 32-week pregnant employee from the UK describes how her employer and HR tried to wrongly deny her Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP). Despite meeting all the eligibility criteria, including working for over 26 weeks and earning above the required threshold, the HR department informed her that she was ineligible for SMP, claiming a false reason: her zero-hours contract. After doing her research and confirming with HMRC that she was indeed entitled to SMP, she discovered that HR had fabricated the reason on official forms, which were filled out incorrectly. Rather than clarifying the mistake, her employer then asked her to return the evidence, which she wisely kept. She now finds herself documenting everything in case of further escalation and is considering reporting the issue to HMRC and ACAS if it’s not resolved in the next five days.
The story provides a powerful example of how employees, particularly those in vulnerable positions like pregnancy, can face legal and administrative challenges from employers who might be more concerned with avoiding costs than following the law. Despite her frustration, the employee remains calm and careful, gathering all the necessary evidence while preparing to take further legal action if necessary.
The company told the woman she wasn’t eligible for maternity pay
But when she uncovered proof they were lying, they started scrambling to make it disappear
This situation sheds light on several critical issues surrounding maternity rights and employment law, especially concerning the manipulation of legal entitlements by employers. In the UK, Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP) is a crucial right for employees who meet the eligibility criteria, which includes having worked for the same employer for at least 26 weeks and earning above a specified weekly threshold. Given that the OP meets all these requirements, HR’s decision to deny her SMP by citing her zero-hours contract as a disqualifying factor was not only factually incorrect but also an attempt to skirt legal obligations.
Under UK law, a zero-hours contract does not disqualify an employee from receiving SMP. The key to SMP eligibility is the duration of employment and meeting the pay criteria—not the type of contract. In this case, HR’s decision to incorrectly state that the OP wasn’t entitled to SMP based on her contract type is an illegal and unethical move, and the fact that HR ghosted her when she asked for clarification further suggests that they were trying to avoid the obligation rather than resolve a simple misunderstanding.
By seeking confirmation from HMRC, the OP took the right steps in verifying her eligibility. The fact that HMRC confirmed her entitlement unequivocally is important because it reinforces the legitimacy of her claim. This independent verification not only provided the OP with peace of mind but also put her in a strong position should she need to escalate the issue. It’s a clear example of why understanding your rights, especially during vulnerable times like pregnancy, is crucial in navigating potential workplace disputes.
Moreover, the OP’s decision to secretly retrieve the SMP1 form and review it closely was a pivotal move in the narrative. Upon reading it, she discovered that HR had handwritten an unsupported reason for her ineligibility—citing her zero-hours contract despite it not being a valid disqualifying factor. The form was supposed to provide factual, legal reasons why an employer might refuse SMP, but instead, HR inserted an invalid, incorrect reason with no legal backing. This is highly concerning because it could suggest a pattern of disregard for legal obligations to save money or avoid paying benefits.
HR’s actions appear to be not just a case of incompetence, but potentially intentional misconduct. The attempt to erase the evidence—when the employer asked the OP to return the form with the fabricated reason for ineligibility—is a particularly telling moment. It indicates that the employer is trying to cover up the mistake or, worse, avoid legal consequences by having the evidence of their wrongdoing removed. This is a common tactic when companies realize they’ve made an error and are looking to mitigate the fallout, but in this case, the OP has proven to be one step ahead by securing copies of the documents.
The emotional toll of dealing with such an issue while pregnant cannot be underestimated. The OP mentions her desire to avoid escalating the issue to prevent workplace tension and unnecessary stress during her pregnancy. This reflects the emotional complexity of situations like this—she is not only fighting for her rights but also trying to protect her mental health during a crucial time. Pregnancy is a period when emotional and physical well-being is paramount, and dealing with workplace issues on top of that can be a significant source of stress. It speaks to the resilience of the OP in maintaining her professionalism while managing the extra burdens of this dispute.
At the heart of this story is the OP’s determination and knowledge of her legal rights, which has put her in a strong position to fight back. By documenting every step, retaining evidence, and taking independent legal advice, the OP has put herself in a good place to escalate the issue appropriately, either through HMRC’s Disputes team or ACAS. In the UK, both of these organizations are instrumental in resolving disputes related to employment law violations, and they offer essential services for employees who find themselves in situations where employers refuse to fulfill their legal obligations.
What stands out most in this situation is the OP’s calm and strategic approach. She didn’t panic or react rashly, but instead, methodically gathered evidence, sought professional guidance, and ensured her actions were legally sound. Her decision to not return the form to the employer is key—it would have been a grave mistake to comply with such a request when it was clear that the form contained erroneous information. Instead, she is now armed with the necessary documentation to make her case if the employer fails to resolve the issue promptly.
In conclusion, this story is a stark reminder of how vulnerable employees can be when navigating maternity rights, and how critical it is to understand your legal rights in such situations. The OP’s situation also highlights the unethical behavior some employers might resort to in an attempt to avoid paying maternity pay, and the lengths to which individuals must go to protect themselves. As the OP prepares to escalate the issue if necessary, this situation serves as a powerful lesson on the importance of being proactive, gathering evidence, and remaining composed when faced with workplace injustice.
Later, the woman shared what the form actually looked like
