Skip to main content

We have encountered an issue regarding absence requests for parental leave for unborn children.

Background: We went live with IFS Cloud last fall and set up parental leave as an absence the employees have to request.

From new year there are new rules for companies to report data such as for which child the absence considers.

Way of working: The Employees add a related persons and flags the “Dependent” flag to yes, these are then used when a absence request is registered. This works fine as long as the date of birth is known. However, when requesting the parental leave for an unborn child it is not possible to add a future date. 

Even though the planned date of birth most likely will change, adding ’today’´s date as date of birth when the absence request is created could be way off since the request can be made in several months ahead.

Are there any other that are using this functionality or have the ‘parental leave for future children’ set up in another way?

 

Best regards maxels

Hi Mattias,

I hope all is well. Thank you for your question.

As you point out the Date of Birth is mandatory for “Dependent”. This is reasonable since “Dependent” is often used in relation to Insurance Companies or Government Agencies (as in your case). The Age of a Dependent is also often required for contractual terms or statutory regulations. Hence, it being mandatory.

Requesting Parental Leave for an unborn child therefore becomes a deviating scenario from the otherwise reasonable logic described above. The scenario is at the same time quite common within Absence Request. Therefore we need to be able to handle it. Something to consider is also if it is possible with some sort of notice, to eventually set the correct Date of Birth and not forget. I will forward this issue to our Product Management.

In the meantime Mattias, please do as you suggest. Set today’s date. Perhaps also set the Year a few decades back in time, to make it obvious that it is not the correct Date of Birth. Otherwise the risk is probably higher of it being mistaken as the correct date and never updated.

Best Regards,
Magnus
 

Thanks for the quick answer!

We did go forward with the workaround for now, this was possible due to a miss understanding from my side regarding the new rules - “to report data such as for which child the absence considers” was not part of the new rules but just a help for the employee to look back and see which absence was connected to which child.

The scenario as you describe is still common and it would be nice if it were supported

Again, thanks!

 

BR Mattias

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings