Returning from parental leave may mean lower pay than colleagues. When must the employer raise your salary?
When returning to work after parental leave, an employee may face changed working arrangements and a pay gap compared with colleagues. The law does not allow employees to be treated less favourably on this basis.
The Estonian Labour Inspectorate and legal experts encounter cases where employees returning from parental leave discover that working arrangements have changed and their colleagues’ salaries have increased. Employers sometimes offer returning employees less favourable terms or a different position.
Vladimir Logatšev, Lead Counselling Lawyer at the Estonian Labour Inspectorate, explains that if the entire team’s pay has increased in the meantime, the employer must also raise the salary of the employee returning from leave. “The mere fact that an employee has been on parental leave is not a lawful reason to treat them less favourably,” Logatšev emphasises.
If a colleague’s salary increased because of their individual performance, the returning employee’s salary does not have to increase to the same extent. However, the employer must be able to provide objective reasons for any pay differences.
Kristel Tiits, Head of Legal Advisory at Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ, highlights the legal requirement: “An employee returning to work after parental leave must be given the same conditions as other employees, including any improved working conditions to which they would have been entitled had they not been on parental leave.”
Tiits explains that if the company implemented a general pay increase during the employee’s parental leave and this increase was not linked to individual performance, the employer must raise the returning employee’s salary on an equivalent basis and according to the same principles. Otherwise, she adds, this constitutes prohibited discrimination on the grounds of parenthood and family responsibilities.
“The simplest way to distinguish between a general and an individual pay increase is to ask: would this employee have received the pay increase if they had been working at the time, without having to demonstrate any additional performance? If the answer is yes, it is most likely a general pay increase,” Tiits notes.
She recommends that employers document pay decisions from the outset to avoid disputes later.
When the previous role no longer exists and a new probationary period is proposed
Logatšev says that having a well-established replacement does not give an employer the right to offer the returning employee a different position or pressure them into resigning. “One common misconception is that if an employer has found a replacement during an employee’s parental leave and wants the replacement to stay, the returning employee can be offered less favourable terms or a different position. This is not the case,” Logatšev explains.
He adds that an employer cannot unilaterally reduce an employee’s salary or change their position or workload simply because the replacement has settled into the role well. He also cautions employers against pressuring returning employees to leave. “An employee cannot be forced to resign voluntarily,” Logatšev says.
Tiits gives an example from early 2024, when an Estonian Labour Dispute Committee found discrimination in a case where an employee’s previous responsibilities had been assigned to a new manager and the returning employee was offered a narrower role. Such cases show that an employer cannot use an employee’s absence as a reason to strip them of their position. In 2025, Labour Dispute Committees handled 55 discrimination cases, while 597 disputes ended in confidential settlements.
Parents of young children often feel uncertain when returning to work. The desire for a smooth transition and fear of damaging the employment relationship may discourage employees from asserting their rights. Tiits notes that lawyers generally become involved only once a dispute is already under way, making it difficult to assess employees’ overall awareness of their rights. At the same time, the growing number of employment disputes suggests that people are more aware of their rights than before and are increasingly willing to turn to the relevant authorities when disputes arise.
Setting a new probationary period for an employee returning after a long period of leave is unlawful. A probationary period applies exclusively when an employee starts employment. If the employee went on leave during their original probationary period, only the remaining part of that period continues when they return to work.
Employers must also recognise that a long absence may require employees to refresh their professional knowledge and, where necessary, receive additional training. Tiits stresses that employers cannot expect employees to be fully up to speed immediately in a changed working environment. Difficulties in readjusting must not be used as grounds for quickly terminating an employment contract. The employer must be able to demonstrate that the employee was given a reasonable opportunity to refresh their skills.
Original source of the article: Delfi Ärileht
