14 wks pregnant and going for a job interview

(211 Posts)
aichi Sun 15-Sep-13 12:05:04

I'm 14 wks pregnant and I've been looking for a job for awhile.
I didnt know I was pregnant when I applied for the job - back in June. (They took ages to shortlist for the interview!)

Its the job that I'd like to do and its part time which would suit me. They're looking for a few different posts, permanent and temporary positions. Ideally I would like a permanent post so I can come back to the post after I have the baby.

Am I being unreasonable to go for a job interview at this stage of my pregnancy? I started to show my bump (well for me it looks big already...my second baby) and worried how to cover my bump at the interview...
I also feel sad to feel that I have to hide my bump when I should be happy with my pregnancy..

hugoagogo Sun 15-Sep-13 14:35:04

Of course you should go for the job, congratulations grin

marzipanned Sun 15-Sep-13 14:35:07

tea it depends on so many factors. Is there PT work available? To what level is she qualified? How long does she intend to take for maternity leave? In what type of company is she seeking work?

Whatever the answers to these, I would never say outright that someone has to take themselves off the job market, but I would say that it would be unfair for her not to let her prospective employers know her situation.

sameoldIggi Sun 15-Sep-13 14:35:50

Mumsnet scarf will cover bump.
You might work for them for the next 20 years, one year is a tiny part of this.

MmmmWhiteWine Sun 15-Sep-13 14:36:12

Be prepared for a hostile reaction from colleagues if you announce you're pregnant almost as soon as you start work. We had someone do that in an office i used to work in and it went down like a lead balloon and completely coloured how everyone viewed the colleague in question thereafter. She came in, announced she was 4 months pg, left after 4 months to go on mat leave leaving the rest of us in the shit, short staffed and stressed out.

hettienne Sun 15-Sep-13 14:41:31

Bearbehind - they'd have to be very sure they could prove that they were sacking her for reasons unrelated to pregnancy.

SilverApples Sun 15-Sep-13 14:45:34

Personally, as a supply teacher, I love maternity leave. grin

PresidentServalan Sun 15-Sep-13 14:46:28

But even if they are sacking her for legit reasons they will still fear that they will be taken to court, like I said above - pregnant women have far more rights than everyone else.

hettienne Sun 15-Sep-13 14:49:01

What do you mean by "more rights"? They have the right not to be discriminated against due to pregnancy - what extra rights are there?

PresidentServalan Sun 15-Sep-13 14:57:01

It is very difficult for employers to get rid of pregnant staff even though there are legitimate reasons - far easier to get rid of non pregnant staff. I worked with someone who was crap at their job, unreliable etc (not down to pregnancy but she took full advantage) and HR advised not to get rid of her. She was a waste of space but she even admitted to several people that they 'couldn't do anything about them, so fuck 'em'

zatyaballerina Sun 15-Sep-13 15:04:22

You should let them know you're pregnant, if you get the job they're going to be extremely pissed that you showed up only to go on maternity leave.

squeakytoy Sun 15-Sep-13 15:09:26

"Ask yourself what a man, whose partner is pregnant, would do in the same situation."

How is that relevant? The man would not be at work while pregnant or needing time off straight into a new job.

Alisvolatpropiis Sun 15-Sep-13 15:26:45

There's no way I would not tell them. They may well offer it to you because you're the best person for the job.

I'm not sure when I'd tell them but assuming the job was offered I wouldn't accept,turn up on my first day and announce it iyswim?

hettienne Sun 15-Sep-13 15:35:14

That's not "extra rights" though - it just means the company has to be sure they can prove that they aren't acting in a discriminatory way. Companies being too lazy to go through proper processes doesn't mean extra rights.

ModeratelyObvious Sun 15-Sep-13 15:40:53

YANBU OP.

<weeps quietly>

HopeS01 Sun 15-Sep-13 15:43:29

Unfortunately, it's likely you'll be on 'probation' for 12 weeks after starting the job anyway. During those 12 weeks an employer can terminate your contract (with a week's notice) for pretty much any reason. Of course, they couldn't legally say it's because you're pregnant but they could say you're "unsuitable" for a number of made up reasons.
I'm really sorry to sound negative, OP, I think you should go for the job, but I'd keep the pregnancy to yourself for as long as possible. It's an unfair world we live in sad

StuntGirl Sun 15-Sep-13 15:45:23

This thread depresses the fucking hell out of me.

I think you have to have been employed for two years before you can claim constructive dismissal.

And probation periods are getting longer, precisely to make it easier for employers to get rid of new people if the face don't fit or if the company's finances change. They can just say that it isn't working out and it would be incredibly difficult to prove sex discrimination.

hettienne Sun 15-Sep-13 15:52:06

You can claim unfair dismissal on the grounds of discrimination however long you have been employed. They'd have to prove that they weren't discriminating.

TheVermiciousKnid Sun 15-Sep-13 16:01:18

^"Ask yourself what a man, whose partner is pregnant, would do in the same situation."

How is that relevant? The man would not be at work^

It is very relevant! If women are treated differently because they are pregnant (e.g. not offered a job or dismissed from a job because they are pregnant) this is sex discrimination - it does not apply to men who are 'expecting' a baby (i.e. whose partners are pregnant), it is something that only applies to women. The legal protection is there to stop this discrimination and women have a right not to disclose their pregnancy (up to a certain gestation) or their future reproductive plans.

The comparison to a man who develops a serious health problem is not relevant - this could apply to both men and women and is therefore not sex discrimination.

I agree with Stuntgirl, this thread is fucking depressing.

Alisvolatpropiis Sun 15-Sep-13 16:08:26

It doesn't matter how much legislation there is re offering jobs.

Prospective employers can employ whomever they like and it's very difficult they didn't employ a woman purely because she is likely to have children/pregnant/has children.

For small companies it's a very real issue financially speaking.

In my experience small companies really struggle to follow any kind of legislation (terrible company, I look forward to the day the owner has to declare insolvency).

Alisvolatpropiis Sun 15-Sep-13 16:08:48

*difficult to prove

teatimesthree Sun 15-Sep-13 16:22:09

I am really struck by the wilful misunderstanding of sex discrimination on this thread. Nobody except for marzipanned has tried to answer my question about a pregnant single woman - or indeed a pregnant female breadwinner. Do you all think women's wages are just pin money?

No wonder women earn less than men.

FrigginRexManningDay Sun 15-Sep-13 16:25:21

No of course not.

OwlinaTree Sun 15-Sep-13 16:30:28

I think you need to be honest in this world. I would not be impressed if someone started a permanent position at work when actually their intention was to be leaving in a few months.

If they had been honest about this, and employer knew their intention was to be leaving in a few months, then it is different, as you would know what their intention was. Even if you are planning to return to work after 3 months of mat leave, you don't know whether you will change your mind or circumstances might change, so you can't really guarantee it.

As for the single mothers question, it is not a case of not applying for jobs, it's still a case of honesty.

Alisvolatpropiis Sun 15-Sep-13 16:31:34

tea

I missed your question, what was it?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now