Is this taking the piss or not? (Maternity leave)

[RolyPolierThanThou]

I'm going to try to put this as neutrally as I can.

I work for an organisation that has about 120 employees. A woman started working here who, three months into her role and still a trainee, announced she was pregnant. Everyone was really pleased for her and congratulated her but she must surely have been ttc as she took the job, unless it was an accident (which is plausible). But everyone was genuinely happy and excited for her.

Anyway, everyone signed a card and gave her gifts for the baby and she took a year's maternity leave and we were all happy for her. Traineeship normally lasts about 8 months here but because she'd be taking maternity leave she was kept as a trainee right through her maternity leave, with a view to promote upon her return.

She came back from maternity leave and after three months was promoted from trainee to her current role. It was at this point she announced that she was expecting AGAIN. She had basically returned from maternity leave already pregnant! I'm sure this happens, but considering she'd practically joined the organisation pregnant makes this seem suspect.

Anyway, she has now returned from her second full year's maternity leave and guess what - pregnant again. She has told at least one person in our team but it's not yet fully announced.

So is she taking the proverbial or is this just something that happens?

She is in her late thirties so I guess might feel under pressure to have children quickly. It just seems she keeps coming back pregnant and announces it after promotion. The company doesn't offer any enhanced maternity packages (only the statutory minimum) but people have been pushing management for a better maternity package, but her case is hardly going to sway their minds.

So what do you think? Completely reasonable and just part of life or a scourge on women's rights in the workplace?

[esiotrot2015]

just part of life
she'll be back in a year and if no more kids she could be working for you for another 25 years!

will she come back full time though with 3 under 3? I don't envy her that!!

[afreshstartplease]

Part of life

[PookBob]

As Ezio said ^^

[ApocalypseThen]

I think it's reasonable. If she wants a family, realistically what can she do but get pregnant? She's got a small window of opportunity to get it done now but years of working life ahead of her.

[LonnyVonnyWilsonFrickett]

How on earth can be a woman exercising her rights be a scourge on women's rights?

[tryingtocatchthewind]

Just part of life but I can see how management would get annoyed. She deserves a medal having two that quick!

[redexpat]

As long as there is only 2 weeks paternity pay available for men, and the pay gap means families are better off with the father working ft then yes her taking a years leave repeatedly is entirely reasonable.

[splodgeses]

I assume between taking her maternity leave periods she was working for a good 7 or so months. In that time, being pregnant, parenting 2 under 2 dc and training must show she is committed and incredibly good at her job.

Yes, taking 3 lots of mat leave in 5 years might seem like she is taking the piss, but if she is fulfilling the requirements of amount of working months etc, then you can't argue and rules can't really be bent as they could affect someone who has worked there for 10 years before having a first dc.

YANBU really, but not much you can do about it.

[WastingMyYoungYears]

What everyone else said. You're clearly cross about this though OP. She wouldn't be getting promoted if she didn't deserve it though, and she might continue to work at the company for 10 or 20+ years.

[Clarinet9]

Bit of both maybe, i can see why she 'does it' and I can see why people think it might not help their cause!

[ApocalypseThen]

But it's a rubbish cause if you require women to curtail their families in the short term interests of a business.

[Fattyfattyyumyum]

If she was pregnant when she took the job then she'll have got no SMP first time round.

[dancingwithmyselfandthecat]

As a manager (and former small business owner) this would annoy me. But I would try to keep my annoyance under wraps because although it is understandable it isn't professional.

From experience of different workplaces, my very anecdotal hunch is that this kind of thing tends to happen less often when there is an enhanced maternity leave package. Most packages operate in such a way that you have to be doing the role for enough of a period that in these circs she wouldn't quality. Maybe that incentives people to spread it out a bit more, or maybe it generates more loyalty to the organisation.

Although maternity leave and concurrent or close maternity leaves can be annoying from the management perspective, I am always super wary of singling them out as such - not only does it lead to workplace misogyny/discrimination but it is far from fair as many things are equally or more so. The underperforming member of staff who always manages just enough of an improvement for a few weeks when you give them a warning; the poisonous gossip; the people with really erratic sick patterns or the ones who are always late - these are the much more common, and more disruptive than mat leaves which are stable and relatively predictable. And these are not management headaches which relate solely to childbearing women - who if anything (in my experience) are the ones least likely to be pulling these stunts!

[YvesJutteau]

"From experience of different workplaces, my very anecdotal hunch is that this kind of thing tends to happen less often when there is an enhanced maternity leave package."

Exactly. Your company is aiming to save money by paying statutory minimum only but they might very well be better off operationally by offering an enhanced package but hedging the enhanced portion around with terms and conditions.

A company DH used to work for offered the whole period of maternity leave at full pay (with conditions). Result was that virtually everyone went back to work and by and large they stuck around for the requisite period afterwards, so the company retained more high-quality female staff and didn't lose their investment in training and developing them.

[BumWad]

I don't understand why it bothers you so much? It's none of your business, fair play to the woman!

[attheendoftheday]

I think it's fine.

[waithorse]

YABU.

[ShadowSpiral]

Just part of life.

I can understand that it might be annoying for management etc, but if she's late 30's she can't really afford to risk leaving big gaps between pregnancies.

[notsogoldenoldie]

It would annoy the hell out of me, if I were a employer. You can't do much about it, though, and it IS her right.

I was really embarrassed when, years ago, I found out I was unexpectedly pregnant on the very day I was offered a job. I took the job, knowing I would either leave fairly soon on ml or leave altogether.

As it happened I left altogether after four months as dd was born very prematurely. I was too embarrassed to go back

[molyholy]

Unless it has a direct impact on your work, in the nicest possible way, I can't see why it would bother you so much.

[TheCraicDealer]

Assuming that she and her DP planned all three pregnancies I think she was wrong to apply for and take the job to be honest. I wouldn’t move to a trainee role without knowing that I was prepared to commit the next few years of my life to making it work. My current workplace is very small, and if we had to pay 8% of SMP plus a salary for a temporary replacement, plus recruitment costs for that maternity cover it would make a significant impact on our cash flow over the course of the few years she was having her family, never mind the disruption to service standards because of repeated personnel change. Perhaps because of that (and the fact I know someone who took a job shortly before trying for each of her pregnancies before returning to be a SAHP after her leave ended) makes me think it’s just not morally right to actively plan that. Also if she’s taking the entire entitlement every time it would make me suspect that her commitment to the role and the company wasn’t that great.

That’s my gut feeling but although I don’t think it’s alright and certainly not the way I would intend to operate, I wouldn’t support any change to legislation to reflect my opinion- especially when splitting of parental leave etc. is still impossible.

[HoneyIsBeePoo]

How is it taking the piss to build your family in your childbearing years and also try to keep your career on track as best you can?

There goes the sisterhood.

[WyrdByrd]

I've worked with someone like this, the difference being that they would come back for a couple of weeks, be signed off sick with stress, then the day before their sick entitlement ran out, announce they were pg. They'd then return for a couple of weeks, be signed off with pg related illness, then take mat leave, return for a few weeks & start the cycle again. This went on for 5 years!

However, in the case you're describing, your colleague is presumably performing her job well & reliably when not on mat leave, so she deserves the same career progression as anyone else.