Starting new nanny job pregnant!

I can't forget that the employers asked her an illegal question because it says much about their attitude to employment law.

What if the employer asks. "If you got drunk and forgot the condoms, would you use the MAP? Get an abortion?"

Another thing to bear in mind is that if ( as she is entitled to do) OP decided not to tell her employer until she is 25 weeks and the employer figures it out before then the employer can very easily get rid of her and OP can't claim discrimination as the employer " didn't know"

A knickerfullofmenace

Forget the fact they asked her if she was planning more kids. I agree, they shouldn't have. BUT do nannies not have moral and professional obligation to their employers and kids they are looking after. Maybe not, but in that case, don't expect the profession to be highly regarded and give nannies a sense of pride in their work. Let them be treated as they treat others. I guess you get cowboy builders who do shoddy work and similarly if you want nannies to be tarred with the same brush then carry on promoting this type of behaviour.

Take pride in whatever you do, treat people with the respect you would want and then you will get the same back.

In all honesty, if I was the nannies employer in this situation, I would sit down and say thanks for your honesty. You can still have the job. Let me know in advance what your plans are, appointments are etc so I can organise cover. It's not ideal the situation you'll be leaving us in but the fact that you've been honest and not deceived me says to me a lot more about your character and I'd be happy for my kids to be looked after you before you go off.

And yes - I am being honest.
However, if you were to be deceitful and not tell me 25 weeks - I would probably suspect by about 16 weeks anyway. I'll then be very hostile to you and on finding out you are pregnant find out what I can do within the law to dismiss you.
That's the honest truth. I am a strong believer of honesty is the best policy. Treat others as you want to be treated.

If a potential employer asks your sexual orientation, should you answer without lying?

OP I wouldn't tell them until you legally have to. They have shown they are not above ignoring employment law.
She had to lie or be discriminated against because she wanted to have children at some point in the future. The employers have no right to that information about her.
Should all employers be allowed to discriminate against women of childbearing age unless they promise they don't want any more children?

Congratulations on your pregnancy.
I do however think that it's wrong to start your Nanny job knowing you will not be there longer than 5 months for whatever reason. Plus with 3 children to look after you mght not be able to give your job the energy and commitment needed in the latter stages of pregnancy.
I understand why you didn't want to tell them abut IVF and they shouldn't have asked but you shouldn't have lied, you could have said you didn't know whether you would be having more children. Also, the fact they mentioned it suggests it WILL be an issue for them.
The right thing for you to do is tell them and offer to provide cover while they look for a long term Nanny. Your employer is going to be pretty pissed off and if they don't find a way to get rid of you ASAP it's going to be an awkward 5 months.

If you send your child to nursery, their key worker may be pregnant when they start. Ditto CM. The majority of childcare workers Are women of childbearing age, I'm pretty sure. It's a wonder more of them aren't men if this is a problem for so many parents.

OP, here's the rules on MA eligibility, hopefully your current job will qualify you for this:
www.gov.uk/maternity-allowance/eligibility

You don't start for two months. In that time they could find someone long term.

The difference is that leaving after a short time to deal with a family emergency is unavoidable. Starting a job knowing you are going to drop them in it is avoidable.

It's not something I could do, no matter how legal.

I'd have to be honest personally.

Incorrect, mythical. She didn't know it couldn't be long term - she wasn't pregnant when the question was asked and she wasn't expecting the IVF to work. And the question wasn't "we would like this to be a long term position, is that what you are looking for?" which would almost certainly not have been a discriminatory question.

Yes, I have sympathy for the other parents, I'd have sympathy if their nanny left after a short time to eg look after a sick relative too. But that doesn't give them any additional rights to another employer.

Plus - it's very early days for the OP, I wish her well in her pregnancy but most people wait until 12 weeks or later to say something. Are they also liars if they work for a small business?

Not an admirable thing to do. What about the children who'll get attached to nanny only for her to up sticks after a few months? Not to mention the hassle the parents face having to find a new nanny.

What's the alternative here? OP has no job and a baby on the way and the family have no nanny.

Which was the status quo when OP interviewed for the job. She's let them believe that they now have a solution.

She isn't starting for two months. The moral thing to do would be to let them have that time to find someone else. Not leave them in the shit, starting from scratch.

So no sympathy for the other mother at all?

I don't agree that they are more in the wrong, as it happens. They trusted her to tell the truth. They told her the job was long term. The only person who knows it can't be lied about it.

She wasn't deceitful though, she was caught off guard when asked an unlawful and personal question. I like to think that, in the same situation I would have said "I'm not answering that." - If I'd been quick enough. The family would probably then not have employed her. There desire for a long-term employee does not trump her employment rights. I would keep quiet OP, it is very early days and not tell them until you have to. What's the alternative here? OP has no job and a baby on the way and the family have no nanny. Agree with Laurie.

Morally it's horrible for the family to have asked her the question.

And legally as well.

So even by your reckoning, they are more in the wrong.

If the family want to avoid employer risks, they need to avoid being an employer.

I'm staggered that so many people think it's morally ok to get a job by being deceitful.

She's not just stacking shelves at Tesco. She'll be establishing a relationship with a family. The parents and DCs may get fond of her, may come to trust her. Then find out she's lied.

They have to search again for a trustworthy person to care for their children having been badly let down.

Legal it may be but morally it's horrible to mess a family around like this.

Yup, Christina. Exactly.

Oh and limpet? OP will not get 90% pay for six weeks, if that is what you are referring to. She won't be eligible for SMP, just MA.

The law is in OP's side here. At the moment, she has been offered a job which she is capable of doing.

If I was,in her employer's situation, I wouldn't be over the moon to find out that my new nanny was pg and not planning to return to work, but that's one of the hassles of being an employer, I'm afraid.

Limpet

Given she's not starting for two months, far more likely they will find someone else, don't you think? They've already indicated they have no moral high ground by asking the question. Quite why you think the OP owes them "better" behaviour then they have showed her, I don't know.

The law is in OP's side here. At the moment, she has been offered a job which she is capable of doing.

If I was,in her employer's situation, I wouldn't be over the moon to find out that my new nanny was pg and not planning to return to work, but that's one of the hassles of being an employer, I'm afraid.