To think that this 'advice' column in today's Guardian is bang out of order?

[Aliama]

I'm fuming at this and wondering if I'm overreacting?

www.theguardian.com/money/2014/feb/01/dear-jeremy-work-issues-solved

Excuse me? Did I misread that? In what fucking world is it 'reprehensible' for a woman to fail to tell a prospective employer that she's planning on getting pregnant at an interview? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it fucking illegal for a company to allow something like that to sway their decision anyway, even if said woman is already pregnant?

Ugh.

I do wonder if his wife is the bread winner and he attempts (and fails) to belittle women to make himself feel better

Hmmm that's a possibility. You might even wonder why someone so big and important who doesn't seem very keen on women or (parents who parent their children) is on a forum dominated by women and parents... I know there lots of child free posters but they stay for the clever conversation..and he doesn't think we're very clever either!

I wondered that - he says he a namechanger, so he's a 'regular' Mnetter. But he doesn't seem to respect women much, or think they have a right to equal opportunities.

Calling someone "bosses bitch" is waaaay out of order.

I suspect he likes the female opinion when it suits him. He admitted he NC so clearly doesn't want to be recognised under his usual NN. Quite telling actually, he maintains he is right and that it's just economics and yet won't stand proudly by his views on an internet forum.

Ice exactly. Plus it just yanks my chain generally when people refuse to do risk management properly, and/or cite it in an entirely transparent and inappropriate attempt to justify the exercise of their personal prejudices.

but small business owners who have experienced of ML, do say it causes their business problems and in many circumstances have to spend their own time performing the extra work as it is not practical to hire someone to cover due to training costs.

I am at the start of planning my own ML at the moment and am looking at 2/3/4 weeks.

many posters seem to forget that employers are (1) human and (2) sometimes female. THB I just don't think anyone cares as it does not effect them and fair enough.

my short term concerns are (a) I need to by smart clothes for visiting clients/prospects that hide my bump for as long as possible. i need their revenue so i can pay salaries. there is no law stopping clients/prospects discriminating against me and they obviously will (b) keeping staff happy and showing i remain committed to advancing the company and helping them move their careers forward.

and this is on top of keeping clients who make billions per year happy - so i have plenty already to keep my busy.

Of course maternity leave has caused problems to small businesses. And no doubt parental leave will continue to do so.

How will small businesses manage now that any person may disappear on leave? Will they just implode? I would think not. Which will show up that the massive problem wasn't really there in the first place.

I think I will save my sympathy for the actual victims here. I feel so monstrously sorry for any 20-40 year old women out there with no intention of having kids who have been systematically screwed over by small business owner's discriminatory practices. It is disgusting.

At least as a small business owner you can employ yourself. I get the impression Windy would have you feet up with a cup of tea looking absent minded in one of those nursing rocking chair thingies as soon as you POAS. (Is tea OK for pregnant women? - I forget)

Wow, 15 pages....I work in the Nhs in child health and it is already absolutely apparent that the norm with 2 parents in the health service will be 1st six months mummy, overlap whist mum uses her accrued a/l (3 weeks) then second six months dad, followed by them both working p/t. This is by far the most cost efficient way of doing things (lower tax bill, no or minimal Childcare costs, get to keep chb)and results in a better quality of life for everyone than any other solution. I believe this is the future and it should be, watch out Windy the amount you are going to have to pay (bribe)those men to prevent them from wanting to be part of their families and their partners to stay out of the workforce will just go up and up. Close to six figures (with loss of cb and 40% tax) wouldnt be enough if their partners have anywhere near a decent job. With Women out earning men in their early thirties this is going to be increasingly the case.

fair enough ice and merry - but you are only interested in the rights and lives of female employees not female employers.

is that feminism?

yes it is feminism.

you are no more in trouble as a female business owner than a male business owner regarding parental leave.

Fighting for an equally qualified female candidates right to an equal chance of getting the job is 100% feminist.

Oh and in answer to OP. You must be joking. I told my employers at 25 weeks (eg 15 weeks before expected week of confinement). Which is after the 2nd scan and about when it started to show. I simply told them
A) when I was going on mat leave
B) when I was starting my accrued annual leave
C) my return date.

you are no more in trouble as a female business owner than a male business owner regarding parental leave.

as long as you ignore being pregnant, giving birth, feeding.

IB - and you are not fighting for equality. you are just telling other people to do something you don't do yourself.

and you are doing it unconvincingly.

If you are an employee of your company you should have the same rights as other employees (I think as a director this depends on you having a contract though - please correct me if I am wrong).

As a business owner you are more able to take advantage of the rewards but also more vulnerable to the risks of business.

I can see your point that it is difficult, but what additional rights do you think pregnant business owners should have?

you wtf? What do I not do myself?

What the hell are you talking about?

Where did all the reasonable people go?

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime

but you are only interested in the rights and lives of female employees not female employers.

You chose to become an employer did you not? You seem to miss the point that whilst you are trying to make a living for yourself so are thousands of women who have been a victim of gender discrimination at interview stage. You think that's that is acceptable?

No one has disputed the fact that ML will affect a business. But no more so than someone on long term sick. Would you avoid hiring say a 50 year old man because there is a heightened risk of prostate cancer? Would you expect them to disclose their urination habits at interview stage?

The government bend over backwards for small businesses by actually paying 100% of the SMP and a further 4.5% in compensation and yet that isn't satisfactory for you. For larger businesses they will pay up to 92%.

I'm intrigued as to what more you think could possibly be done to eliminate discrimination against women?

Wow, this thread. I got pregnant within two months of starting a new job. I'd been TTC for ages in a job which would have been very pregnancy/motherhood friendly. Had a shot at a dream job and thought 'fuck it, I'm not putting my life on hold for a baby that may never materialise'. I feel a bit guilty - I'm just going to be getting to the point where I'm starting to perform at my best when I go on mat leave. But that's just the way things work out. The idea my behaviour might be reprehensible is a joke.

Having spent the last few years seeing people I know comprehensively shafted by their employers, who have been perfectly willing to make scapegoats of people, screw them over and bin them casually when it becomes convenient to do so, I would not advise anyone to tell their employer any personal information that might later be used to disadvantage them if things go that way. Keep your cards close to your chest - which is not the same as aiming to get as much maternity leave out of your employer for as little time in the job as possible (and Plate, you clearly didn't intend to do that, it just happened that the pregnancy and job move ended up being close together) All most women want is to be treated fairly in the job and then to be allowed to take off the maternity leave they're entitled to without being made to feel greedy or entitled.

riverboat it is very true that many women in their 30s may well not want to have children or may have had any they wish to have. So discriminating against women in their 30s is futile. Employers could miss out on great staff and end up employing somebody who leaves to travel the world or get a 'better' job elsewhere. In that whole time of training and employing those people other eligable women of 'child-beairng' age could be missed - sorry did I say missed, I meant disrciminated against illegally!

You chose to become an employer did you not? I started my own business after taking a sex discrimination case making me unemployable. so no.

do you assume that most people choose their job? employers are just the same. we look at the limited range of options in front of us and pick one.

The government bend over backwards for small businesses by actually paying 100% of the SMP and a further 4.5% in compensation and yet that isn't satisfactory for you.

i said upthread, in my industry you are looking at £400 per day for a contactor to replace a permanent member of staff on a lower salary. so no SMP is nothing - i would be happy to pay that. its the £2k per week that's the problem.

I'm intrigued as to what more you think could possibly be done to eliminate discrimination against women?

if all the posters criticizing employers started their own businesses, they could create jobs with excellent ML packages for women. this would be real change. if its that easy. of course what would actually happen is you would realise their is a vast difference between theorising on MN than actually keeping clients happy, staff happy, paying all your bills (which are vast), and managing the odd holiday yourself, when time allows.

the fix is for men to use the PL/APL. then more people take leave, but for shorter periods of time.

A decent employer will want to have the very best staff they can get working for them. You can't honestly say that you have the best employees if you've ignored the 50% of the population who happen to be female in case they have a baby. Having children is a 'blip' in the long working life of a woman and again, good employers trying to keep and train good staff know this and invest in them.
I work with plenty of working mothers who pull more than their weight and are brilliant. I work with plenty of men who've never taken extended time off because of children but are. well. lazy, unfocused, jobsworths.
I also work with men who share the child duties with their partners because I'm lucky enough to work for an employer who extend flexible working to all staff, and it's not a big deal now when a guy wants to do more family stuff, take a day off cos the kids are ill, work part time etc
It's all about the person when it comes down to it - not their gender.

i don't ignore 50% of the population. i get about 3-5% of job applications from women and the other 95-97% from men. the chance of one of the women being the best person for the job is very low.