New recruit pregnant before job starting

[FlimFlamJimJams]

I've started a new business, it'll open to the public around April time.
It's a very small, community focused business with only 4 staff members initially.
I recruited all the staff within the last few weeks and are finalising contracts. Everyone has formal job offers, no one yet has a job contract.

The roles require training on the job resulting in a nationally recognised qualification, probably achieved within 12 months or so. The business is paying for this.

I have had meetings with everyone individually this week to go through bits and bobs, start dates etc - and at the end of a meeting with one lady yesterday, she tells me that she's 12 weeks pregnant and anticipates starting her Maternity leave around mid-July. She said she found out at 5 weeks - so she'd have known she was pregnant at interview.

I'm now stuck in a difficult position - the business is already going to struggle financially for the first few years (it's not quite a non-profit, but it's close) and I'm now facing having to extend someone's training at least 6 months past everyone else's as well as find temporary cover, which is expensive. She may well choose not to return after her maternity. I turned down other applicants who applied after her job offer was made.

I guess there isn't a AIBU, because I'm not going to do anything, but I feel really deceived and a bit stressed about the whole thing.
I know everyone is entitled to get pregnant etc. But I wasn't anticipating someone going on ML before they'd even qualified, or finished their probation.

@Pawprintpaper

Imagining this person is an 18yo school/college leaver, the fact that she is motivated to train in a career and interviewed well for this position is a positive. You may find as a younger mother, she still lives at home and has family support (I had friends who had accidental pregnancies - one at sixth form and one at university - it actually had minimal impact on their studies as grandma was really keen to help out). She may not take much time off at all.

I wonder if the same people calling her deceitful would call her all sorts of other names if she was a teen mother who was not interested in supporting herself and her child financially or planning for the future.

In many countries having a child at 18 doesn’t imply it’s an accidental pregnancy and that she’s a rare ‘teen bride’. It’s a normal age to marry and have children in most of the world!!!

She’s entitled to apply for a job, and you don’t need to disclose until you are 5 months. So those saying she should have discriminated are just a) wrong b) unfeminist c) willing to break the law d) no morals

I hope the pregnant woman sees this and realises this company is not worth working for. She’s obviously capable, but this employer can’t see beyond a period of maternity leave (which might be as short as 2 weeks). First lesson for you to learn…look after your staff and you might keep them and be successful! Employees won’t stay because you paid for their training, they will stay because they feel valued and respected

@Pawprintpaper

Imagining this person is an 18yo school/college leaver, the fact that she is motivated to train in a career and interviewed well for this position is a positive. You may find as a younger mother, she still lives at home and has family support (I had friends who had accidental pregnancies - one at sixth form and one at university - it actually had minimal impact on their studies as grandma was really keen to help out). She may not take much time off at all.

I wonder if the same people calling her deceitful would call her all sorts of other names if she was a teen mother who was not interested in supporting herself and her child financially or planning for the future.

I think she was deceitful and no, I wouldn't call her names in any circumstances. What a stupid comment. I took pregnancy out of the equation and it changed my view of what happened. Would I keep someone on who misled me in interview and couldn't meet the basic requirements of the job? No.
To keep her on just because she is pregnant isn't equality.

@CantBeAssed

Iv never seen a job advertised saying "staff required in 9months time". Positions are advertised asking applicant to work certain hours per week etc. If you apply, you are saying you are available to work what is requested. It is completely selfish and really shitty not to devulge you are pregnant! If you aren't able to do the job advertised don't apply!

Agreed. I wonder whether the applicant would have applied had the job not offer maternity pay.

@Lap871

I hope the pregnant woman sees this and realises this company is not worth working for. She’s obviously capable, but this employer can’t see beyond a period of maternity leave (which might be as short as 2 weeks). First lesson for you to learn…look after your staff and you might keep them and be successful! Employees won’t stay because you paid for their training, they will stay because they feel valued and respected

Have you read my posts?

Have you read my posts?

Judging by the sheer volume of posters who seem to believe you are domiciled in Tunbridge Wells or similar, it's a fair bet the answer is 'no'.

This happened to us several times. Not a small organisation, the position I remember best was for a university lecturer so an essential post to fill. The woman involved was on three month notice with her previous employer and actually did not teach at all before going on ML. She came back for four months after ML, over the summer when there was no teaching, and announced that she was already almost due to go off on ML again. She left the job before coming back again.
I've nothing against people taking ML, it's their right, but I think that some women really do take the p*ss.

@Abigail12345654321

She’s 18 and probably doesn’t realise the offer isn’t formal until a contract is signed

You don’t need a written contract of employment at all in the UK to prove an employment relationship, as one is automatically implied. An offer, whether verbal or written, is still a formal offer. And in the UK, if that offer is retracted on the grounds of the employee being pregnant, that’s an act of discrimination.

But the OP isn’t in the UK. But honestly OP, in these circumstances, if discrimination law doesn’t apply, I’d withdraw the offer. Why should you be thousands of pounds out of pocket as a small business?

TBH if you live somewhere where you're not legally required to give her leave I wouldn't do it. And I thought you should be in post for two years?

Surely the answer is to keep the offer open but be v clear that:

1. If she doesn’t return full time, she’ll be legally liable to repay significant training costs under her contract
2. You cannot offer/accept a part time arrangement

I worked with someone for a month before they went on maternity leave. Show you're a good employer. Any probation or training would need to pause. People take jobs and have to go on long term sick pay. Don't feel hard done by.

There’s another thread running at the moment where someone who will have worked 8 months out of nearly 3 years is debating whether or not to tell her employer that she’s definitely not returning after mat leave. Resounding response is that she shouldn’t. This is what I meant by using rights as a sword rather than a shield. I’m fully supportive of maternity rights but I can well see why employers are sick of having to spend years paying for staff that aren’t actually providing any labour for them.

@MabelsApron

There’s another thread running at the moment where someone who will have worked 8 months out of nearly 3 years is debating whether or not to tell her employer that she’s definitely not returning after mat leave. Resounding response is that she shouldn’t. This is what I meant by using rights as a sword rather than a shield. I’m fully supportive of maternity rights but I can well see why employers are sick of having to spend years paying for staff that aren’t actually providing any labour for them.

I'm reading it now. 🤯🤯🤯

I’m hopeful that the pregnant woman/employee will remember how good you have been in supporting her at this time and you’ll end up with a loyal employee and maybe even a friend in the future. What’s that saying again - Life is what happens when you are busy making other plans.
I would have been mortified to have to tell a new manager that I was pregnant before I even started but it’s better you know now and you can plan for it. Hopefully she can start the training after Mat leave.
You sound like a very reasonable boss btw. All the best for your new venture!

@MabelsApron

There’s another thread running at the moment where someone who will have worked 8 months out of nearly 3 years is debating whether or not to tell her employer that she’s definitely not returning after mat leave. Resounding response is that she shouldn’t. This is what I meant by using rights as a sword rather than a shield. I’m fully supportive of maternity rights but I can well see why employers are sick of having to spend years paying for staff that aren’t actually providing any labour for them.

Care to comment on this OP?

@MabelsApron

There’s another thread running at the moment where someone who will have worked 8 months out of nearly 3 years is debating whether or not to tell her employer that she’s definitely not returning after mat leave. Resounding response is that she shouldn’t. This is what I meant by using rights as a sword rather than a shield. I’m fully supportive of maternity rights but I can well see why employers are sick of having to spend years paying for staff that aren’t actually providing any labour for them.

The woman in that thread didn’t qualify for enhanced mat pay in her first mat leave and said the enhanced pay for her second leave wasn’t very much above stat, and was payable back if she left

Not really a case of “having to spend years paying for staff that aren’t actually providing any labour for them” is it

She’s entitled to a job

Eh??

@MabelsApron

There’s another thread running at the moment where someone who will have worked 8 months out of nearly 3 years is debating whether or not to tell her employer that she’s definitely not returning after mat leave. Resounding response is that she shouldn’t. This is what I meant by using rights as a sword rather than a shield. I’m fully supportive of maternity rights but I can well see why employers are sick of having to spend years paying for staff that aren’t actually providing any labour for them.

The employer hasn't paid her anything in maternity pay, SMP is claimed back from HMRC. And why should she tell the company that she's not returning, my advice to her was this could screw her over for multiple reasons. How on earth is she meant to predict what is happening between now and April 2023? Employers always look out for themselves, employees don't get anywhere by being selfless and throwing themselves under a bus! Just look at the discrimination and nasty comments on all these threads about pregnant women in the workplace, and by employers too! So the wise thing to do as a pregnant employee is to protect yourself. Otherwise you will be screwed!

You have no idea how long this women may have been trying for a baby, or weather it was planned or an accident. We do not need disclose anything to an employer by law until 20weeks I believe. She may have had multiple miscarriage’s. There’s one million reasons why she may have thought best not to say anything during the interview process and that’s her right to do so.

If she was aware of the needs and requirements of the job. Maybe she could continue her training whilst on mat leave and return qualified. She’s having a baby, it is possible to do other things around said baby … I also assume she has a partner… maybe they plan to split the leave. I went back to work after 4 months with both of my children and completed courses whilst off. I also applied and got a position whilst knowing I was early pregnant and didn’t say anything to the employer until I was comfortable to do so.

Whilst inconvenient- I’m sure a conversation on what her plans are going forward might help…

And tbh if she had told you an interview stage you would have said no which still would have potentially lead you to a tribunal so..:

I would say get some advice and just have an honest and open conversation with her about her plans going forward. I work full time around 2 children under5 as does my husband. My aunt is a single mother, completed a uni degree and works full time. It is possible to hve a job, study and parent x

@Freecuthbert

So the two years of accumulated annual leave isn’t costing the employer anything?

So worked August to April (8 months - so likely wasn’t pregnant when offered the job and thus nothing like this situation) then mat leave for 12 months and now another 12 months mat leave is 2.8 years worth of accumulated annual leave. So that’s about 17 weeks of paid annual leave and 34 weeks of actual work.

So in effect it’s like having a 50% pay rise for those 34 weeks, when you think about it. Sounds costly to me.

@Abigail12345654321

Firstly, of course she wasn't pregnant when she was offered or started the job, otherwise she wouldn't be entitled to SMP.

Secondly, the statutory entitlement to annual leave is 5.6 weeks. For 2 years of annual leave while on mat leave I make that to be 11.2 weeks. That's not much in the grand scheme of things. Or do you suggest women on maternity leave shouldn't be entitled to this? And then where do we draw the line with what benefits they lose?

The reason she can't return is because the company won't allow her part time/flexi working, which she now requires to fit around her new circumstances. It's not like she's trying to take the piss. Plenty of women have back to back maternity leave, women should be allowed to plan children when they want to have them. And other women fall pregnant even at the most inconvenient time for themselves and still decide to keep the baby. Either way the woman is trying to do what's best for herself and the baby. If women did what's best for the company they would never have babies!

She didn't have to tell you until 20 weeks.

Pregnancy and maternity are protected characteristics by law so tread carefully. You hired her as she was right for the job, being pregnant is not a reason to retract an offer and the law will be on her side.

But she isn't right for the job if she can't complete the necessary training in time.
I'm all for looking after existing employees and hiring pregnant women who are already trained and able to do the job from the day they start work. But no way would I hire someone who needed to do a year's training but who would be leaving halfway through and likely to be out for a year! It is dishonest not to disclose to the employer that you can't actually do the job required!