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.

Big drip feed that you're not in the UK. People have wasted time giving you advice

Absolutely shitty of her to do this. She shouldve informed you before taking the offer. She just wants someone to pay for her maternity unfortunately you got stitched up OP

I would withdraw the offer if i could. I know women can get pregnant whenever they want, but it is a shitty thing to do to a small new business.

Or as pp said, get something added to the contract about paying back training fees if they leave within 2 years or something then you are covered if she decides not to return.

Presume you won't be paying any enhanced mat pay, but if yoy ever do in future make sure you have something in contract about paying it bqck if they leave within 6-12 months or something

OP, this is MN, you’ll only get answers saying YABU and if you’re remotely displeased about it then you’re sexist and shouldn’t be running a business.

Neither of you is BU. She’s entitled to protected status is employment and you’re entitled to feel annoyed about the disruption to you. As long as you’re not treating her differently it’s fine to be disgruntled - nobody can require you to be overjoyed about it.

It’s shitty when people do this, especially when they knowingly do it to small businesses.
What, pursue careers and children? Are women supposed to just pause all career development for a couple of years? What about women who have repeat miscarriages and no idea whether their five-week pregnancy will make it to term? If a small business isn’t viable if it employs pregnant women, it isn’t viable.

Yes indeed big drip feed. Since you are not even in the UK and would not even be acting illegally if you withdraw the offer. What a time waster.

@RoomOfRequirement

Joy. Another of these disgusting threads for people to come and spew their misogyny in.

She's 12 weeks. Your business is not ready if it cannot support this. What if she were only 8 now? Or got pregnant next week? Were you going to have a ban on women having lives outside of your company for the first year?

It's not misogyny to ask what the hell a small business does in this position.

It's logical to try and ameliorate the effects this woman's choices will have on the business.

It debases the real experiences of women to use the term do loosely.

@RoomOfRequirement

Joy. Another of these disgusting threads for people to come and spew their misogyny in.

She's 12 weeks. Your business is not ready if it cannot support this. What if she were only 8 now? Or got pregnant next week? Were you going to have a ban on women having lives outside of your company for the first year?

Just coming to say this. Depressing regular number of these threads recently where posters openly say they don’t think pregnant women should get new jobs

@stuntbubbles there are plenty of other big companies women can work if all they need is employment for SMP payments, why go for a brand new start up business.

How much would it cost you to tell her there is no job for her any longer?

If it is as little as one penny less, tell her to get lost. Shitty trick.

Whilst the business is not in the UK, I'm British so I'm following as many UK laws as I can simply because they seem fairer in the majority of cases than the local laws. For example, I'm paying above a living wage in a country that actually has no minimum wage - a lot of business around here pay the equivalent of £5 an hour.

I'm sorry if people feel like I've wasted their time, but I'm more processing emotionally anyway. As PP have said, if I were in the UK the law is very clear - I cannot withdraw the offer. So I figured any advice would reflect that.

@RoomOfRequirement Deliberately causing a small business to go under because you want to get maternity is awful awful. OP does not deserve this!!! Stop defending and sugar coating selfish behaviour that could cause OP's business to go under. Ridiculous

Do you not get any government money to cover mat leave in the country you're in, OP?

@FlimFlamJimJams Just read your post that you are not in the UK. Check your laws and get rid of her if you can. I wouldn't be kind to someone who was being deceitful.

@HoardingSamphireSaurus But this IS affecting women - not the OP, but the multiple posts suggesting to fire her - every single time this is brought up! Which is exactly what I said. You're just ok with sexism because...why? Those poor businesses, not being allowed to discriminate?

Annoying but at 5 weeks pregnant she may not have known or didn't want to say as many women do lose babies early, she still might...
She's already willing to take a job knowing she entitled to very little mat pay or benefits so think longer term - she's clearly keen to work with you, was she the best choice? If so she's worth the inconvenience.

[quote UnshakenNeedsStirring]@RoomOfRequirement Deliberately causing a small business to go under because you want to get maternity is awful awful. OP does not deserve this!!! Stop defending and sugar coating selfish behaviour that could cause OP's business to go under. Ridiculous[/quote]
I imagine OP is not giving enhanced maternity, so it doesn't cost anything! If anything the pregnant woman is missing out if she had employment before. It is NOT selfish to get pregnant! And if it is, it's just as selfish of everyone saying to fire her over a business!

But thank you for proving my point earlier. Your sexism on this thread is disgusting.

What, pursue careers and children? Are women supposed to just pause all career development for a couple of years?

Not at all, but the ideal would be to be properly settled in a job before making them accommodate your maternity.

What about women who have repeat miscarriages and no idea whether their five-week pregnancy will make it to term?

This is difficult, but again it’s probably better in that situation to be in a settled job. If that’s not possible, then at least avoid taking a job in a very new very small business. There are plenty of big companies that can accommodate maternity with ease.

If a small business isn’t viable if it employs pregnant women, it isn’t viable.

That’s just not true, especially in the first years of starting a business.

I imagine OP is not giving enhanced maternity, so it doesn't cost anything!

OP's not in the UK so we don't know this.
If she's offering full-length maternity it's going to cost something as most countries aren't as generous as us.

@RoomOfRequirement

The Maternity pay isn't really the issue - it's the training.
To do the job, everyone must do the training. I specifically employed on that basis and it was made very clear in the advert and at interview that everyone would need to get qualified within 12-14 months.

By going on ML, she will be missing at least 6 months of training meaning that I'm going to have to extend the contract with the supplier just for her. It's at least £1000 a month plus assessor fees etc. So one staff member doing it separately to the rest is going to cost a fortune, not to mention the logistics of not having everyone qualify at the same time.

@DressingPafe

I don't have much to add. But if i was one of the unsuccessful candidates I wouldn't be very impressed with being offered the role as maternity cover only. I guess may be they could hope it would lead to something permanent but it's a gamble.

@DressingPafe if you were currently unemployed, you might be delighted to pick up a temporary role

You need to toughen up if you want to run a profitable business. There is no room for emotion. Make a business decision and do whats right for the business.

And I dont think you can necessarily say that she wont come back

I agree. I had this with someone I helped to recruit back in about 2010. She is still in the role or at least, working for the same company.

But I wasn't anticipating someone going on ML before they'd even qualified, or finished their probation.

Given the length of the probation and training, you should have antecipated this possibility, yes. As you should antecipate that other people can have accidents, become severely ill, etc.