AIBU to feel frustrated about manager's repeated maternity leave?

[ShesPregnantAgain]

My manager, let's call her Betty, has just announced her fifth pregnancy. I've enthusiastically congratulated her but I'm actually pissed off. She's barely been at work for the past 7 years. She gets pregnant, that makes her ill so she's off for most of her pregnancy, then 9 months on maternity leave, comes back and a few months later does it all again.

The job she used to do doesn't really exist any more. The company's moved on: all the people, systems and expectations are different. They get in maternity cover for her every time so someone gets trained up, actually does a good job, does a handover when she comes back and then leaves. It's so disruptive.

I know the company can't fire her for pregnancy-related sickness or for taking maternity leave per her statutory rights. They can't even performance manage her because she's never here long enough, or appoint one of her covers to do the job permanently. None of us can work for promotion to her level because that would discriminate against her. Her manager does promote people out sideways and upwards but she's just there, filling the role without actually doing anything. We all just get on without her.

I know that women, me included, benefit from these protections because of the crap women suffered in the past. I just think she's taking the piss.

And yet SH tenants are vilified on here if they dare to "play the game to their advantage" and not downsize after kids have grown More MN hypocrisy

she's not taking the piss at all, but her own manager is not managing her service properly.

Im also child free by choice and i remember being at a job interview back in 2004 and the employer asked if i was planning to have children. I said no and that i didnt want them
His reply? Why? Dont you want responsibility.

So i agree It doesnt help

this is so ridiculous
what happened to all the mumsnet feminists?

Shame on you!

“The company should be able to plan for an 8 year absence” . This sums up how ridiculous this situation actually is as clearly no company can plan for this.

I would agree if our biological differences translated into a genuine advantage for employers.

Women have been fighting for decades to prove they are just as good as men. We have also fought for various polices and protections. All good.

But the more emphasis we put on our differences, the less we are seen as individuals who may or may not need mat leave, meno policies etc.

As someone for whom work has always taken first place in my life, I do not want to start from a position of disadvantage simply because I am a woman.

Our biology is not there to be an advantage to an employer, because our purpose was not to be little worker bees.

We are just as good as men, but we are not the same as men, and it’s really silly to try and pretend otherwise.

It very much sounds like you resent being a woman, like you don’t want to be associated with ‘weaker’ women who require maternity leaves and menopause policies, because that doesn’t apply to you.

Honestly - I don’t resent it, I do however resent that I’m assumed to either need to take considerable time off for maternity or I’m incapable of doing my job properly because I’m peri/actual menopause.

Our biology does disadvantage an employer potentially. I am saying there needs to be an upside to this to balance it out.

So from an employer’s POV, (esp a small company that will struggle with insufficient staff and without the budget for temps etc) what is the upside for them to actively recruit a woman over a man? Do you not see how plenty of employers see a woman as less ‘reliable’ than a man?

I think personally that people should be judged on their own merits and circumstances but that won’t happen so instead we are all assumed to be the same.

It disadvantages women who don’t have the same needs.

Wouldn’t it be great if employers just hired the best person for the job, regardless of sex?

So you resent that other women ‘take considerable time off for maternity’ and are ‘incapable’ (infer: pathetic) due to menopause. That’s a lot of hate for your own kind there.

There doesn’t need to be an upside for employers beyond our own personal skills. We do not need to prove our worth to anyone.

I agree we should all be judged on our own merits in an ideal world but it’s not an ideal world.

I am lucky enough to work in an environment where they genuinely give the same opportunities to women (even middle aged ones) as they do to men.

They took someone on at a senior level who was very obviously pregnant at her interview.

They can afford for cover when someone is off on maternity and extra support when someone is struggling with meno symptoms.

Many smaller companies struggle though. They don’t want to take the risk,

That’s not luck, that’s basic equality and it seems like your company are working in ‘an ideal world’.

It very much reads like it is you who has the issue with women, especially ‘middle aged ones’, not your employer.

Oh my goodness - I'd never have thought a man could play the system that way. Mind you, he'd have to successfully impregnate multiple partners happy to carry his child and share parental leave with him. So unlikely

Judge away.

With any (major) illness, there will likely be a 'band' of medical sick leave. By which I mean a lower and an upper period of time for which a (reputable) medical professional will sign you off. First time, I took the minimum amount possible, less than what was recommended (but with restricted duties in heavy lifting and travelling out of rush hour which made it medically acceptable). What a muppet - I mean, why did I do that?

So second time, I took the maximum amount of sick leave I could legitimately be signed off for. And took the full benefit of full pay on sick leave. And I'm glad I did. The system was there and I took full advantage of that.

Yet again - I have an issue with being judged in case I’m going to need time off or extra support just because I am female. It should be available for those who need it but it shouldn’t be assumed that everyone will need concessions because they were born with a vagina.

My company can absorb things like mat cover. Smaller businesses in the same industry can’t do that as easily. And it’s known as not the most modern type of business.

You can deny it all you like but showing ourselves as less capable because of our sex does nobody any favours. And if you think people don’t discriminate, you are kidding yourself. But you clearly think it’s a level playing field so you just want to paint me as hating other women. If it suits you to be so defensive, then go for it.

Who is judging you, because you said your employer doesn’t, so it sounds like you’re perceiving something that isn’t there.

I don’t think maternity leave and acknowledging menopause does make us ‘less capable’, that’s a reflection of your feelings, not a general consensus.

I agree in this situation that she is obviously trying to do her best to get maximum pay, with as little work as possible which is obviously wrong.

the no childcare thing is absolutely ridiculous tho and that’s a joke on your workplace to allow that. In fact you say she shows the kids off on calls, you could complain about this, or raise a grievance about it.

That being said I find it deeply concerning that so many people on this thread are openly saying the don’t hire women that maternity leave’s should be capped etc.

Lots of women already see having children and a career as hard, putting more restrictions in place is going to mean more women remain childless and more mothers remain out of work and rely on the state.

I am on maternity leave with my second (3.5 year age gap. I would love to have at least one more. What’s the age gap that people on here would deem acceptable? Or am I automatically deemed as unacceptable as I’ve already had my 2

If you were returning to work for a significant period of time between maternity leaves and doing your job properly, likely no one would think anything of it. It's just that some people, like at OP's workplace, take the piss. They come back from mat leave already pregnant, or go off for long periods of sick leave and do this repeatedly. And when they are there, they aren't doing enough because they are out of the loop and the role has changed. It does annoy all the people flogging away, who also have things going on in their lives, that they'd like paid leave for, or at least job protection. But they don't get it and that's not fair.

Whilst I don’t believe in it, I think it’s interesting to hear people openly admit they’ll swerve females they think will take may leave. That’s a whole new thread.

My work life is significantly harder than it needs to be because a more senior colleague has a special contract due to childcare responsibilities. From my point of view that's not very women's rights at all. I'm a woman too!

This precisely, is really sad that a man or women would post this. I’ve always had to take the first few weeks off due to sickness and I’d far rather have been at work than suffering the hell of hyperemesis. The one time I didn’t need to take time off it turned out I’d had a missed miscarriage and because I was physically able to get into work I did actually still go in while waiting, right up until the day I passed my baby and then returned within a few days despite my organisation offering 2 weeks miscarriage leave (not that anyone feels they should have to) Does the OP realise that this manager doesn’t get paid for most of her maternity leave. My organisation is one of the more generous offering 8 weeks at full pay then a further 18 weeks half pay and then SMP paid for by the government until 9 months