Pregnant teacher

[Newmumtobe7654]

I am a secondary school teacher. I will be 30 weeks pregnant when the new term starts and I have been told that I will be going in and teaching a normal timetable. I read that shielding people will not have to from the 1st August and I feel fine that I will be going to work but I was just wondering if any pregnant women have been told what the plans are for them in the new academic year. Are you required to go in or still working from home?

Government have said everyone back in from September. I know it sucks but that's the rules. So you either go in or find ways to stay home. Signed off for two weeks due to extreme nausea and vomiting maybe another two weeks after that. Then you might develop a new and concerning cough that means you have to isolate for two weeks. That takes you to 36 weeks.

Hi, I am a teacher but due to go in maternity leave in September so am lucky in a way.

I wonder if you could ask for PPE? I think someone mentioned a face visor and mask. There are some masks I have seen on etsy that have clear windows so others can see your mouth when you teach. I was also reading that airflow is important to minimise risk so perhaps open those classroon windows too. Perhaps have hand sanitiser just for you to use regularly throughout the day and think about seating in lessons so you can keep away from the students as much as reasonably possible.

Is it just me who finds the suggestions that you lie in order to game the system really unpleasant? Is integrity not a thing any more?

OP, ask your HT to show you the revised risk assessment which takes account of Covid plus whatever the latest advice is regarding pregnant women in the workplace. If she can't demonstrate that it has been addressed satisfactorily, you can contact your union and ask for their support.

If you go off sick, your employer will automatically start your maternity leave at 36 weeks. If you claim you have covid symptoms, you'll be asked to go for a test. Don't listen to daft ideas, just decide if you'll be working, working subject to mitigations, or going on maternity leave early.

I am shielded due to Gov letter yet I am expected to be in school in September. No choice.

@cloudburstagain sorry to hear that :( it seems so many schools are doing different things which seems so unfair!
How many weeks will you be when the new term starts?

I think there has to be a point when shielding people either return to work or are let go as unfit to work. There isn’t really a half way house. Either someone is certified sick or they are available for work. I don’t think schools can be expected to pay for indefinite shielding.

Work should provide protection for employees but not being available for work for another indefinite period will mean employers can start to redistribute roles within school and presumably declare employees unfit to work if they are absent for prolonged periods without being actually sick.

Is it just me who finds the suggestions that you lie in order to game the system really unpleasant? Is integrity not a thing any more?

Ideally the government would have enough integrity to actually consider those who are vulnerable rather than just telling everyone to get back to work, including in professions where it's accepted social distancing cannot happen, and where the risks during pregnancy aren't fully known. Ideally the school will have a risk assessment which adheres to guidance, but it won't because it's impossible in that environment. As that is never going to be the case, then its not unreasonable to stay off rather than take mat leave really early and return earlier, unless the school can provide something to be doing safely or from home

There will come a time when schools won’t have the money for the ideal situation for everyone. Children need teaching. We cannot deny them this. There are protections for staff but if someone isn’t fit to work, for the unforseeable future, any employer would seek to remove them from the workforce.

@My0My Wow, you have no clue about employment law. It is up to the employer to ensure the work place is safe and provide a risk assessment that mitigates the risks identified including diseases. This would be the case for pregnancy even without a pandemic. People who are Clinically vulnerable or Extremely clinically vulnerable are not ‘unfit to work’, they require their work place to make the work place fit and safe for work. The onus is on the employer not the employee to do this. Glad you don’t have employees to subject unlawful practice onto.

@Newmumtobe7654 You need to ask for your risk assessment and then go through it and the government guidance with your union. Alternatively, you could be signed off to 36 weeks (for a number of medically pregnancy related reasons - nothing to do with lack of integrity) at which point you’d be required to start your maternity leave. Ignore the people talking out of turn, and refer to your union advice, your head’s union advice, websites like Maternity Action and the RCOG.

@My0My in the case of OP it's just a few weeks, they have said they are taking just 6 months mat leave, so even with additional weeks before birth actually will be back to the workplace a lot sooner than most. Guessing you aren't vulnerable, and if you were you would soon change your time.

Tune*

I get the pregnancy bit. I was referring to people who don’t want to go back to work who are shielding. How long dies this go on for before an explorer says the employee isn’t fit for work? That has to be the conversation at some point or school budgets will never cover the extended time off and balance the need to teach children.

Don’t you think the forthcoming redundancies in the private sector won’t take ability to work into account? Of course it will matter. I’m not suggesting for one minute pregnant employees come into this category but other employees might if they don’t go back to work. Just wait and see what happens.

But this is a thread about pregnancy...

@My0My Still talking nonsense - the majority of those shielding will be covered by the Equality Act, so their condition is a protected characteristic and the employer is required to make reasonable adjustments to their work. Shielding employees are not unfit to work, their work place is not safe for them to be in until the employer takes action to make it and make reasonable adjustments, such as continuing to work from home, working in a different, safer role or in a different way etc. Just because you don’t understand the law doesn’t mean it doesn’t apply.

My sister in law was told early on she will not have to go back in for the rest of her pregnancy. I was relieved, as was she. Great head.

@autumn1985 thank you for your help. I will ask my school for a risk assessment and contact the union :)

MyoMy - you may say that but as a shielded teacher I have worked full-time from home because most children have been at home. So no furlough. Yet someone in a gym or a restaurant can have 7 months at home, at a reasonable level of their salary for doing nothing, so why should not a shielded teacher have the chance to have furlough now if they cannot teach in a school for the same amount of time?

I will be 31 weeks when we return in September. I am in secondary too. At the minute, I am planning to take maternity leave at 38 weeks. My school has currently timetabled me to take intervention sessions or catch up sessions, so basically smaller groups, which I am happy to do. I am not timetabled to teach any normal sized classes. If that changes and I am asked to teach as normal without PPE, I am planning on either getting signed off (I dont mind if it is unpaid) or I will take maternity leave early. I am in the lucky position to be able to take the money hit though.

A colleague of mine who is also pregnant said that as teachers we would be in contact with hundreds of kids, without any PPE, and that because of that risk we can be signed off after 29 weeks. I am going to ask my midwife about it.

Considering getting CV after 30 weeks has a high chance of resulting in an early c-section, I am not taking the risk of having to be sectioned at 32 weeks. Not for a job.

Hi all - thought I would join this thread. I have just found out I am pregnant and work in a secondary school. We have been told yesterday that September is back to normal with normal timetables for everybody. We are not allowed to use PPE. This means I will spend my second and third trimester amongst hundreds of students every day with no protection. I am extremely anxious and worried. Any advice on how to discuss my feelings with my school or lessen my anxiety would be greatly appreciated.

@BabySweet85 my advice would be to tell your school soon. I know it is very early, but the sooner you tell them, the sooner they can maybe help you. I would ask for a risk assessment. My school do one automatically, pandemic or not, and through this you may be able to get some protection in some shape or form. Personally, I would insist on wearing a mask. They cant fire you for it. When I go in in September I am wearing one whether they like it or not. They are legally obliged to keep you safe so maybe have some of the health and safety act to hand when speaking to them, and take a look at the burgundy book when it comes to being pregnant in the teaching workplace. A pandemic doesnt mean health and safety is out the door for teachers, no matter what the government try to say. After that, I would just take any precaution you can yourself, so hand sanitizer, keep to the top of the classroom as much as possible, dont touch anything you dont need to so bring your pens and markers everywhere with you, use disinfectant wipes on your desk and chair if you move classrooms etc.

@SqidgeBum thanks for the advice. I have decided to tell them, ask for a risk assessment and be allowed PPE. I have also asked them to ensure social distancing for me as they have said we must within 1m of all students at the end of the lesson to write praise comments in their planner.

@Autumn1985
The equality act allows dismissal on health grounds where it isn't possible to put reasonable adjustments into place that allow the employee to continue to work effectively, and while genuinely open alternative roles should be considered before dismissal there is no expectation that roles that wouldn't otherwise exist are made to continue employment.
Unfortunately there are many job roles that have substantial duties that cannot be performed from home even with reasonable adjustments in place and therefore it is likely that anyone whose condition will continue to prevent them from working outside of the home and whose job falls into this category will at some stage be let go if the virus remains in circulation.

@StatisticalSense You’ve completely misunderstood the point. Shielding is ending so it is up to the employer to adjust the working practices of the employee if they have a protected characteristic, or risk being taken to tribunal for discrimination. The government are ceasing with shielding guidance from August - this does not mean that the employer no longer has to consider the risk faced by those people. It’s at that time that the adjustments, or further adjustments, need to be made. It could be continue WFH, it could be working in the work place in an single office rather than an open plan, it could be working alone in the back rather than front of shop with customers. There are many ways to adjust the workplace to make it safer for those employees.

"this does not mean that the employer no longer has to consider the risk faced by those people"

It depends on whether the risk is considered insignificant now / September
However, imo an employer would have difficulty refusing permission for a mask or visor.