Falling pregnant whilst on maternity/ or not long after return.

[Dozeyland]

what are your views?

i think they should be able to termanate on the spot to be hones it would be cheaper for you to sue them to keep you on.

they have to pay for your salery for 2 years also train and pay a replacement or if they cannot find a replacement every one elese has to take the strain.
the on your return you will be out of the loop for neigh on two years have to be trained up on new developments and thats if they return or are able to work full time with 2 small children

women want equailty but just not when they get pregnant

i actually favour employers asking if your planning a child if you already have kids then being able to ask what childcare plans you have in place.

small companys were its only 3 or 4 people cannot take the strain of somone being off for to years for somthing that is their choice.

its not as if your ill being pregnant is self afflected

Oh grow up. How about "men want equality but just not when their partner's are pregnant". Er no, that doesn't apply does it.
How many women actually fall into this category anyway?

pmsl. Sure - I'm fully in agreement with all you say maypole - but only when MEN are the ones having the babies and requiring the leave. Bet many of then would be singing a different tune.

And why, pray tell, should it just be a WOMAN that is asked if you're planning a child, if you already have kids, and asking about childcare plans in place? My DH has taken time off work because of an ill child or because childcare plans fell through. It's not just the woman that deals with that stuff.

OP, why have you put this in "In the News"? Is there a Coalition proposal to restrict maternity benefits in this situation or something?

It was on Daybreak, a woman got made redundant because of falling pregnant whilst still on maternity leave.

mumsnet lady was on there defending her corner, and another lady (who i think was rude) was protesting

It would be illegal to make her redundant because of pregnancy.

It would be illegal to make her redundant because of pregnancy.

Did she trip over something?

I did this. Went back after ML to tell my boss I'd be starting another ML in 3 months. I was really embarassed and she was livid, but she had to hide it because we worked for a local authority, so bound by strict rules and regs.

She made my life hell, though and I had a breakdown and left eventually .

My employer didn't pay my salary, they claimed almost all of it back (only got SMP) and hired a temp replacement part time to keep things ticking over. Me being on maternity leave probably saved them about ten grand.

Any waylike i said its cheaper to get id and letthem sue by the time you add up the mertainty pay the replacement if you can get one training the replacement of having to go to an agancey which charge twice the price then after almost two years re training the person with the possability of them getting pregnant again also factor in the off days that go with having 2 young children and them not able to do overtime

Its cheaper to sack um

Being equal means being equal not having 2 years off or nipping home early to take babay to the doctor
Having a child is a choice

And i dont see why some one who chooses to have a child should get paid to sit at home for neigh on two years and have everyone else in the office cover her work for not a peny more is mad

You do have some emsulated men who are house husbands but most are not

If i were employer i would only hire woman over 40 and men

Really grumpla i sure them having to hire a temp and twice the price having too train someone up then re introducing you back into the work force were you no doubut went pt as so many woman do after ml saved them loads as oppsed to not hireing somone of child brearing age

I always wonder what people like maypole think would be the ideal. No women in the workforce? A one child only policy? Or for women to give up work the moment they (and their partners) decide to try to start a family a la 1950s?

Obviously all people who are half-awake already know this, but for the benefit of the others, let's just remind ourselves that employers can claim back all the costs of SMP from the government so this "by the time you add up maternity pay" nonsense is irrelevant.

Employers also generally get considerably more notice from a woman going on Mat Leave than from someone leaving to get another job. And once a woman has children, she is more likely to be loyal to her employers than before, given that she has to work around the logistics of childcare etc, so that leaving one secure job for a the unknown terms of another is a far more serious proposition than before.

Anyway, as iggi said, the behaviour of this employer sounds straightforwardly illegal, so I'm not sure why it merited a debate on national TV.

If your a small company you dont want to spend money to have to claim it back want you want is not to spend it in the first place.

Also most small companys Who only have a workforce of 4-5 cannot not abosorb somone absent for 2 years who then has almost no intetion to come back full time, and most women are not honest and dont tell their company this until they are due to return

Finding mertenity cover is not always that easy other in the work force have to pick up the slack for no extra money and to be honest CLAIMING MONEY BACK YOU HAVE TO START WITH DOSENT HELP YOU WHEN YOUR A MAN DOWN or pregant woman as the case many be

I am sure a boss jups for joy he can claim the money back when he relises he hs no one to cover shifts

Maternity leave is 1 year. Why is someone absent for 2 years Maypole?

Where to begin maypole1?
If you're a small company; plural of company is companies ; absorb not abosorb, intention not intetion. Maternity not mertenity; doesn't not dosent etc etc.
First of all women are paid significantly less than men overall so companies may choose women as women tend to undersell or undervalue their skills.
People have children together, women bear children and raise them with a partner ideally. Having children is a privilege but is not always a choice.
Perhaps women ought to consent to sterilisation to join the workforce then there can be none of this maternity lark? But as you've written "most women are not honest" so would probably lie about being fertile the scheming little temptresses/ good for nothings gadding about the workplace.

Unless you have no clue how a coil works its a choice.

No dont think you need to go that far but if your boss wants to have a work force who dosent need to take a year of every 3 years or so whats the issue.

Its so selfish you want to have babies want your co works to pick up the slack and then walse back in to a job only to anounce your off again after getting up the duff again and be paid for the privlage to be honest i dont even think their should be materinty pay if you want to have babies fine do it on your own pay i bet people wouldnt be having two in a row then

I work for a local authority and am about to return to work after my 2nd 6 months mat leave in 2 years, my youngest have 16 months between them.
What is the acceptable gap please?

I did this. I told them that I was pregnant again before I went back so they wouldn't bother putting me back in my old job (line manager so would be annoying for staff to have a lack of continuity). The result was the person on secondment to my role kept it, person on secondment in their job kept it and so on until a role was lost at the bottom.

This was mangeable in a big organisation. However I realised it was a pain in the back side for the employer and took every effort to be open with my plans and useful in the short time that I was back (which was good because it proved I could hit the ground running after a long absence, with the result that they said I could temp there whenever I wanted).

I knew that I wanted 3 DC close together and I didn't return after DC2 because I thought it would be taking the p. I hope to return there after time out and feel I have a good relationship with them (if anyone remembers who I am!!).

I think anyone who does this needs to be prepared for a from everyone else and to have to prove they are still committed. Not sure on the rights and wrongs of that. It's probably wrong but I think people's views are coloured by the ones that have several maternity leaves close together then do sod all when they are back inbetween then moan about doing the job they are employed to do when they do come back as it is not family friendly.

Going back for a short while is more of a pain to an employer than not going back at all. Perhaps more employers should be happy to offer unpaid leave to staff who are pregnant again when they return.

I'm guessing that your English teacher went on several maternity leaves at various critical points in your education?

Incidentally, I don't know how the coil works but feel free to elucidate.My fertility is restricted to a few days each month, my husband however is always fertile. He uses contraception, not me. Unless you think that contraception should be left to the woman?

Do tell the X case having a child is a choice...

"Being equal means being equal not having 2 years off or nipping home early to take babay to the doctor"

Surely being equal would means that it would be just as likely that it would be a man nipping home early to take baby to the doctor?

Sobloodystupid maybe your Sex ed teacher was on matenity leave too

If your not sure how having a child is a choice then i Suggest its you who needs an education.

Amazing isn't it. You compromise your career prospects and lose all your wages to childcare, giving up hope of a comfortable retirement for yourself in the process, all for the sake of bringing the next generation into the world so that your child-free colleagues will get their pensions paid, and they call you selfish for taking up your basic employment rights. What on earth is that all about?

I would think being equal would mean the male could get pregnant and go through childbirth. Until that happens, it's never going to be truly equal and women will always have to make the tough choices and take the career hits.

To answer the OP question I think it is unfair but thats life & companies have to follow the law even if it is a pita for everyone else concerned.