Job Offer withdrawn after informing employer that I am pregnant.

[Char1997]

Hi all,

I originally posted this on as a pregnancy thread. As the situation has evolved I have been advised to post on here. I was offered a job yesterday afternoon and although I know I was under no obligation to inform them, I told the employer that I was expecting in December. Since then I have had the job offer withdrawn as they felt that I “misled them” and wasn’t honest. Is anyone able to give me some advice if I were to take this further.

It’s an honest opinion of a small employer. There’s so much pearl grabbing on here, the real world is very different. If you have a vacancy it needs filling by someone who won’t be disappearing for a year just after being trained, without being able to fill her place as she doesn’t have to give you her honest answer about coming back for months.

She probably is on here. She did very little work as she was constantly talking about her babies.

"This is not illegal! They have withdrawn a job offer, presumably the job had a probation period and if so they should pay you in lieu of notice of whatever is stated in the contract. No contract, no case."

If you don't have a clue about the law, don't post about it.

"I employed a lady who was pregnant, she didn’t tell us until she was 13 weeks, took 52 weeks maternity and didn’t come in for any KIT days. We’re a small company, it caused hell."

If someone telling you at the same time most people do and then going on maternity leave causes 'hell' in your business, you're running it exceptionally badly!

"Why would you want her in employment? She’s dishonest for starters."

Why do you think she is dishonest? Nothing she has said on here indicates that at all. She was not at any point dishonest. In fact she was completely honest, even though she had no reason or need to be. She told them far earlier than she needed to that she was pregnant.

She didn't tell them before the interview because it is not relevant to the discussion about her skills, experience, capabilities, which were the subject of discussion, and in any case they would have had to disregard it.

I have spent the last ten years of my life working with small businesses on their HR issues, by the way. Fortunately the vast majority of small business owners aren't like you.

People can bleat about the “morals” of it all they like but it is what it is. The law of the land protects pregnant women from being unlawfully discriminated against and if employers flout that they have to take the consequences

Exactly!

@Frugalfox I've been a small employer. I made sure my employees were looked after in spite of having to go bankrupt myself in 2009 because of the crash. Your personal feelings about people are not relevant when it comes to the legalities of employing other people. You either accept this as an employer or you don't employ people. It really is that simple.

And Frugalfox is EXACTLY the reason these laws exist.

In my experience, looking after staff creates far more loyalty long term. There will always be exceptions - that's life - but short termism will always bite you in the bum!

So going bankrupt is morally right is it? Having your debt wiped off?

I’ve never claimed to be a lawyer. I’m an employer who runs a small business. This is what happens in real life, not MN world.

OP; please please;
Get this thread deleted
Do not make any more responses or do anything until you have spoken with ACAS or an employment lawyer. Maybe both.

If you ticked the ‘legal fees ‘ box on your household contents insurance they will cover employment matters.

@Frugalfox you openly practice illegal discrimination in the workplace. It doesn't matter how you frame it. If the 'real world' (which apparently only you inhabit) operates like this (how would I know, here in fairyland?) then thank god the law protects us.

I think the employer has behaved badly - and stupidly. But I don’t think you’ve been entirely straight either - you should have waited till you had to tell them or told them at interview, telling them just after interview and before you’ve signed contract was daft, as an employer it would have made me question your judgement

And reading this post makes me question your judgement!

@flowery I noticed you posting on this thread and just wanted to say I took your advice on a matter a couple of months ago and it all worked out for me, so thanks again

I’m being honest, if small business owners were anonymously asked, I’m certain their honest response would be similar.

If an employee has worked for the business and goes on maternity leave, that’s one thing, but openly applying for a job whilst pregnant and not disclosing it is dishonest.

So in your world, no pregnant woman can ever apply for a job? Wow.

Oh do bore of frugalfox! Morality has nothing to do with it.

OP might find these helpful for her ongoing job search, despite the fact they are written by Americans:
www.flexjobs.com/blog/post/5-tips-disclosing-pregnancy-in-a-job-search/
www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/do-i-tell-potential-employers-i-am-pregnant.html

OP said she felt 'guilty' about keeping the pregnancy secret, despite the law saying she does not need to disclose for another 6 weeks. The company who verbally offered the job were very foolish to send the emails being so explicit about their reasons for withdrawing the job offer as it does seem to show discrimination due to her pregnancy. As OP says, the relationship has been damaged before it began so working there now, no matter the outcome of any legal proceedings, is unlikely to prove satisfactory to either.

I can understand why a company would not want to employ someone who will definitely be taking significant absence a short time after starting the job (and potentially not even being out of the probation period). Even though OP would not be entitled to SMP if the baby arrived within 26 weeks of her starting work, maternity cover for her role would still need to be organised - effectively meaning 2 new employees are definitely going to need training/induction etc.. within a 5 month period.

I can see the difficulties for both sides. It might not be legally required to disclose pregnancy at this stage, but it is a real possibility that being honest and upfront at interview will create an atmosphere of trust and a positive relationship from the outset. If OP is the best candidate, any decent company will snap her up. I hope OP finds a suitable role soon.

”openly applying for a job whilst pregnant and not disclosing it is dishonest.”

Bearing in mind the employer would not have been allowed to take the information into account, how do you think it would have helped them to know before the interview rather than after?

Also, you need to brush up on your comprehension of the word ‘dishonest’. If withholding completely irrelevant personal information in an interview is ‘dishonest’, then any ‘honest’ interview could go on for hours.

Presumably you also think that in order to be ‘honest’, job candidates should list what children they have, their ages and childcare arrangements; any elderly or dependant relatives hanging about, any medical conditions they might have previously had, any medical information about their partner or spouse, and a variety of other personal information which might impact their work?

@Mayday19 no problem at all, glad to have helped and I’m glad it worked out!

SusieSusieSoo

As an employment lawyer have you any advice about the level of compensation that the OP might be awarded if she took this further. I couldn’t find any similar cases and was wondering if any compensation might be negligible given the circumstances. All the other examples in the thread of pregnancy incrimination are quite different to the OPs situation.

Exactly. Saying you're pregnant during an interview could be seen as sneaky.

This is illegal and it's brilliant that you've got it in writing. I echo what everyone else says- take them to the cleaners!

@Frugalfox & I expect you would sack or not employ someone if they were disabled? Which explains the difficulty disabled people have getting employment -especially those with Mental Disabilities (catch all term for LD, ASD & Mental Health issues from Disability Studies) the irony for anyone caught out there (& with any SM or anyone who needs 2 salaries) is that the new benefit system is excluding more & more people who should be getting it & at the same time they are getting treated as second class citizens. Women with children & disabled people are more likely to be loyal workers & not look round for other jobs - that has been statistically proven!

If withholding completely irrelevant personal information in an interview is ‘dishonest’, then any ‘honest’ interview could go on for hours.

Do you mean it's irrelevant to the decision process under the law, because it certainly is highly relevant to the employee's presence at work and will mean there is a definite absence from carrying out her duties (unless she doesn't suffer any pregnancy-related conditions, misses all antenatal appointments and returns to work from the labour ward etc...!) (as are the other family and medical factors you mention but are also illegal to discrimate against)

OP's pregnancy is no reason for her not to be an excellent, long-term employee and is certainly nothing to be ashamed of. It is part of what she brings to the role at the time of application and regardless of the legal fine-print, any employer who didn't respect someone who was upfront about it and could show they were still a viable candidate isn't one worth working for. PPs are proof that such employers exist!

As an aside, I was once asked at an interview 'who does the cooking in your home?' and ' who is responsible for the childcare?'. Needless to say, I declined the job offer!!

Sorry to break it to you, Frugalfox, but it would also be illegal to terminate someone after probation because they were pregnant.

Yabbers., I queried your scenario not because it wouldn’t be the case that hiring someone pregnant could be very difficult in a time critical/person critical situation, but that it was unlikely that many women would put themselves into the situation of applying for such a job when pregnant given that professionally they would know what a hard situation they would be going into.

Many of the other scenarios painted on this thread are of the difficulty caused to small businesses by women taking maternity leave full stop. Clearly still something that many businesses want to avoid and the reason you can no longer fire someone for being pregnant. Loyal, high performing staff repay investment.

”Do you mean it's irrelevant to the decision process under the law, because it certainly is highly relevant to the employee's presence at work and will mean there is a definite absence from carrying out her duties (unless she doesn't suffer any pregnancy-related conditions, misses all antenatal appointments and returns to work from the labour ward etc...!) (as are the other family and medical factors you mention but are also illegal to discrimate against)”

It’s irrelevant to how well her skills, capabilities and experience match the requirements of the job. Interviews should be about assessing someone against the criteria set out in the person specification. No employer would put ‘must not be pregnant’ on a person spec, and asking questions (or expecting information to be proactively volunteered) about personal issues that may/will impact on attendance isn’t what an interview is for. As well as being specifically unlawful!

”Exactly. Saying you're pregnant during an interview could be seen as sneaky.”

Yep. Telling them you are pregnant could be seen as putting huge pressure on them to appoint you if they don’t want to risk a discrimination claim. You can see an employer in that position wishing they hadn’t known!