Moral Dilema - Do I tell I'm Preggers?

[spikeycat]

Just need a bit of advice really, I went for an interview today for a small P/T job in an estate agents on a sunday. I didn't tell them I was 5 months pregnant (you can't really tell) but if they phone and offer me the job should I tell them then?

I know I'm under no legal obligation to do so but its just tricky...hmmmmmm - any advice?

Fairymum - tbh, the situation you describe is exactly why I'm glad it's legislated against. I only wish it was easier to prove that it happened so that more companies could get such a wake up call.

fm, spikeycat has been honest, she didn't have to tell them at all before starting the job. oh, and it is they who are not playing by the rules btw.

Looks like its me and FairyMum against the knashing teeth of other mumsnetters.

I think the size of the company does matter. I remember a story in the paper of a firm that wanted an assistant. Woman applied, got the job. They had stated in the interview that it would have involved lifting but she didn't mention that she was pregnant. The owner of the firm didn't feel that she would be able to do the job (or he would be sued if she was injured) and retracted the offer. She sued and won £12K, compnay folded. This poor man was only trying to think of the woman and his livelihood was taken away. IF however she had worked for him for a long time (earned her dues as FM states) then they could have come to some arrangement. A bigger company would also have had more staff to cover a change of job etc.

I know it doesn't represent working in an estate agents but I really feel strongly that you should be honest when applying for jobs when pregnant.

It is not fair on the company or the other people you work with who will have to cover for your when you are off, probably not with your best interests at heart if they feel they have been messed around.

Spikey - how awful. I hope things work out. Its a shame companies have such attitudes.

IMHO - whenever a company employs anyone it is always a risk. For eg. you don't know whether that person will be with the company for 2 days or 2 wks, 2 yrs or even 20 yrs. Whether a candidate is pregnant at the time shouldn't be a discriminating factor as there is no guarantee that the next candidate will be any more reliable or even suitable. No way would I tell any prospective employer that I had children or if I was pregnant as I don't think it is any issue if you can do the job at the end of the day. In an ideal world if a pregnant candidate was honest about her condition then an offer would be made irrespective of this. Sadly - as shown in Spikey's case - it seems to be frowned upon

M2T - I don't really care if I hurt companies in that respect either. If a company were making redundancies I don't think they would look at people's people's circumstances - it would be based purely on the job itself. Therefore I have the attitude if I do my job well and honestly that is all I owe them.

Blimey, what hope is there is other women feel this way about pregnancy/motherhood and employment? Fairymum, do you think women should be allowed to work? What about women with children? Women who intend to have children? Or do you think only men are entitled to earn a living? Do you think men have children too or do you think all the responsibility lies with women all the time? I don't have any stats but I would put quite a lot of money on betting that where a company has family friendly (not just mother friendly) or work/life balance policies in place their staff retention is good and turnover is low. Therefore you could argue (and clearly I am!) that these policies make sense economically as well as morally. A happy workforce generally = a more productive workforce. Plus recruitment and training costs are lower if staff turnover is low. This is without even factoring in the value of long standing, loyal, experienced, highly motivated employees. And society needs women to have children (not that I'm saying we do it as a favour) to ensure the continuation of the human race. Ohh, I'll stop there. For now.

okay, oliveoil and fm, what should pregnant women do if they find they need to get a job after they've found out that they are pregnant? temping isn't an option for everyone, neither is living on benefits, and not everyone has the luxury of having a partner who is able/willing to support them if they can't get a job.

yes exactly www, seems that employing women at all could be too much of a liability in some people's eyes. and if you don't need to work, why bother getting an education? just a waste of time...

In fact, I would like to say that many small companies aren't that short-sited. Almost all the ones dh has worked with have been really flexible re: family commitments etc, encouraged wives to be employed/involved in the company, wanted to meet ds... we even invited one boss to our ds naming day and he was thrilled! As a result of them being really involved/interested & flexible, dh really pours himself into his work and they get tremendous commitment from him and other employees that work for them, and it's far more interesting to work for a company where you can see the difference pushing for a deadline makes to the whole company, imo.

So it isn't all bleak out there, promise!

I am not sure if it is right to call it "my attitude". I have both been a manager faced with pregnant women (in a big corporation) and a mother faced with pregnancy (and discriminated against at the time) and needing time off for sick children. I believe we should have rights (and that men should have more paternity rights), but I do see both sides of the coin. I think certain women and situations (like the situation I described with person employed for maternity-cover was already pregnant) only contributes against prejudice against women in workplace.
I think the main point I am trying to make is that I think you need to have worked for the company for a certain amount of time before claiming any benefits/rights. I can see that Spikeycat's case is slightly different. I still think she did the right thing to tell them.

bk - I found temping was brilliant when I was pregnant. Had 5 month placing in the end and am still in touch with people I worked with.

When dd was born and I had stretched my maternity leave (unpaid) to its limit, I got a permanent p/t job.

oliveoil, that's great, but do you think temping is an option (1) for all occupations and/or (2) everywhere in the country?

Fairymum - Yes you do have to have worked for the company a certain amount of time before you can claim any money, that IS the law!! As is the fact that no woman should be refused employment or lose their job through pregnancy.

That's not what the issue is here, its them changing their mind AFTER offering her the job. It's totally disgusting!

Olive Oil - I have temped loads of times before and it certainly does not suit everyone. What about those who have never worked a PC?? Most temping jobs are admin/secretarial.
And how naive to think that the "poor man" who didn't hire the woman did it for HER OWN interest??? Purrrlease! What if she wasn't pregnant, but had a bad back??? She wouldn't tell him that would she???

I haven't read all of this, but I'm really outraged on spikeycat's behalf and definitely think you should follow it up, even if just for your own peace of mind. If we don't stand up for ourselves when people try waking all over us things are never going to change. Why don't you ring the Maternity Alliance and ask their advice? 020 7490 7638 / maternityalliance.org.uk

I think that this is all getting a bit messy because Spikeycat has special circumstances, ie one day a week and only planning to take 3 days off, surely we all can support that. But what about the bigger picture. I run a small company and when my staff are pregnant I bend over backwards to adjust their work to suit them, give them time off for doctors etc, full maternity leave and then they can come back but work part time instead(if they prefer) with hours to suit both of us.I try to be helpful because I know what its like BUT surely fairness runs both ways. If someone applied for a full time job and was 5 mths pregnant (but didnt say), I would be furious because they would have been applying for the job in the full knowledge that they were planning to be off for a prolonged period and in a small company that can be a nightmare for the other staff. Yes I know people can leave/get bad backs/be ill but thats unforseen. Yes we have to keep our rights but I agree with Fairymum that this kind of behaviour is contributing to discrimination.

well put the miggster

Miggy - well put.

M2T - if she had a bad back then she shouldn't be doing the job either should she? And I do think 'poor man' he was doing what he thought was best for her and her baby, how is that naive?

Yes, Blimey WWW! I must say you are making assumptions about what opinions I have of mothers in the workplace.

Miggy,

I can agree with everything you put there...(its so nice to be able to agree!)

Yes, well put Miggy. This is exactly what I have been trying to say, but haven't made a very godo job saying it.......

Miggy - Surely you are just complying with the law rather than making any personal sacrifice?

I have never had that much loyalty for a company that I have worked for and have never been shown that much either! I couldn't give a sht what the yearly profit is and I don't think my employer would give a sht if I said that I couldn't afford my outgoings on that salary!! It's not their concern.
Work is NOT personal.

I don't think I've made any assumptions about your views of women in the workplace Fairymum, not at all. I have asked you some questions which I don't think you've answered though. You said: "As a manager myself (before I had Ds) I discriminated against women myself. Feeling very bad about it now, but I didn't employ women with small children for example. I would definatly advise against telling an employer you had children. I comes across CVs where women had put "my 2 year-old-daugthter" under interests......A man would never do that!" And I asked you: "do you think women should be allowed to work? What about women with children? Women who intend to have children? Or do you think only men are entitled to earn a living? Do you think men have children too or do you think all the responsibility lies with women all the time?" So if the answer to all of my questions is yes to the first 3 and no to the last 2 then we don't appear to be disagreeing that much. Maybe your attitude has changed since having children but I didn't think that was what you were saying. Sorry if I've got that wrong. As M2T points out, a woman does have to be employed for a certain amount of time before any maternity benefits or pay kick in at all.

lol Batters - Good point! Women can work anywhere as long as they research properly if the company is big enough and prosperous enough to pay them Mat pay and survive!

Here's a bit of controversy for you all...

I worked as a Contractor for years. Before and after ds was born. I knew that if I wanted another child I needed to be in a staff position so I would have a job to return too. As a Contractor my contract was terminated when I went on Mat Leave. SOOOOOO I took the job I'm in now for the main reason (although there were other reasons!) that..... I would get a decent Maternity package when I decided to have a 2nd. However, I have to be here a year before going on Mat Leave.
There are plenty guys in this office who take their full sick pay entitlement just coz they believe they are due it!! Now THAT is wrong.

www, well I did put "feeling very bad about it now", so my attitudes have changed. I am not sure if I would not have done the same thing again if I was faced with a women with small children vs. a man, with the same CV though. I am just being honest and describing a reality which I have met in the banking/finance sector in the city. It doesn't mean that I don't want it to be changed.