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?

Also, I don't think saying that I believe women should be honest about pregnancy when applying for jobs (within reason) is the same as saying I don't think women should work....I think you put 2 and 2 together and got 59 !

Hmm, wonder if a man is expected to state that a new baby is due in the family...

Good point Tinker!
My DH took 3 weeks off when ds was born and then when I went back to work 4 mths later he had to cut his hours down to deal with the childcare!!!

If he had gone for the interview whilst I was pg would that be viewed as deception too?

Fairymum, I do think you were stating a MUCH stronger point than purely saying women should be honest about it!

Well, men are not pregnant and only have 2 weeks paternity leave(although I think they should have more like 2 months).

Was I stating a much stronger point M2T ?

Yes Fairymum - It;s one thing to state that you shouldn't be entitled to Mat pay etc unless you've worked there a while (which I have already pointed out is the law anyway!!).... and it's TOTALLY another to suggest that an employer would be perfectly justified to NOT hire you coz you are pregnant. How ludicrous???

hurrah for Europe and european law protecting women and their rights in the workplace is all I can say having read this lot of comments!
obviously there is a need for legislation on this subject and it would be good for companies to see that it is enforced too - all the more reason for spikeycat to pursue her case

I think it is a little more complicated than that. As I have said, I do think it is a difference between small and large companies. I also think it is a difference between 2 weeks pregnant (you might not know) and 5 months pregnant. If you are 5 months pregnant and go for an interview, you might have 1 month's resignation, the new job might involve some training etc....Then you are pretty close to the birth of your child in my mind. Yes, I think in that case you should tell an employer and they can make the decision. Like the examples I mentioned with getting a pregnant cover for a team member I had already lost to maternity leave....That's the kind of thing which makes employers cautious I'm afraid.

Fairymum - Are you seriously suggesting that we all think about the size of the company before we decide on what info we divulge to them???? Speaking PURELY as an employee it doesn't matter a jot to me the size of the company..... why should it??? Why would you feel more loyalty to a small company than a large one??? And where is the cut-off point??

I think you are extremely bias in your views!

I reiterate my point... whether its a Multinational company or a family run business..... you are just a number and your employer won't go out of their way to make sure YOU are financially sound so why should you consider whether they are??

I can't really see you point on that one at all?

M2T, I am not sure where the cut-off point is, but I think the difference between the big bank I work for and a smaller family-run business is quite clear. I think it is clear in that the impact you are having on someone's small business is greater. I can't see my manager go hungry if I go out to maternity leave......Again, I think it is quite complicated, because I also think it makes a difference if someone pays to hire you, how easily replacable are you etc?

I am under no illusions where I work. I know I am just a number and in fact I lost my own job while on maternity leave, so I have absolutely been on both sides of the fence here. I am not sure if this is about loyalty to a company. I wouldn't say I am loyal to my company, but I don't try to milk them either. I think going for a job at 5-6 months pregnant and not being honest that you will have to take a lot of time off in the near future is milking a company. I am pretty certain that if you worked in any of the banks I have built my career in, your career would be pretty much ruined anyway as soon as they found out......

BTW, I writing generally as I obvioulsly don't think that Spikeycat was trying to milk her company....

isn't that why the government pays maternity leave not companies (or am I wrong here?) and why you have to have worked for a certain period of time before qualifying for either in house company schemes or SMP (my place it's a year so no chance of the 'I was only 5 weeks preggers lot getting a penny! companies are perfectly capable of watching their own backs it seems to me - no need for us to do it for them)

At the time of pregnancy you may have no idea how the after birth childcare arrangements are going to pan out. But no-one would ever dare suggest that a man was deceiving a company by not stating that a new baby was on the way, it wouldn't even be an issue.

Morocco - You are absolutley right! When I found out i was pg 5 wks into my job I only jeeeust qualified for SMP, but the company claimed it off the government! So Another flaw Fairymum!

Gosh, didn't mean to start all this off!

The point is, I didn't tell them at the interview as my pregnancy would not prevent me from sitting at a desk 6 hours a week picking up a bloody phone, also, I "knew" with people out there with opinions like the negative ones that have been expressed here that they wouldn't even consider me.

I worked in HR for a large firm that employed over 600 people, mainly being men. When pregnant with DS I worked up until a week or so before he was born and returned 8 weeks later. So, I am sure I would have fulfilled the commitment I made to return to the job I was offered at the LARGE estate agent business that I appiled to!

As for the bollocks they put in the letter they sent me "due to the nature of the work", they will have to prove that every pg woman that ever worked there was immediately put on maternity leave.

I would have done exactly the same if it was a fulltime position as well. And I shall certainly ben entertaining "my right" to take legal action against them for discriminating against me.

I'll let you all know how it goes, the IT1 (tribunal application) is going in the post tomorrow (How I would love to see their faces when they open that)

Good for you Spikeycat. Do let us know what response you get won't you?

Batters, I don't think that the monetary aspect of the compensation will be very big - 6 hours pay per week is only a huge amount if you an a former tory Chancellor of the Exchequer! - Hope the company learns its lesson though. good luck Spikeycat, let us know what happens.

My parents run a smallish company, I work for them part time so I feel qualified to comment here.

It is wrong to discriminate against a pg woman. If spikey was a man and his wife was pregnant then he would be entitled to take paternity leave and once he had been there for 12 months parental leave. Also men are just as entitled to have time off with sick children or when care arrangements break down.

Incidentally the goct only pays all SMP in very small companies for the rest its 92ish%. However spikeycat wouldn't be entitled to this anyway although she may get maternity allowance if she worked for someone else during her qualifying perios and earnt more than £70 per week.

What did mess up my parents was when a pg employee said that she was returning to her job after 18 weeks leave so they didn't bother getting a temp thinking they would manage for that short amount of time, she then changed her mind as was her right to and took the additional leave. However less than a week before she was due to return she went in and said she wasn't going back.

We found out later that she never had any intention of going back and had used her maternity leave to start training as a childminder.

Julie F don't you think that that is the fault of the gov for making the regulations so that you only get the full payments if you do say you intend to go back? Why should women be honest if it means they are legally entitled to less?

Prufock, I thought maternity pay was paid irrespective of whether the employee intends to return or not.

Statutory minimum yes. But things like holiday entitlement pension rights etc you only get if you say you are going to return (don't you?)

Good luck Spikeycat.

I have a meeting with my boss next Thursday in which he is probably going to tell me I am redundant (contract at client site where I work terminates at end of the year). Oh and I'll probably only get statutory minimum redundancy of £1300 (have been here over 5 years and have been billable to clients for over 60% of that time).

There's a possibility that I could apply for a job at the site I work but I need my boss's agreement he won't stick to the non-poaching clause in the contract which applies even during redundancy. Thing is the site where I work has not made me a formal job offer and only a couple of colleagues know I am pregnant. I am trying really hard to hide it as i don't want the verbally discussed possible job withdrawn because I am pregnant. It's my second baby and I had DS whilst I was here. Had 3.5 months maternity leave and came back full-time afterwards.

I just want the next 3 weeks over and done with so that I know whether I am either working in same job, new company (less sodding pay!) or whether I am a SAHM for the next year. No point looking for another job whilst I am pregnant since I don't think I'd be able to show enough enthusiasm to get the job.

My current employer does know I am pregnant by the way.

Sorry for hijacking the thread a bit Spikey.

Would appreciate any thoughts or ideas if anyone has them...

message withdrawn

well, I have got the tribunal process under way - they have offered me £1,000 through acas - Do I accept (I would get around £2,000 through tribunal having looked up some other case history) or do I push ahead??? mmmm