Got the job without telling employer I am pregnant

[Emma70459]

Hi ladies!
So I'm looking for advice desperately.
I'm currently 37 weeks pregnant and 3 weeks ago,I had an interview for a zero hour contract admin job. They asked if I was able to start work full time immediately and I said "I am able to work full time for now".
They couldn't see that i was heavily pregnant as the interview was done online.
I wasnt expecting to get the job,so naturally I was thrilled when I found out that I got it.
Now my line manager is asking if I am available to work next week but I will be on maternity leave from next week.
How do I tell her that as much as i would love to start working for her i cant otherwise i would lose all my SMP? But i would definitely want to start working as soon as my maternity finishes.

You say pregnancy discrimination happens all the time, but it happens because of people like you! You can make all the excuses you like but discrimination happens because people like you fuck them over. Honestly can't believe you're defending this!

@Wickerbaskets

Oh please don't try and argue you were doing this for women rights. Discrimination in pregnancy exists because of people like you who are looking to take the piss and in doing so make it worse for the rest of us.

Just to be clear, it is employers who would refuse to employ a woman who is pregnant who make things difficult for women, not people like the OP. Discrimination in pregnancy exists because companies put maximising profits over other considerations, such as investing in their workforce or contributing to a more equal society.

In an ideal world, OP could have said at her interview ‘I’m pregnant so can’t start work until September’ and the employer would have thought ‘no problem, she’s clearly the right fit for the job so we will hire her and she can start picking up shifts when she returns from maternity’. It is not OP’s fault that we don’t live in that world, and she is under no obligation to facilitate her own discrimination.

I’m often astounded by how easily people take the side of employers over actual humans in situations like this. The entire point of things like unions and EU employment law and pregnancy discrimination laws is to protect people from the kind of exploitation that leaves workers (and particularly women) shafted by their employers. You wonder what it’s all for when a hundred posters seem to think sticking up for the rights of an employer over the rights of employees is the right thing to do.

As a woman who has worked in management, I would absolutely side with the employer on this. The op took the piss, and just reiterated why often times companies don't like to hire woman. You're right that legally she was under no obligation to tell them, however what kind of a shitty person accepts a job that they can't start for 9 months, but tells the employer they can start right a way?

Op. Here is some guidance from acas. You need to be sure of your contract type because it's crucial to what happens next. www.acas.org.uk/zero-hours-contracts

I’m really surprised the op is refusing to own this too and repeatedly pleading she could have started if it had been sooner . There is no doubt this is true but with dbs checks and references to obtain there is no way it would have been sooner, even if it was, it would only habe been for a couple of weeks.

Everyone wishes to eliminate pregnancy discrimination. But this was just a ridiculous and pointless lie to the employer. And very few folks would think it acceptable.

As a woman who has worked in management, I would absolutely side with the employer on this.

Depressing

The op took the piss, and just reiterated why often times companies don't like to hire woman

Companies that don’t like to hire women, for whatever reason, are shitty companies. There’s no way around that fact.

You're right that legally she was under no obligation to tell them, however what kind of a shitty person accepts a job that they can't start for 9 months, but tells the employer they can start right a way?

At the time she was asked that question, she could start right away, and would have been able to work for a few weeks. It’s not her fault this company has moved glacially slowly. And it’s not her fault that she couldn’t trust the company not to discriminate against her.

Really think about what you’re saying - you seem to think it’s an issue that this company wasn’t given the opportunity to refuse to hire OP because she is pregnant. That’s what you’re defending here - the right of a company to decide that a woman who is perfectly suitable for a job and who would otherwise be given it shouldn’t be employed because she is pregnant. Is that truly the position you want to take?!

But you literally can't do the fucking job they have hired you for! You've accepted the job knowing you can't do it. This is just pure fucking them around and it's totally pointless. Have they once mentioned part time unpaid voluntary work in the future to you? You can't just decide you're going to do that for someone and presume they'd be okay with it.

@Wickerbaskets yes. That is the position I'm wanting to take. The company could have still hired her, however been able to hire another person to cover the time in which she's off on maternity. It was a crappy thing that she did.
We've no idea what sort of paperwork they had to do, or information they had to deal with before she could start. It's very rare a job starts the day after your interview, or acceptance. I really don't see how you don't think that she's in the wrong here.

@peboh they can still hire someone to cover her maternity period if needed. I doubt it will be since employers who make use of zero hour contracts tend to hire more people than required to ensure there are always enough employees to pick up the shifts, but even if they do it’s presumably the work of sending an email to the next person or people on the list until they find one who still wants the job. God forbid they have to do some paperwork - that’s clearly a far worse injustice than pregnancy discrimination

I don’t think OP is in the wrong because at the end of the day I don’t think it’s any woman’s job to make sure a company has the opportunity to discriminate against her on the basis of her being pregnant. You clearly feel differently, and while I’m surprised that you’re admitting to being actually in favour of pregnancy discrimination it’s your right to feel that way. I suspect you wouldn’t be so opposed to pregnancy discrimination laws if you were the one being protected by them, however.

It's not about pregnancy discrimination, I'm in favour of people being honest. She's been deceitful, would you really want a member of staff on your team like that? I know I wouldn't.

Also to add I went through a lot of shit when I was pregnant with the company I worked for, I have seen pregnancy discrimination first hand and it still doesn't change my opinion on this instance.

If it’s a NHS bank post, she’ll likely be taken off it if she doesn’t work for 3 months anyway.

@user17425642134531

I'm not sure I follow how you expected this to work out when you applied / interviewed?

Yes this! What a weird situation to have put yourself in

If they give her a hard time because she is pregnant, surely that is pregnancy discrimination. It’s not an ‘if/or’ situation. She stated she was pregnant on the paperwork but didn’t want to disclose it as she wanted to be considered on merit, not discriminated against for being pregnant (whether that was 9 weeks or 9 months). It seems like a lot of people feel it’s okay to discriminate a pregnant woman based on how far along she is. Don’t blame pregnant women for pregnancy discrimination. Employers should take these things into consideration. All they need to do is hire someone to cover her leave like they would for any other woman. They could easily get in contact with one of other successful candidate and ask if they want a short term employee or else use one of the zero hour employees to fill the gap. She may not even be needed straight away anyway if it is a zero hour contract.

Since you’ve stated you were pregnant in the paperwork (which they do check to ensure they can make reasonable allowances for the interview) all you need to do is just say “as disclosed in my original paperwork, I am pregnant. I am going on maternity leave on this date and am plan to return on this date. I will be available for ‘keep in touch days’ (I think it’s something like 10 days where you can go into work and still get to keep your SMP - but check based on your contracted hours). If they say anything negative, report them for discrimination. As you are on bank work/zero hour contract, they could make life difficult in not giving you regular work for ‘letting them down’ so maybe think of joining an agency once you’re back at work. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

It's not about pregnancy discrimination, I'm in favour of people being honest. She's been deceitful, would you really want a member of staff on your team like that? I know I wouldn't.

She hasn’t actually been deceitful. Not her fault the company didn’t check the paperwork to see that she disclosed her pregnancy in March. Not her fault that they took so long to interview and offer that she then couldn’t start right away as she originally could have when she told them that.

You say you’re not in favour of pregnancy discrimination but in this situation you feel bad for a company because they weren’t given sufficient opportunity to discriminate. How does that work?

If the company would have refused to hire OP because she was pregnant then it proves she was right not to call it to their attention more explicitly. If they wouldn’t have discriminated and she would have been given the job anyway, they’re in the same position they would have been in anyway. So how exactly do you feel the company has lost out unless you think it should be morally and legally acceptable for a company to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy?

OP CAN do the job, I assume, as she was offered it, but will be off due to pregnancy/maternity. So, cover will need to be found for that. "As a woman who works in management" also, I am aware it is the duty of management (and not the employee) to cover gaps for when employees are off (be that parental leave, holiday, sickness, whatever).

Also, apparently us ladies will need to continue to be "deceitful" (i.e. not give personal information that will be used to discriminate against us) because looking at this thread, pregnancy discrimination is still rife. As a hiring manager, I would prefer a candidate didn't tell us she was pregnant. I wouldn't discriminate on it, but I can't say the same for my boss. I think it's a positive thing for women getting jobs and being less discriminated against that some interviews are on Zoom now. That is helping us.

Surely it's what ODFOx said?

Seems like a huge waste of time for everyone. If it is NHS, recruitment is always ridiculously slow.

Am I missing something OP you are 37 weeks pregnant and hoping to still get a few hours from the bank.
I'm sure most (all) employers want someone to actually WORK after passing the interview.
That is decitful. Then we wonder why pregnant women get shit upon.

@excitedemmi and @TheChristmasPrincess thank you for being rare voices of sense on this absolutely bizarre and depressing thread

[quote Wickerbaskets]**@excitedemmi* and @TheChristmasPrincess* thank you for being rare voices of sense on this absolutely bizarre and depressing thread[/quote]
Agree!

I don't think it's been said yet, OP well done for passing the interview and getting the job.

I employ and interview regularly, and I'd like to think in this situation, considering it's 0 hours anyway and you're being taken on as part of a cohort and not for a set individual role, I'd actually just bank your CV for the next cohort after you became available and consider it one less interview to conduct in a few months time.

A lot of people here have absolutely no idea how bank work/ agency work operates but feel compelled to tell you how awful you are anyway

For those wondering: Banks (im assuming you're in healthcare, op?) are a rolling conveyor belt of workers. There's a massively high turnover and because of that you literally hire and interview constantly. The whole point of banks is you fill in gaps in other workforces and you have a number of staff on your books to do that, because the nature of 0 hours means workers pick and choose their hours to suit themselves. It's like job sharing between sometimes hundreds of people.

Yes, if this was a specific role the company were hiring for then OP would have done something really shady and although legal, would have put some noses out of joint. However, I actually think she's made a good call here and the job she's applied for is built to fit around people like OP who have mega childcare responsibilities.

OP, don't offer voluntary work, you don't need to. Just tell them your situation and express that you'll be available to work from x date when you'll begin to pick up shifts, alternatively you can offer to do any training days they want you to do on the next lot they've booked if it's in the next couple of weeks, or offer to do the training days unpaid after your first 6 weeks of Mat leave.

Congrats and good luck with both the pregnancy and the job!

I would just say to the manager, have HR told you that I am pregnant? It’s a bit close to going on mat leave I’d be happy to pick up shifts next week but would you prefer me to start in 6 weeks when I get back?

You’ve disclosed it -it’s not their fault that they haven’t communicated internally.

Not your fault - it is their fault if their HR and managers don’t talk.

@Emma70459

What is the difference between bank and zero hours contract? My interviewer said it was zero hours but the position is bank

I explained this earlier. If you are on the Bank, you are a bank worker. No employment rights. No guarantee of working any hours - from either party.

You are not an employee. You are not on a zero hours employment contract.

The employer will mean you are working under a bank worker agreement with no guarantee of hours (they should not be referring to you as on zero hours or a zero hours employee, under a contract of employment).

Some people use the terms ‘zero hours’ and ‘bank’ incorrectly - they are very different

@Fairybatman

I would just say to the manager, have HR told you that I am pregnant? It’s a bit close to going on mat leave I’d be happy to pick up shifts next week but would you prefer me to start in 6 weeks when I get back?

You’ve disclosed it -it’s not their fault that they haven’t communicated internally.

Actually this may be a way round it.

So respond ans say “oh, I’m sorry, I think there is cross wires, on my application I stated I was pregnant, I thought you were aware. My sincere apologies, when I said I could work “now” I meant in the next two to three weeks as I thought that is what you were asking. I desperately want this job, but start my maternity leave on x date, so would commence shifts properly now on my return, planned forward x date”

Hey guys,
Thankyou to those who were not judgemental and sympathetic to me.
I called my line manager and she just wanted to see if I was free to take up a temp role in an institution for mon-fri. I said that I was not able to do so anymore.
She did ask why, as she specifically wanted ppl to do this short term role on a full time basis but I explained that my circumstances have changed and I will be going on maternity soon. I said that I would have pushed my maternity back if I could but because baby is due any day now, I cant.
She said ok that's fine, I still have training to do and one reference outstanding anyway and her colleagues will let me know if any other opportunities will come up.
That was all