About to start new job 4 months pregnant **MOD warning 1st post**

lettuce97

Bandana boy wrote: »

The outcome is that if the company has a problem with hiring you because you are pregnant they do not hire you .This by many is considered preferable to being hired into a company that will resent you for having "tricked" them.

It all comes down to whether or not getting hired ,or carer progression after getting hired is the main goal.

I fail to see how a career can progress without getting hired??

I think, as previously mentioned in this thread, that there is obviously still a bias against pregnant women in this country. I don't agree with (hypothetical) women who take years off work to raise kids expecting to come back into the workforce at the same level as their peers (male or female) when they left, but don't think that 6-9 months of maternity leave should have any impact on working life whatsoever.

Paulownia

sillysmiles wrote: »

I agree, but there is a problem in society in general where an expectant mother has to worry about this kind of thing. Ultimately a lot of people can't afford to not be employed so in the toss up between an employer who is a bit miffed but legally can't do anything to you compared to unemployment - it's not hard to see where a person would side.
At least once you are in the job you can prove you are good at it, you can prove nothing from the unemployment line.

We don't know that she was unemployed! As for having to worry, she should have thought of that before now. We all make decisions in our lives, and it would appear that all her supporters here are not people trying to keep a business going against all odds.

skallywag

lettuce97 wrote: »

...but don't think that 6-9 months of maternity leave should have any impact on working life whatsoever...

Agreed, it normally should not, when handled in an open & honest manner. If on the other hand, just for example say, I am hiring for a role / project where the next 6-12 months is critical to my needs as an employer then it is also understandable that withholding the fact that one is pregnant would be looked on dimly.

sillysmiles

Paulownia wrote: »

We don't know that she was unemployed! As for having to worry, she should have thought of that before now. We all make decisions in our lives, and it would appear that all her supporters here are not people trying to keep a business going against all odds.

We don't know if the alternative is unemployment or under-employment, but either way, she was deemed to be the best candidate for the job. Pregnancy shouldn't come into it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "we all make decisions in our lives" - are you saying that she shouldn't have gotten pregnant? Or that she shouldn't expect to progress in her career while she is pregnant/planning a family? Or that she should protect the company? Her responsibility is to herself and her family.
It may take anything from weeks to years to get pregnant - should she put all career progression on hold? Or family on hold until such time as she has the perfect job.

I think things are never prefect and you just have to go with it.

The OP has state that it is a large company - chance are that her taking maternity leave is not going to drive it under.

runawaybishop

sillysmiles wrote: »

We don't know if the alternative is unemployment or under-employment, but either way, she was deemed to be the best candidate for the job. Pregnancy shouldn't come into it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "we all make decisions in our lives" - are you saying that she shouldn't have gotten pregnant? Or that she shouldn't expect to progress in her career while she is pregnant/planning a family? Or that she should protect the company? Her responsibility is to herself and her family.
It may take anything from weeks to years to get pregnant - should she put all career progression on hold? Or family on hold until such time as she has the perfect job.

I think things are never prefect and you just have to go with it.

The OP has state that it is a large company - chance are that her taking maternity leave is not going to drive it under.

The question the OP asked was when should she disclose her pregnancy considering she already has the job. Not disclosing it now is not a great idea.

davo10

Pregnancy related employment legislation is pretty clear, OP cannot be discriminated against based on whether or not she is pregnant and legally she did not have to inform her employer, nor can they now treat her differently when eventually she does disclose her status.

But there will be a change in the relationship, of that there can be no doubt. The employer probably would not employ any employee who would need to take that amount of time off so soon after starting. That would be regardless of pregnancy/health/personal status, it would be purely from a business point of view, the employer will effectively have to begin the recruitment process again in a couple of weeks time, then train a new employee again etc.

The likely outcome of this is that when ops pregnancy is disclosed, the employer will be annoyed about the situation particularly ops omission of this important detail at interview. Ops career at this company will be at a dead end as soon as she starts but the company will be careful to ensure that nothing can be proven.

Bandana boy

lettuce97 wrote: »

I fail to see how a career can progress without getting hired??

I think, as previously mentioned in this thread, that there is obviously still a bias against pregnant women in this country. I don't agree with (hypothetical) women who take years off work to raise kids expecting to come back into the workforce at the same level as their peers (male or female) when they left, but don't think that 6-9 months of maternity leave should have any impact on working life whatsoever.

I suppose I am assuming the individual was in employment and looking to progress. The timing of a suitable role coincided with becoming pregnant.

There are many progressive companies who on hearing you are pregnant will carry on regardless and hire you if you are the best candidate There are some who will see this as an unnecessary cost in terms of training and going through the hire process again in a few weeks, and will use this information to decide against the candidate.

If we think getting in the door is the primary goal then absolutely keep the information to yourself until hired and trust that legislation is there to protect your rights once in the door.

If progression though is the long term goal then giving the information knowing that if there is no problem they will still hire you ,if there is a problem they will not and you have avoided a couple of years in a company that will possibly hold this initial act against you.
In fact you might join the same company at a later date without this possible cloud.

Remember as well that most companies will not pay maternity for the first two years ,so I suspect you will be entitled only to Social Welfare Maternity pay.

ebbsy

My Mrs told her employer she was pregnant in an interview 14 years ago.

She is still there now.

pwurple

davo10 wrote: »

Ops career at this company will be at a dead end as soon as she starts but the company will be careful to ensure that nothing can be proven.

This is pure conjecture. In my experience this is fairly far from what happens. Maybe it depends on the industry, but in mine, qualified employees are hard to find. I've started roles while pregnant, gone away for 6 months, come back again, and my career and the project has been in the same place.

They don't have to pay maternity leave (and usually don't in my line of work), and if this is a new role being created, they may not even backfill.

It's impossible for some randomer on the internet to say what will happen. There will most likely be no impact, bar a gap.

I'd go in, get set up, read the policies, and tell health and safety if there is an impact (working with chemicals etc). After that tell manager/whoever you report to. That's it.

What does a few months unpaid time off matter when they're going to get years/decades of hard work and expertise out of you?

Don't expect or take any crap.

skallywag

pwurple wrote: »

This is pure conjecture. In my experience this is fairly far from what happens...

I think what Davo10 is getting at here is the point that the employer will feel deceived that the OP did not mention this during the interview. I would tend to agree.

Of course one can start roles while pregnant and return successfully, etc, but the main issue in play as I see it here is that the OP was not honest about her current situation. I don't think that any employer can be at fault for not being happy about that.

Peintre Celebre

Yes she has the law on her side, as in she will not be let go because of her pregnancy.


But on a probationary period you can be let go at any time. There isn't a manager with half a brain cell that will even hint at the pregnancy being a reason for dismissal, despite it probably being the case. OP may well have not had to say it, but are people really serious here, thinking that going in and announcing you're taking maternity leave on your very first day and expecting nothing negative is comical. The company will not let on, but they may very well be already looking for the next candidate.

As others have said, tell them ASAP and make the best impression you can. If you are brilliant at your work it will certainly help.

Nody

//MOD

As people appear to be unable to understand basic instructions to remain constructive this thread is closed.

//MOD