Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Pregnant and moving to Ireland to start a new job. Should I tell?

13»

Comments

  • #62
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    screamer wrote: »
    You seem to think that a pregnant employee won't be dismissed...... that is gullible, a bloody good HR department is well used to handing "explosive" situations and employees and would be well able to dismiss a pregnant woman on probation because she was no good at her job, not the right fit for the company, whatever, and there is SFA the employee can do about it. Big HR departments run water tight ships, don't think they don't have access to the top legal companies in the country. On probation, pregnant or not, even for the first 12 months into a new job, your employer can terminate your employment and there is very, very little you can do about it, and for someone who has not got enough PRSI stamps built up either to qualify for any kind of social welfare, it's a risk.

    You have no experience of being an employer nor being in a position of authority, that is plainly obvious. Sacking a pregnant employee is a minefield irrespective of whether they are bad at their job. As soon as a Tribunal adjudicator hears that the employee is pregnant the balance shifts to the employee and the employer has to prove beyond that the dismissal was fair. Not "being a fit" is absolutely unprovable as the employee will counter that she was not a "fit" because she was pregnant. All dismissals are deemed unfair until proven otherwise in the eyes of the law. During probation an employee can be dismissed but if pregnant the goalposts change position.


  • #63
    screamer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,207 ✭✭✭screamer


    davo10 wrote: »
    You have no experience of being an employer nor being in a position of authority, that is plainly obvious. Sacking a pregnant employee is a minefield irrespective of whether they are bad at their job. As soon as a Tribunal adjudicator hears that the employee is pregnant the balance shifts to the employee and the employer has to prove beyond that the dismissal was fair. Not "being a fit" is absolutely unprovable as the employee will counter that she was not a "fit" because she was pregnant. All dismissals are deemed unfair until proven otherwise in the eyes of the law. During probation an employee can be dismissed but if pregnant the goalposts change position.

    HA! you know nothing about me at all, but you must never have experienced a company focused HR department, who is good at their job and would eat employee for breakfast (yes, sorry to tell you HR is not a touchy feely there for the employees department). So, let's leave it at that, you can continue to believe that all pregnant women on probation are magically kept on even if they are atrocious at their jobs.......


  • #64
    ToRamona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭ToRamona


    davo10 wrote: »
    During probation an employee can be dismissed but if pregnant the goalposts change position.

    Why should it change because the person is pregnant? This to me is women using pregnancy for their own agenda (not all women) It's no wonder employers get so much hassle with pregnant employees.
    Everyone is expected to make allowances etc you want a job you live with the same set of rules as everyone else.


  • #65
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,310 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    armabelle wrote: »
    The company is a big multinational company and there is nothing in the contract that speaks about maternity benefits.
    There probably isn't, then.
    armabelle wrote: »
    Indefinite contract but the contract does say that there is a probation for 6 months which can be extended to 10 months
    6 to 10 months of working. I dare say this timeframe will be paused when she goes on maternity leave, and resume when she is due back in.
    armabelle wrote: »
    About two years ago, she was offered a job for the same company and she had just found out she was pregnant with our first child. At the time she was employed and didn't want to lose her current job by going into a probation in a new job. She also did not want to hide anything. What happened? She told and they didn't hire her.
    And if they think that she's pregnant, I'd wonder would they let her go before she tells them. You may think that's deceitful, but you are thinking of doing similar to them...

    Also, the last time she applied for the job; was it in Ireland? The laws here may be different to the other country.

    At the same time, I'd wonder if because they were made aware of her pregnancy last time, would they be more vigilant this time?
    Glinda wrote: »
    As for most employers "don't mind" women employees being pregnant, that statement kind of illustrates my point - it's really none of their business whether people are pregnant or not, except insofar as they need to make proper arrangements to facilitate them and keep them safe at work.
    Once the job doesn't involve lifting and/or being on their feet constantly. As said, lateness due to morning sickness happens. Regular lateness without reason (if she didn't tell the employer that she was pregnant) would mean being let go.

    Oh, and no reason has to be given to let someone go in the first year, in Ireland.
    davo10 wrote: »
    Sacking a pregnant employee is a minefield irrespective of whether they are bad at their job.
    Maybe, but if she left of her own accord as she didn't feel up to the job would be a far more efficient way. And as there are usually a higher percentage of women in HR (from what I've seen in the last 15 years), they'll have an idea.


  • #66
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    ToRamona wrote: »
    Why should it change because the person is pregnant? This to me is women using pregnancy for their own agenda (not all women) It's no wonder employers get so much hassle with pregnant employees.
    Everyone is expected to make allowances etc you want a job you live with the same set of rules as everyone else.

    Because she is pregnant.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    ToRamona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭ToRamona


    davo10 wrote: »
    Because she is pregnant.

    That is not a valid reason to be kept in a job if the person is not up to the job. That's saying being pregnant gives the person a free pass for nine months.


  • #68
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    screamer wrote: »
    HA! you know nothing about me at all, but you must never have experienced a company focused HR department, who is good at their job and would eat employee for breakfast (yes, sorry to tell you HR is not a touchy feely there for the employees department). So, let's leave it at that, you can continue to believe that all pregnant women on probation are magically kept on even if they are atrocious at their jobs.......

    I know enough about you to realise you do not know anything about employment law.

    I've been an employer and company owner for 20 years. All contracts and employee issues are handled by an independent HR company. The advice I have received and all business owners receive is that unless a pregnant employee has done something that amounts to provable gross misconduct, they cannot be dismissed while pregnant without risking a visit to the Employment Tribunal. You may think you know something but that amounts to a hill of beans unless it's your ass on the line.


  • #69
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    ToRamona wrote: »
    That is not a valid reason to be kept in a job if the person is not up to the job. That's saying being pregnant gives the person a free pass for nine months.

    In reality, it does give a free pass for 15 months. I'm not sure you are grasping the gravity of discrimination legislation and its implications for an employer.


  • #70
    ToRamona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭ToRamona


    davo10 wrote: »
    In reality, it does give a free pass for 15 months. I'm not sure you are grasping the gravity of discrimination legislation and its implications for an employer.

    I know what you are saying and I see it all the time and it stinks IMO the way pregnancy is used. I know employers are scared ****less of discrimination but I think it should work both ways. Plenty of women work away during pregnancy with no hassle but there is always a few who make a big issue out of everything. The breastfeeding hour is a joke IMO and its only an excuse for women to take an hour off everyday with their lunch break.


  • #71
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    ToRamona wrote: »
    I know what you are saying and I see it all the time and it stinks IMO the way pregnancy is used. I know employers are scared ****less of discrimination but I think it should work both ways. Plenty of women work away during pregnancy with no hassle but there is always a few who make a big issue out of everything. The breastfeeding hour is a joke IMO and its only an excuse for women to take an hour off everyday with their lunch break.

    I know, I'm pissed off the way your pet dinasour pisses on my lawn but what can I do?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    ToRamona wrote: »
    That is not a valid reason to be kept in a job if the person is not up to the job. That's saying being pregnant gives the person a free pass for nine months.
    davo10 wrote: »
    I know enough about you to realise you do not know anything about employment law.

    I've been an employer and company owner for 20 years. All contracts and employee issues are handled by an independent HR company. The advice I have received and all business owners receive is that unless a pregnant employee has done something that amounts to provable gross misconduct, they cannot be dismissed while pregnant without risking a visit to the Employment Tribunal. You may think you know something but that amounts to a hill of beans unless it's your ass on the line.
    ToRamona wrote: »
    I know what you are saying and I see it all the time and it stinks IMO the way pregnancy is used..

    I agree with davo10 on this and tbh I've seen too many instances of pregnancy being used as a reason for people to work less across multiple workplaces.

    There's a balance that needs to be achieved, particularly in regard to parental leave following the birth of a child not being restricted just to the mother.

    I personally have been subjected to questions in interviews relating to my age and marital status with the assumption being I had children, which led to assumptions being made about my child dependancy status.

    Despite what I perceived as a negative interview, I got offered the job.

    When the Head of HR rang me to offer the job I politely declined explaining as follows: "I won't be taking the offer as the first question I was asked was how I managed a hectic work schedule with the fact I had children and commuted"


    I explained I didn't have children, etc.

    The interviewer got sacked.

    Employers here avoid pregnancy related disputes like the plague.


  • #73
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,522 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    screamer wrote: »
    I am absolutely astounded by the amount of gullibility in some of these replies. OP whether your wife tells the company about her pregnancy or not in a probationary period they CAN fire her.

    What you are completely and utterly missing is the one simple question that follows from this point.

    Yes, they can dismiss her when she is in her probationary period.

    Now, are they more likely or less likely to do that if they feel she was not totally honest in her dealings with the company?


  • #74
    armabelle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭armabelle


    the_syco wrote: »
    There probably isn't, then.



    And if they think that she's pregnant, I'd wonder would they let her go before she tells them. You may think that's deceitful, but you are thinking of doing similar to them...

    Also, the last time she applied for the job; was it in Ireland? The laws here may be different to the other country.

    At the same time, I'd wonder if because they were made aware of her pregnancy last time, would they be more vigilant this time?

    No it wasn't in Ireland. It was for the same company but in another EU country. Also, I do disagree with you on the fact that not telling them is deceitful. It may not be courteous but if you are abiding by the rights which are given to you by the law then why is it deceitful? A company taking a way a work opportunity just for finding out the employee is pregnant has got to be wrong not just in the eyes of the law but on moral grounds too. If this had happen to you and you had another shot at an even better job, would you still tell right up front? Think about it: you have the job and tell them you are pregnant and poof!! it is gone! then another one comes up and you are put in the same position. Wouldn't you be taking a different approach this time round?

    and you say the word "vigilant" as if she is a thief in the night who has a criminal record of some kind. That is not very nice at all.


  • #75
    armabelle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭armabelle


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    What you are completely and utterly missing is the one simple question that follows from this point.

    Yes, they can dismiss her when she is in her probationary period.

    Now, are they more likely or less likely to do that if they feel she was not totally honest in her dealings with the company?

    When you go to the toilet in a company must you also tell them if it is number one or number two? Why do you see not telling them as dishonest, I can't work this out. I know you argue that the company could lose out because of someone going on ML but if you give 15 weeks this should be plenty of time for them to replace you or make a plan. Why is it wrong?


  • #76
    ToRamona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭ToRamona


    armabelle wrote: »
    When you go to the toilet in a company must you also tell them if it is number one or number two? Why do you see not telling them as dishonest, I can't work this out. I know you argue that the company could lose out because of someone going on ML but if you give 15 weeks this should be plenty of time for them to replace you or make a plan. Why is it wrong?

    That is a stupid comparison.
    The company will have to take on a temp to cover ML, training up a new employee just to let them go again. Why cant you see it is dishonest or at least not courteous to inform them before the contract is signed.


  • #77
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    armabelle wrote: »
    When you go to the toilet in a company must you also tell them if it is number one or number two? Why do you see not telling them as dishonest, I can't work this out. I know you argue that the company could lose out because of someone going on ML but if you give 15 weeks this should be plenty of time for them to replace you or make a plan. Why is it wrong?

    There are only so many ways this can be explained. You do not have the benefit of discrimination legislation until you actually inform your employer of the pregnancy. If you leave it until three months before the due date, the bump will have been very noticeable for at least 3 months prior to this during which time your partner can be dismissed for any reason as it will be during the probation period. Also the employer is required to make H&S arrangements which would benefit your partner.

    Are you waiting for a post to tell you that you are right? The toilet analogy is wide of the mark.


  • #78
    JustAThought
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,324 ✭✭✭JustAThought


    The whole thing smacks of nievity, opportunism & dishonesty.

    Just as your wife is 2 months pregnant you decide to move to Ireland and not to tell your new boss. No doubt she'll be 3 months gone again she starts - you think no-one will notice? Or notice when she needs to go to maternity appointments - assuming she can get one?
    Your wife can be got rid of legally using basic laws & obeying employment laws up to and including the first 366 days of work and there are MANY ways this can be legally done : not up to the standard required, not able to do the job adequetely, not a good fit for the culture, language or communication issues, not geling with the team, a review of the position, inadequet flexibility, missing from work, economic changes, departmental restructuring, etc
    One of the interesting scenarios is the disclosure clause most companies ask you to sign which specifies if you fail to disclose anything you can be immeduately dismissed & be ineligible to apply for roles in the company again. The other is, of course , the medical & p in the cup test - you're niaeve if you think they're just doing that for diabetes / drugs? and she can be failed for ( eg risk - inflecibility, obesity, high blood pressure etc) - it won't be pregnancy.

    Do you think you won't be viewed as a welfare tourist by all & sundry including social welfare when you present after your wife has been let go & you're looking for help? I doubt they will view your sudden urge to live here & ( if fired) inability to pay your way fondly. I think theres a full two year requirement for stamps from the year prior to application before you can take out from the system - particular scrutiny on those landing pregnant & wanting medical & all other benefits & courtesies paid for by others. and thats only if you're from the EU for starters & its straightforward.

    How much of a bigger problem for your wife & baby will all this extra pressure & stress - the stress of a new job, new colleagues, new country & possibly language , as well as the physical move & house search in the middle of a well promoted housing crisis, not to mention the daily grind & first year insecurity of doing a job to 100% satisfaction while wondering which colleague who will have to pull her workload when she is gone or unable to will shaft her first at the first opportunity. And if you think they won't, for a total stranger, they will. What she is prepared to do to them they will protect themselves from - who wants to pull someone elses workload or train in another person to do the job af a new person they have had to support while they were also training in? Not too many.
    And thats assuming her manager isnt a total *******

    iMO its a high risk & poor judgement all round. I would expect better from a husband, let alone a new employee. And it seems you have already seen the colours of this company - does a leopard suddenly change its spots - or will you and your family all be happy left utterly high & dry, drawing down on your savings at 1400+ minimum for rent alone monthly while you have all the new costs of a baby, medical bills, etc and no support syatem for your wife .


Advertisement
Advertisement