Jump to content

Women starting a new job while hiding being pregnant


Recommended Posts

Eternal Sunshine

Seriously this one really annoys me. One of my co-workers did that and she says it wasn't planned and happened after she got the job already. It's doubtful because she started 2 months ago and already looks like she is over 6 months pregnant (probably more).

 

I know this is none of my business but now company is stuck because they have to let her pass probation or she can sue them. Her attitude of "poor me, I had no idea", "I am a victim" is :rolleyes:

 

FFS "it looks bad" because it is bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously this one really annoys me. One of my co-workers did that and she says it wasn't planned and happened after she got the job already. It's doubtful because she started 2 months ago and already looks like she is over 6 months pregnant (probably more).

 

I know this is none of my business but now company is stuck because they have to let her pass probation or she can sue them. Her attitude of "poor me, I had no idea", "I am a victim" is :rolleyes:

 

FFS "it looks bad" because it is bad.

 

How would things have been different if you knew she was pregnant? Not hiring her due to her bring pregnant??

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think disclosing pregnancy (or any other sort of personal/family/relationship matters like being gay, being married, being single, divorcing, having a sick family member etc) is required in job hires.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m also not sure why it’s your coworkers business whether her pregnancy was planned and whether she got pregnant before she was hired :confused:

 

Does a gay man have to disclose when he came out of the closet too?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that I don’t think she has to disclose that information. Also, I can guarantee you that if that fact were known, she would’ve been discriminated against because of it - as in, she probably wouldn’t have been hired.

 

My big question is, why does it bother you so much that a mom is being protective of her and her baby because she needs a job to take care of herself and family? Shouldn’t we, above all else, have respect for that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Marissa Mayer was 6-month pregnant when Yahoo announced she was going to be the next CEO years ago. Not sure when her pregnancy was disclosed during the job negotiation process. Thankfully Yahoo still went ahead hiring her, instead of worrying about getting sued if they wanted to remove her at some point. She went on to be pregnant again (with twins).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Eternal Sunshine

Because being gay doesn't make you take a year off work and force your employer to find "maternity leave replacement" thus going through a lengthy hiring process all over again.

 

Because being gay doesn't make you lose all focus and be obsessed with the new baby once you come back from said 1 year leave.

 

Women that have small children lose all ambition, are constantly absent because kids are sick or have to be taken to place A, B or C thus making their "on" days "half" days, interrupted by constant phone calls. They tend to do the absolute bare minimum and are only back on track when the kids are school age.

 

It leaves people like me, that have no kids take the extra work load because we don't have "obligations" :rolleyes: Maybe I want to travel or sleep in - but that's not considered an appropriate excuse.

 

I could go on and on.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most of us can agree on the following:

 

  • In general, pregnancy is a choice.
  • In some countries/states, women are free to abort.

 

While I respect a women trying to provide for their upcoming children, I think there are more honorable or ethical ways to earn that money. For all we know, this woman may be in desperate need of money. But yeah that's my general standpoint.

 

Also I probably wouldn't hire a pregnant woman either. It's different than discriminating by race or sexual orientation, because the latter two have (or shouldn't) have no bearing on your work as an employee. Broadly speaking, women become pregnant when they want to, so they do have a choice. Hiring a pregnant woman means you will have an employee who cannot work at their best of their abilities for aprox 1 year, and you have to pay them the same as the other employees, that may have their workload increased (in many cases not voluntarily) to cover said woman during her period of absense. That's not good business in my book.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think most of us can agree on the following:

 

  • In general, pregnancy is a choice.
  • In some countries/states, women are free to abort.

 

While I respect a women trying to provide for their upcoming children, I think there are more honorable or ethical ways to earn that money. For all we know, this woman may be in desperate need of money. But yeah that's my general standpoint.

 

Also I probably wouldn't hire a pregnant woman either. It's different than discriminating by race or sexual orientation, because the latter two have (or shouldn't) have no bearing on your work as an employee. Broadly speaking, women become pregnant when they want to, so they do have a choice. Hiring a pregnant woman means you will have an employee who cannot work at their best of their abilities for aprox 1 year, and you have to pay them the same as the other employees, that may have their workload increased (in many cases not voluntarily) to cover said woman during her period of absense. That's not good business in my book.

 

There are more honorable ways to earn money than getting a job and working? Like what ways would those be?

 

This is between the employee and the employer. The OP says she got hired 2 months ago and is already past the probationary period but I thought the probationary period is 3 months.

 

It's not ideal but I can't fault a pregnant woman for wanting to work and earn money. A lot of assumptions being thrown around here that this woman will be a useless employee because she's going to have a baby. My manager had a baby a year ago and as far as I can tell it hasn't affected her ability to be good at her job. Sure she has had to leave early or come in late a couple of times due to doctors appointments or last minute sitter arrangements but the company didn't fall apart because of it. We are quite capable of managing without her for a couple of hours here and there.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Eternal Sunshine

 

I hear you & I feel you. Unfortunately, attitudes like ours is why pregnancy is a special protected class that can't be discriminated against.

 

Maybe your co-worker will be the exception that proves the rule & be a good employee when her maternity leave is over. Then again if she's already acting like some kind of "victim" that doesn't bode well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because being gay doesn't make you take a year off work and force your employer to find "maternity leave replacement" thus going through a lengthy hiring process all over again.

 

Because being gay doesn't make you lose all focus and be obsessed with the new baby once you come back from said 1 year leave.

 

Women that have small children lose all ambition, are constantly absent because kids are sick or have to be taken to place A, B or C thus making their "on" days "half" days, interrupted by constant phone calls. They tend to do the absolute bare minimum and are only back on track when the kids are school age.

 

It leaves people like me, that have no kids take the extra work load because we don't have "obligations" :rolleyes: Maybe I want to travel or sleep in - but that's not considered an appropriate excuse.

 

I could go on and on.

 

Refresh my memory - how exactly did you come into this world :confused: ???

 

Mr. Lucky

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
Because being gay doesn't make you take a year off work and force your employer to find "maternity leave replacement" thus going through a lengthy hiring process all over again.

Because being gay doesn't make you lose all focus and be obsessed with the new baby once you come back from said 1 year leave.

 

Women that have small children lose all ambition, are constantly absent because kids are sick or have to be taken to place A, B or C thus making their "on" days "half" days, interrupted by constant phone calls. They tend to do the absolute bare minimum and are only back on track when the kids are school age.

 

It leaves people like me, that have no kids take the extra work load because we don't have "obligations" :rolleyes: Maybe I want to travel or sleep in - but that's not considered an appropriate excuse.

 

I could go on and on.

 

Not true,

 

I have a few gay friends who have children and took `family leave`

 

Their positions were filled temporarily whilst they were off enjoying the joys of parenthood.

 

After my kids arrived, i loved going to work and mooching around telling anyone who would listen about my little `Pride and joys`:cool:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear god, judging a woman for getting a job while pregnant. Or for even being pregnant. Discussing abortion like it’s as casual as a pair of jeans. Have so many become this heartless?

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Because being gay doesn't make you take a year off work and force your employer to find "maternity leave replacement" thus going through a lengthy hiring process all over again.

 

Because being gay doesn't make you lose all focus and be obsessed with the new baby once you come back from said 1 year leave.

 

Women that have small children lose all ambition, are constantly absent because kids are sick or have to be taken to place A, B or C thus making their "on" days "half" days, interrupted by constant phone calls. They tend to do the absolute bare minimum and are only back on track when the kids are school age.

 

It leaves people like me, that have no kids take the extra work load because we don't have "obligations" :rolleyes: Maybe I want to travel or sleep in - but that's not considered an appropriate excuse.

 

I could go on and on.

 

This is an extremely unfair generalization. You have no idea how this woman is going to organize her home life and childcare.

 

The fact that I'm a mother has never affected my ability to do my job, as evident by a number of promotions I've had, where I've won over mostly people without children.

 

Is there any surprise she omitted this information during the interview if this is the way mothers are percieved by potential employers?

 

In any case - she's not at all obligated to give anyone details of her personal life. I applaud her for doing what she needs to do, going to work and not letting her pregnancy stop her.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
There are more honorable ways to earn money than getting a job and working? Like what ways would those be?

 

Like, actually working to earn/make your pay? When you are hiring people, you expect them to fill a position asap. Otherwise, what's the point? With pregnant employees, it basically goes like this: you need to wait (can be months or years long process), worst case scenario hire someone else to fulfill that role and then, when they are back from their leave, you get to see if they are suitable for said role. That's if I still need them or they still want the job after their absence period.

 

So far, that has been my experience. I have never voiced this opinion to anyone in real life and quite frankly, it sucks that it has worked like this for me (and not just for me). But just like nearly any adult person walking this earth, I have bills to pay and mouths to feed. Respect those women looking to feed their kids, but fair or not fair I'm gonna do the same.

Edited by WomenWubber
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it’s literally illegal to engage in discriminatory practices against pregnant women and women who could become pregnant.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Like, actually working to earn/make your pay? When you are hiring people, you expect them to fill a position asap. Otherwise, what's the point? With pregnant employees, it basically goes like this: you need to wait (can be months or years long process), worst case scenario hire someone else to fulfill that role and then, when they are back from their leave, you get to see if they are suitable for said role. That's if I still need them or they still want the job after their absence period.

 

So far, that has been my experience. I have never voiced this opinion to anyone in real life and quite frankly, it sucks that it has worked like this for me (and not just for me). But just like nearly any adult person walking this earth, I have bills to pay and mouths to feed. Respect those women looking to feed their kids, but fair or not fair I'm gonna do the same.

 

So women should not get paid while on maternity leave? What about when you get sick and can't come in to work - should you not get paid then either?

 

Besides, the woman from OP's work is currently working, she's just pregnant and will need to take a maternity leave in the near future. A possibility for any woman of child-bearing age in the workforce.

 

Maybe we should simply stay home until we reach menopause?Or maybe get our tubes tied and bring an official confirmation of it to our employer?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the bolded I fully agree. I maintain myself my property with quite a lot of land, few other projects, pets etc, on top of having full-time job (with hours fluctuating but rarely under 10-12h/day). And yet my own relatives (!!) turned at me saying I'm free of obligations because I'm childless in contrast to my sister freeloading with her baby and bf at mommy's place :D It's absurd.

 

But you can't select against pregnant women from legal perspective. Obviously you can use common sense filtering during interviews ;), but that would make you lose a large fraction of potential candidates.

 

Not sure what your job exactly is, but in any field requiring PhD childbearing is squished later in life, so most women 30-40 (i.e. the majority of entry-mid level PhD-level candidates) would rush to get pregnant if and as soon as opportunity strikes. There is just no way around it....

 

 

Because being gay doesn't make you take a year off work and force your employer to find "maternity leave replacement" thus going through a lengthy hiring process all over again.

 

Because being gay doesn't make you lose all focus and be obsessed with the new baby once you come back from said 1 year leave.

 

Women that have small children lose all ambition, are constantly absent because kids are sick or have to be taken to place A, B or C thus making their "on" days "half" days, interrupted by constant phone calls. They tend to do the absolute bare minimum and are only back on track when the kids are school age.

 

It leaves people like me, that have no kids take the extra work load because we don't have "obligations" :rolleyes: Maybe I want to travel or sleep in - but that's not considered an appropriate excuse.

I could go on and on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being given extra work while your coworker is on maternity leave is a management problem - not a pregnancy problem. They should be bringing in a temp/contractor who the woman trains before she goes on leave.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
With the bolded I fully agree. I maintain myself my property with quite a lot of land, few other projects, pets etc, on top of having full-time job (with hours fluctuating but rarely under 10-12h/day). And yet my own relatives (!!) turned at me saying I'm free of obligations because I'm childless in contrast to my sister freeloading with her baby and bf at mommy's place :D It's absurd.

 

It's not necessarily a child thing. Because I'm a stay at home carer, I get given extra tasks by my own family because they see me as not doing anything. I've recently picked up a job that I can do from home, working around my caring...but still they send the extra workload my way because I *appear* to be more available.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not necessarily a child thing. Because I'm a stay at home carer, I get given extra tasks by my own family because they see me as not doing anything. I've recently picked up a job that I can do from home, working around my caring...but still they send the extra workload my way because I *appear* to be more available.

 

Yeah, very true. People working from home, odd hours etc are considered available even if they work their b*tt off.

 

I agree it is a management issue (on top of the emotional aspect LOL) for ES to delegate the work. The biggest mistake of new managers is to be scared to delegate and take over work (thinking they can do it faster, better etc), leading to exhaustion and resentment. My (male) manager in my last job did that, he was good at his work but couldn't delegate properly until maybe 3 years or so in the position.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Like, actually working to earn/make your pay? When you are hiring people, you expect them to fill a position asap. Otherwise, what's the point? With pregnant employees, it basically goes like this: you need to wait (can be months or years long process), worst case scenario hire someone else to fulfill that role and then, when they are back from their leave, you get to see if they are suitable for said role. That's if I still need them or they still want the job after their absence period.

 

So far, that has been my experience. I have never voiced this opinion to anyone in real life and quite frankly, it sucks that it has worked like this for me (and not just for me). But just like nearly any adult person walking this earth, I have bills to pay and mouths to feed. Respect those women looking to feed their kids, but fair or not fair I'm gonna do the same.

 

Well there's no evidence that this woman is not working and earning her pay. The OP says the employee says she found out that she was pregnant after she got hired but OP thinks she looks six months pregnant. Doesn't mean she is 6 months pregnant. She might be working several more months before she has the baby and then she will be out for a few months on maternity leave. That doesn't sound like the company is going to go under. If we take your line of reasoning then all fertile women should not be hired because what difference does it make if a woman has a baby 5 months after being hired or 5 years? In either case they are going to have to find a replacement for her during her maternity leave.

Edited by anika99
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
littleblackheart

Get the fathers to take parental leave instead once the baby is born - problem solved.

 

These things are non-issues in countries where parental leave is 50/50 between the parents; no more misplaced resentment towards mothers, more equality at work.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite - fathers can do it for the older children, but women still need time off especially if the pregnancy/delivery is complicated. No way to avoid few months leave, especially for older mothers. I see this all the time in my job- women postpone getting pregnant to 30+ (even 35+) and then things are not smooth sailing.... When getting your final degree happens in your late 20s/30s, that's the toll to pay :(

 

Get the fathers to take parental leave instead once the baby is born - problem solved.

 

These things are non-issues in countries where parental leave is 50/50 between the parents; no more misplaced resentment towards mothers, more equality at work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...