Can you get rid of a pregnant lady?

MrsTinks

Have to sat as a former employer of a large team (albeit not my company lol) then absolutely - I'd consider the fact that it's a fixed term contract as the main issue as the employee has now stated she does in fact not wish to complete the fixed term she previously agreed to. The cause for this should be seen as irrelevant really. For all your friend cares then she could be wanting to travel the world or do voluntary work in South America!
However as Savvy sue says... Get legal advice! Employment law is a mine field it truly is! My argument in any tribunal would be that the employee was not intending to uphold the fixed term contract and therefor had broken the contractual terms. But it depends on the contract and the wording and DEFINITELY get advice!

tsstss7

MrsTine wrote: »

Have to sat as a former employer of a large team (albeit not my company lol) then absolutely - I'd consider the fact that it's a fixed term contract as the main issue as the employee has now stated she does in fact not wish to complete the fixed term she previously agreed to. The cause for this should be seen as irrelevant really. For all your friend cares then she could be wanting to travel the world or do voluntary work in South America!
However as Savvy sue says... Get legal advice! Employment law is a mine field it truly is! My argument in any tribunal would be that the employee was not intending to uphold the fixed term contract and therefor had broken the contractual terms. But it depends on the contract and the wording and DEFINITELY get advice!

I really don't think this is true - having done a bit of research just now it seems a woman is protected over and above the need to fulfill a fixed term contract. In any caser I'd advise your friend to be careful ( and yes take legal advice) - I'm sure the last thing she needs is an employment tribunal when she has just had a baby herself.

If I was her I'd contact the second best candidate and offer them the job or readvertise. If she starts to organise this straight away she could probably get the advance maternity paynments sorted (both for her and her employee) and not be too badly out of pocket.

I know it seems unfair but having known people who have effectively had their careers ruined because they were pregnant I can see it from the other side as well...this lady probably did know she was pregnant but no doubt she NEEDS to work as none of the child supporting benefits kick in until the birth (assuming this is her first) of her child.

People on this forum would be quick enough to condemn such a person for resting on their laurels - well sometimes hiding a pregnancy is the only way a pregnant person can get a job if they find themselves unemployed during the pregnancy. After all there are not many employers who would willingly hire someone who was pregnant and soon to go on maternity leave (whatever the legalities).

BridgetJones_2

tsstss7 wrote: »

The point is that she doesn't have less rights because she is pregnant - and the pregnancy is the only reason the employer wishes to terminate her employment.

Well no that isn't true, she wishes to terminate her employment because she cannot cover the time she was employed for! She clearly knew she was pregnant as she's so far gone so she shouldn't have applied in the first place!! She's clearly not honest or particularly kind...like you said it's a small shop not a huge company.

In my company we get rid of temps every week, simply because it isn't working out so the same could be applied here. Nip it in the bud early.

BridgetJones_2

tsstss7 wrote: »

well sometimes hiding a pregnancy is the only way a pregnant person can get a job if they find themselves unemployed during the pregnancy. After all there are not many employers who would willingly hire someone who was pregnant and soon to go on maternity leave (whatever the legalities).

Personally I wouldn't get pregnant if I was unemployed.

And even if I did I certainly wouldn't cheat myself into a job. Think of the poor owner who is being robbed of her own maternity leave. These is no excuse.

ohreally

Is there any reason the op's friend couldn't have employed a male for the role?

cazziebo

Agree with Savvy Sue and others that your friend needs some legal advice. I've always found ACAS to be really helpful (as an employer)

In a nutshell, the employee can be dismissed but not for pregnancy. The inability to fulfill the term of the contract doesn't hold because the reason she can't is because of pregnancy. She is protected from dismissal for this reason. Bear in mind she will also be protected from disciplinaries due to any pregnancy related absences.

The other posters are also right. Just being pregnant doesn't make you immune from dismissal (although because the law is such a minefield it takes a very brave employer to dismiss a pregnant woman). The woman can be dismissed for performance, attitude or capacity. As these reasons are not apparent then your friend is in a difficult position.

There is likely a creative solution but you would need sound legal advice to ensure your friend avoids an expensive tribunal. eg make the job part time so it becomes less attractive, "restructure" the team etc. Difficult, difficult situation.

(Oh really - hope you're not suggesting that women should never be considered for employment?! )

ohreally

cazziebo wrote: »

(Oh really - hope you're not suggesting that women should never be considered for employment?! )

Absolutely not, that would be morally and ethically questionable. Simply suggesting a workplace balance to bring some proportionality and diversity to what appears a single gender employer

Savvy_Sue

tsstss7 wrote: »

I know it seems unfair but having known people who have effectively had their careers ruined because they were pregnant I can see it from the other side as well...this lady probably did know she was pregnant but no doubt she NEEDS to work as none of the child supporting benefits kick in until the birth (assuming this is her first) of her child.

I don't think you can equate not completing a TEMPORARY contract with having your career ruined.

tsstss7 wrote: »

People on this forum would be quick enough to condemn such a person for resting on their laurels - well sometimes hiding a pregnancy is the only way a pregnant person can get a job if they find themselves unemployed during the pregnancy. After all there are not many employers who would willingly hire someone who was pregnant and soon to go on maternity leave (whatever the legalities).

And I don't think any of us have a problem with pregnant ladies applying for jobs - I know we've given advice to those who need to do so.

But I don't think there are many of us who would have the nerve to apply for a temporary job covering maternity leave knowing we were pregnant and were going to want to take leave at about the same time as the person we were covering for ...

However, unless the NE comes and posts and says "Yes, I knew I was pregnant, and yes, I knew I would want to leave before the person I was covering for started their maternity leave, but I needed the job", I for one will give her the benefit of the doubt.

Legal advice. Good legal advice.

Federation of Small Businesses any help? Could be worth joining, don't know whether they'll make you wait before they give advice, but they have a legal helpline for members, and there are other benefits too.

tsstss7

I agree she should take good legal advice.

pinkshoes

Given that it stated that this was a temporary position for maternity leave, then this pregnant woman must've lied in the interview about being able to fulfil the contract, as she would have been 3 months pregnant at the time, so knew full well that she'd never be able to complete such a contract.

As she was employed as the best/most suitable candidate, she only got this job through lying, as if it was disclosed she wouldn't be able to complete the full contract, then she no longer became the best candidate and wouldn't have got the job in the first place!

Is their no law about obtaining a job through deceipt???