Would you hire someone at 30 weeks pregnant?

smileylondongal

If a heavily pregnant woman can't get a permanent job on this basis, how on earth is she going to get a contract job?? Has it occurred to anyone on here that perhaps it's not about the money but to have a job to come back to? Has it occurred to any of you that she may return after 2 months and not a year?? I was prepared to as it was a job. Plus any salary they would pay me would go to hiring a replacement due to their not owing me any pay as I wouldn't have been there long enough.

I think there have been many confusing additional elements on this thread - small businesses, extra training, taking time off etc, - at the end of the day, the OP hasn't talked about any of that so I think quite a lot of you are either assuming a lot or have a chip on your shoulder because of one experience. Not all pregnant women will behave in one particular way, just like not all employees are clones.

Did the OP do the right thing legally? No. Will the candidate have sufficient grounds to question it? Possibly, and she can apply to see all of the documentation - both her own and that of her fellow candidates, to prove wrong doing. If the OP has done his or her documentation correctly, they are covered. Really, I am surprised as to the number of people on here, assumingly people who hire, who think they can discriminate so sweepingly. And yes, if you don't hire a woman because she's pregnant, then it's called discrimination, whatever your reasoning, because the law says it is.

an9i77

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

if you were 30 weeks pregnant and soon to be going on maternity leave, would you think that you're the best person for the job? or do you think a temporary contract would suit you better?

Actually a contract would be worse - would be difficult to get a contract in my field for less than 3 months in which case I'm leaving the employer more in the doo-doo by starting the project but being unable to complete it. Also, whilst on maternity leave i'd accrue holiday, pension contributions etc which whilst all the anti-maternity people will say is further proof as to why they shouldn't employ the pregnant woman, means I'd be a lot better off on a perm contract. Plus of course I'd then have something to go back to. It's hard enough trying to get a job at the mo, let alone if you've been off for 6-12 months so your experience is no longer 'recent'. But if I had been in that position, I'd probably have gone for anything, just to have an income. It's not like most people can be picky with the economy like it is.

scheming_gypsy

smileylondongal wrote: »

the OP hasn't talked about any of that so I think quite a lot of you are either assuming

Did the OP do the right thing legally? No. .

touche .........

RedwoodBrook

Goodness me! I didn't expect to come back to such a battleground.

I must say I am very surprised at the number of people who have assumed so many things. I'm not sure whether I should clarify the situation or not. Its quite amusing watching some people call me a criminal while others suggest I am the heavily pregnant woman. Maybe I'm both?

an9i77

I'm not assuming anything - sorry if this is no longer about you, but I had kind of moved on from talking about the original situation to a more abstract discussion of whether it is right to prevent a heavily pregnant person from getting a job. I assumed by your thread title that you were more interested in what people thought of employing someone heavily pregnant rather than specific advice on your (still to be explained!) situation

RedwoodBrook

an9i77 wrote: »

I'm not assuming anything - sorry if this is no longer about you, but I had kind of moved on from talking about the original situation to a more abstract discussion of whether it is right to prevent a heavily pregnant person from getting a job. After all, wasn't that your original question (and thread title?)

You are quite right. I just wanted people's opinions as to whether or not they would employ someone at that stage of pregnancy in a particular job. And no seems to be the answer!

an9i77

I have my suspicions that you may in fact be the pregnant person, if you're one of the two?

an9i77

Oh well all those who wouldn't consider employing a pregnant woman, hopefully she has a husband with a good income and/or some savings to fall back on, eh? Wouldn't want her struggling now would we?

RedwoodBrook

I did actually apply but declined the interview, mostly for the benefit of the employer/client. Despite being qualified with ample experience, I suspected the pregnancy would prevent me from being offered the role even if I was the best candidate.

And yes, I am financially secure. I made sure of that before I got pregnant

an9i77

Glad to hear it. Hope all goes well with your pregnancy - really sorry to hear about your son Felix.