Would you hire someone at 30 weeks pregnant?

zzzLazyDaisy

RedwoodBrook wrote: »

Glad I made the right decision then!

Just out of interest, what would you consider the "cut off" point for starting someones employment? 15? 20? 25 weeks?

There is no fair or lawful 'cut off' point.

At the risk of stating the obvious, if you are going to refuse to give a pregnant woman a job, for goodness sake find a good reason not related to the pregnancy or you will find yourself in tribunal quicker than you can blink!

smileylondongal

I ws actually going to ask what reasons you gave this lady for rejecting her?

lincroft1710

No...........

johnwarner75

1. She will work for a few week (prob need all the extra cash she can get) 2. She will be very maternal- good for caring, happy, personable, and 3. Customers like pregnant women!

Any

You don't need to actually give reason... unless they ask and then you can just say you had better candidate!!
I doubt anyone is stupid enough to actually give pregnant woman the pregnancy as a reason... employers are completely entitled to hire the best person for the job and it would be difficult to prove one wasn't...
To be honest I cannot see how person leaving in couple of months time can be the best person for the job one is hiring for...

No cut off point. If I was hiring, I was hiring because I need someone.
I would consider person straight out of maternity leave, but not someone just before it.

Lovelyjoolz

In a word, No. It's not just the fact that she'll disappear for 6months minimum maternity leave, it's the flexible hours she'll want, the emergency day off when the childminder is sick, or the hour or two off because little Johnny got sick at school. I'm sorry, but every woman (not to be sexist, but it always seems to be the mum that has to leave work in an emergency) with children that I've worked with has always had instances like this. Some much more than others. As an employer, I would always be wary of this, because frankly, having someone who keeps taking emergency leave, just puts a strain and extra pressure on all your other staff. It's not fair.

Maybe women just can't have it all.... I'm ready to be flamed now!!!!

thegirlintheattic

No for the following reasons:

1) At 30 weeks she is unlikely to be able to cope with the manual work often required from these jobs for very long, is she going to be able to lift from wheelchairs etc?
2) Once trained she will work for a limited time, maybe further limited by complications (hopefully not).
3) After being trained she may not come back after the baby.
4) Will you become responsible for maternity pay for her?
5) Depending on the people she supports, there may be an unreasonable risk to her and the baby. I've worked with ASD indiviudals that have assaulted carers, not their fault but not the kind of risk I would want to inflict on someone who is preggers.

I'm sure that in many area's you can find better candidates for the job that do not pose these problems. Un-PC but true.

Person_one

Women, know your place, apparently.

honeypop

Angelic wrote: »

It would depend upon the nature of the job but strictly speaking hasn't the OP admitted in public that they have discriminated against a candidate?

No she hasn't admitted that. She asked if anyone would, then said she had made the right decision. She didn't say it was her who made the decision not to employ someone.

Knowing (by looking at other posts) she is around that many weeks pregnant herself, she could have possibly made the decision not to apply for a job she wanted, as it became evident not many people would have taken someone on that far along on a pregnancy.

She hasn't admitted discriminating against anyone has she?

TeaCake

As a woman I wouldn't dream of going for a job that provided physical care to other adults while pregnant. An educational setting is different but lifting / picking someone up from the floor / adults lashing out not knowing their own strength etc would make me worried about the health of my baby, especially in late pregnancy.

Do you know if she was a job centre candidate? Maybe she had to apply for the job rather than out of choice?