Would you hire someone at 30 weeks pregnant?

an9i77

Well I was nearly in the position of having to look for work at apx 20 weeks pregnant (and if i'd not found something straight away could have been 30 weeks) but luckily my employer made me permanent at apx 12 weeks (and no he didn't know I was pregnant at that point) and even more luckily was absolutely fine when I told him, even when illness in pregnancy made it difficult for me to work and I had a lot of antenatal appointments etc. I shudder to think how I'd have coped if I'd not been made permanent or had a more sympathetic boss. I completely understand that it is disruptive to a company to take someone on who is heavily pregnant but like it or not it is the law of the land and this is what our law makers have decreed we must not discriminate against. Pregnant women need to earn money too! And I will go back to my job and be good for the company so they will get their return in the long run. To the poster who said it was ok to break this law if you wouldn't get caught, do you apply that to other laws too? Would you steal from someone, or a shop, if you were sure you would not get caught? Why don't we break all laws where there is no chance of being caught? because most people have some respect for the law even if they do not completely agree with it.

purplepardalis

You are all presuming that the woman is going to take 6 months plus of maternity leave. Compulsory maternity leave is just 2 weeks and SMP pays 90% of pay for only 6 weeks meaning that financially someone would have to go back to work sooner. You could be missing out on blinking good candidate who would be an asset to your team due to your prejudice

thegirlintheattic

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

Since it's possible the OP was asking about applying for jobs at 30 weeks pregnant, if I had to do this, I wouldn't apply for jobs I considered would put me at risk, and I wouldn't say I was pregnant until I had to, ie after I'd started.

As for employing someone who was 30 weeks pregnant, I wouldn't ask if they didn't say, even if I suspected.

At 30 weeks it would be a bit obvious that she was preggers.

purplepardalis

an9i77 wrote: »

Well I was nearly in the position of having to look for work at apx 20 weeks pregnant (and if i'd not found something straight away could have been 30 weeks) but luckily my employer made me permanent at apx 12 weeks (and no he didn't know I was pregnant at that point) and even more luckily was absolutely fine when I told him, even when illness in pregnancy made it difficult for me to work and I had a lot of antenatal appointments etc. I shudder to think how I'd have coped if I'd not been made permanent or had a more sympathetic boss. I completely understand that it is disruptive to a company to take someone on who is heavily pregnant but like it or not it is the law of the land and this is what our law makers have decreed we must not discriminate against. Pregnant women need to earn money too! And I will go back to my job and be good for the company so they will get their return in the long run. To the poster who said it was ok to break this law if you wouldn't get caught, do you apply that to other laws too? Would you steal from someone, or a shop, if you were sure you would not get caught? Why don't we break all laws where there is no chance of being caught? because most people have some respect for the law even if they do not completely agree with it.

Nicely put

Savvy_Sue

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

At 30 weeks it would be a bit obvious that she was preggers.

It's unwise to assume anything these days. Some of us look pregnant even when we're not ... and age is no barrier!

Blobby8_2

smileylondongal wrote: »

Flaming commencing...:rotfl:

Are you really saying that you'd not employ any woman of child-bearing age because that's what I'm reading.

I would'nt & I don't, much better older women, or men.
Best employees are hetrosexual , non philandering, married men with children and a SAHM. (IMHO)
Just saying , like.

an9i77

Googlewhacker wrote: »

Which poster said that? because if you re-read what I put I didn't.

you said you had the right to pick and choose which laws you obeyed,

didn't you?

an9i77

So if it's not ok how is it a 'right' then?
Sorry I don't think I understand you

Perhaps you can explain?

Person_one

Blobby8 wrote: »

I would'nt & I don't, much better older women, or men.
Best employees are hetrosexual , non philandering, married men with children and a SAHM. (IMHO)
Just saying , like.

This is why I get annoyed when people say feminism is no longer relevant. :mad:

an9i77

Googlewhacker wrote: »

You as a person have the right to do anything. Whether that right is legal or not is completely different and whether it is ok or not is completely different as well.

But I don't agree that a person has the right to do anything. Stab me in the eye? Burn down my house with my family inside it? In what respect can you say someone has the right to do that?