3.5 months pregnant interview for new job

Savvy_Sue

mountainofdebt wrote: »

And this ladies and gentlemen is why OH won't employ women.

Sexist ? Possibly

Illegal ? Difficult to prove as he's never actually had to advertise for employees

But when you have women who are prepared to do what the OP has done, I think its perfectly understandable.

He does know he could have men who want paternity or adoption leave, doesn't he?

Acc72

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

He does know he could have men who want paternity or adoption leave, doesn't he?

True, however you cannot compare 2 weeks paternity leave to up to 12 months maternity leave.

Sorry to be negative, but the OP may find that there will be a "restructuring" in the next week or so and that her services are no longer required.

Savvy_Sue

Acc72 wrote: »

True, however you cannot compare 2 weeks paternity leave to up to 12 months maternity leave.

I thought fathers could apply to take more than that, if the mother doesn't take it all? Not sure what the payment arrangements are, but it means the father is away from work for quite a while.

mrsreynolds

I thank you for the replys in reply to some post's

i want to chance to responce to some, in my 15 years of working i have seen many people start a new job and leave and the job is for 1-2 years etc but they decide to go uni or something else or don't like the job .

if you didnt like a job that had a year contract would you stay because you knew it was a year ?

i am 33 and this will be my one and only baby and i am doing what is right for me, i can assure you business is business and companies don't think about the employer when then need to make cuts it's just business and morally i am happy to tell them when i start i have worked for this company in the past as a temp few years ago , so they don't need to spend weeks training me up or send me away which would cost them money so some you win some your lose but i will do my best for as long as i can and if offered to return i will as i want to support my family as best i can

Acc72

mrsreynolds wrote: »

i want to chance to responce to some, in my 15 years of working i have seen many people start a new job and leave and the job is for 1-2 years etc but they decide to go uni or something else or don't like the job .

if you didnt like a job that had a year contract would you stay because you knew it was a year ?

There is a difference between leaving a job because you don't like it, and starting a 12 month contract that you already know that you will be unable to fulfil.

At the interview, did the employer ask if you could commit to the 12 months ?

If so, what was your reply ?

Uncertain

Acc72 wrote: »

At the interview, did the employer ask if you could commit to the 12 months ?

If so, what was your reply ?

Well that would be a pretty stupid question to ask a woman of childbearing age at an interview! It would leave the door wide opent to a discrimination claim if she was not offered the job.

In any case, had they asked and had she replied "yes" there would still be nothing whatever they could do about it when they later found out she was pregnant. That would also render the question pointless.

Having been away for over two weeks I'm amazed that this debate is still going on. The OP has done nothing whatever wrong in the eyes of the law and it really annoys me when people on here seek to impose their claimed superior morals on others. :mad:

Spamfree_2

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

I thought fathers could apply to take more than that, if the mother doesn't take it all? Not sure what the payment arrangements are, but it means the father is away from work for quite a while.

What is the criteria for a man to get paternity leave I wonder.

Could any guy could say he's got three women on the go and get three lots of paternity leave over say the space of a year and a half?
At least with a woman, the employer more or less knows for a fact that the woman has been pregnant( ie the big bump )

Spirit_2

Spamfree wrote: »

What is the criteria for a man to get paternity leave I wonder.

Could any guy could say he's got three women on the go and get three lots of paternity leave over say the space of a year and a half?
At least with a woman, the employer more or less knows for a fact that the woman has been pregnant( ie the big bump )

I work for a large organisation and have had more than one instance of managers asking for advice when faced with two lots of generously paid 'paternity' leave in short succession from an individual.

Spamfree_2

Spirit wrote: »

I work for a large organisation and have had more than one instance of managers asking for advice when faced with two lots of generously paid 'paternity' leave in short succession from an individual.

So it has become yet another thing for people to take advantage of...

Acc72

Uncertain wrote: »

Well that would be a pretty stupid question to ask a woman of childbearing age at an interview! It would leave the door wide opent to a discrimination claim if she was not offered the job.

In any case, had they asked and had she replied "yes" there would still be nothing whatever they could do about it when they later found out she was pregnant. That would also render the question pointless.

Having been away for over two weeks I'm amazed that this debate is still going on. The OP has done nothing whatever wrong in the eyes of the law and it really annoys me when people on here seek to impose their claimed superior morals on others. :mad:

In answer to your comments :

If I were recruiting for a 12 month contract, I would consider it reasonable to ask the candidates if they were able to commit to the duration of the contract (this would be irrespective of whether they were female and of child bearing age or not).

I agree that legally, if the candidate answered "yes" in full knowledge that they could not (ie. that they were already 4 months pregnant) the employer could not seek recourse for this - although this was not the question in the context of this thread.

The debate is only on-going because the OP came back with further comments, thanking "some replys" (sic) - presumabely those that she agreed with.

I am not sure about "claimed superior morals" - the OP asked a question and she did not agree with some of the answers; such as is life.

You seem rather angry.

You believe that it is ok to deliberately mislead a potential employer and others do not.