»

Pregnant and still on probation a year in.

New Post Advanced Search

Welcome to the new MSE Forum!

If you were registered on the old Forum BEFORE 6th February 2020, you will need to reset your password (here) before you are able to log in. When you've reset your password, you can close this message with the 'X' in the top-right corner to make it disappear. If you need any help getting started, click here.

Pregnant and still on probation a year in.

8 replies 538 views

Hi there, 

I’m just wanting some advice...

I have been in my current job for almost one year. I do have mixed emotions about my job, like it one minute, hate it the next. So I have considered leaving already. 


The way they work is you have to hit your target for three months before they will pass your probation.  

I have had many meetings where by they say how much the value me, how I’m great for the team etc. However unfortunately I’m just not hitting target. 

So they keep extending my probation and try to help me pass. 

I have been consistent in making them money just not enough to hit target.

They say they would love to pass me but the big boss would see the figures and not agree. 

I have just found out I am pregnant very early on and now I feel like I’m stuck. 

Do I tell them after 12 weeks and give them a reason to dismiss me... or do I leave now and look elsewhere?! 


Any help and advice would be appreciated

Replies

  • SueC_2SueC_2
    1.6K posts
    Forumite
    1000 Posts
    ✭✭✭
    If I'm reading that correctly you feel that they may your pregnancy as a reason to dismiss you.
    Legally pregnancy is not a reason to dismiss you.  Quite the opposite in fact.
  • lisyloolisyloo
    26.2K posts
    Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 25000 Posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    But they don’t need a reason with less than 2 years service as there are no rights bar discrimination.
    For example they could simply say repeatedly failed to meet targets. They’d have to be idiots to say we’re getting rid of you due to pregnancy as that’s illegal discrimination so it’s very likely they wouldn’t.
  • General_GrantGeneral_Grant
    1.4K posts
    Forumite
    Seventh Anniversary 1000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭
    BUT . . .  the OP surely now has right to maternity pay which would be lost if she resigned.
    It would look very suspicious if they decided to dismiss her after she told them of her pregnancy - given they have managed to keep her onboard for a year/
  • edited 15 February at 12:24AM
    DiamandisDiamandis
    377 posts
    Forumite
    100 Posts Second Anniversary
    ✭✭
    edited 15 February at 12:24AM
    I wouldn't say that's suspicious, not meeting your targets for a full year despite them trying to help you do so is a perfectly acceptable reason to get rid of anyone.

    If you leave now you wouldn't be entitled to maternity pay in a new job. 
  • JsackerJsacker
    110 posts
    Forumite
    100 Posts
    BUT . . .  the OP surely now has right to maternity pay which would be lost if she resigned.
    It would look very suspicious if they decided to dismiss her after she told them of her pregnancy - given they have managed to keep her onboard for a year/
    I agree, it would look suspicious. I would not begrudge the poster in contacting the likes of ACAS/Union etc over such a matter. The other posters on this thread correctly point out that there's a fair reason for sacking (poor performance) knocking around, but that does not necessarily mean that it would be the REAL reason for sacking. 

    Advice to the poster:

    - I genuinely don't know what you should do (leave or stay). In your shoes, I personally would stay and either hope that they don't get funny or speak to the likes of ACAS etc about possible pregnancy discrimination if they do. 

    - Make records from now on. Preferably documents/emails, but a diary (date/time/people/gist of convo) may suffice. Basically, document instances of feedback relating to your performance in the role, your success in the probation period etc. Anything which can be used to refute the idea that they sacked you for performance. It could come in handy if you do go ACAS etc and they advise that you have a pursuable case.

  • TELLIT01TELLIT01
    8K posts
    Forumite
    5000 Posts Fifth Anniversary PPI Party Pooper
    ✭✭✭✭
    Jsacker said:
     The other posters on this thread correctly point out that there's a fair reason for sacking (poor performance) knocking around, but that does not necessarily mean that it would be the REAL reason for sacking. 


    Whether performance was the REAL reason or not, it would be extremely difficult to argue that it wasn't a perfectly valid reason for terminating employment.  They have failed to perform for a full year, so wouldn't be able to claim they didn't perform because it was a quiet time of year for example.

  • MasomniaMasomnia
    19.2K posts
    Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10000 Posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    lisyloo said:
    But they don’t need a reason with less than 2 years service as there are no rights bar discrimination.
    For example they could simply say repeatedly failed to meet targets. They’d have to be idiots to say we’re getting rid of you due to pregnancy as that’s illegal discrimination so it’s very likely they wouldn’t.
    Apart from all the others.

    OP, it sounds like they've treated you fairly so far. How they'd react to finding out that you're pregnant really depends on the employer imho. Some would take the risk anyway and dismiss you for poor performance when the two year mark was coming up, some would find out that you were pregnant and decide it wasn't worth it as long as you were doing ok. It would be interesting to know if there were any precedents for how long they let other employees run before dismissing. 
    If they let others carry on for 18 months before dismissing them, but dismissed you after 12 once they found out that you were pregnant then that doesn't look good. But it really depends on the facts of each case.
    Unfortunately there's no easy answer to this one. Do you think you'd be able to meet the requirements in the near future?
    “I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.” - P.G. Wodehouse
  • theoreticatheoretica
    6.4K posts
    Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 5000 Posts Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭
    Are the targets reasonably achievable and are other people meeting them?
    But a banker, engaged at enormous expense,
    Had the whole of their cash in his care.
    Lewis Carroll
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms