When to tell potential employer about pregnancy?

[tvguy]

I believe the OP is from NH and ging to FL, the one of HR persons who believes that discrimination is aceptable is from Canada.

I speaking about myself, at the time I was unemployed, newly divorced & pregnant.

Upon further checking, at least in California, you WOULD have a job to come back to , but it appears you would not qualify for maternity disability benefits if you have not worked in that job for one year.

 

[gwynne]

So for a very short time a few people might be inconvenienced, that is a reason to deny someone (if she is the most qualified) a job?
And again I have a really hard time seeing how violating the law & discriminating against someone is ok.

I don't think that having to rely on the team for 4-8 weeks is gonna ruin a childs academic career

This particular situation is unfortunately, badly timed in the academic year.
That said, schools deal with multiple issues of testing and competency. It's really not about the child's entire academic career, it's about making sure every classroom meets the standards for that year. And I think it would be wonderful if other teachers happily volunteered to stepped up their workload without a second thought. Truthfully, I think they would realize they really don't have a choice. Every class in that grade level needs to do well..and if one class doesn't it affects the overall grade score.
I guess HR would explain to the entire teaching team they needed to "suck it up buttercup" and get busy. Because the other teachers jobs/promotions/opportunities are often tied in many ways to the same test scores.

 

[MickeySP]

If she is the most qualified for the job then she should get the job. Deception is not the way to get a job. I think the employers would not be happy she withheld this info. It may hurt her future with the school and she would immediately break the trust between her and her boss. Employers don't like to feel duped and it would be very clear that she duped them to get the job. I think she should absolutely apply, but just be honest about her situation.

Trust? Really, I have a hard time with that given the statements from the HR people who are happy to break the law and dupe the potential candidate by providing a false reason for not hiring. Which is worse not revaeling info that you are not required and more specfically employer is not allowed by law to ask - may I add for the very reason the HR people have stated - or lying & discriminating against anyone. What if the employer does not like Asians or African Americans would it be ok to give those candidates a false reason for not hiring? It is a law for this reason, you do not get to pick who you discriminate against.

Now I can hear the "I would never...." Really you would to one group but not to another - I call baloney on that.

 

[MickeySP]

Actually schools deal with multiple issues of testing and competency. It's really not about the child's entire academic career, it's about making sure every classroom meets the standards for that year. And I think it would be wonderful if other teachers happily volunteered to stepped up their workload without a second thought. Truthfully, I think they would realize they really don't have a choice. Every class in that grade level needs to do well..and if one class doesn't it affects the overall grade score.

Again to me it is not about inconviencing people for a short time - it is about the LAW!!! The law is to protect people from unritious act of discrimination. It applies to all or noone, you do not get to pick & choose.

Believe I know about picking up slack, it is done in many professions.

 

[anniemae]

Trust? Really, I have a hard time with that given the statements from the HR people who are happy to break the law and dupe the potential candidate by providing a false reason for not hiring. Which is worse not revaeling info that you are not required and more specfically employer is not allowed by law to ask - may I add for the very reason the HR people have stated - or lying & discriminating against anyone. What if the employer does not like Asians or African Americans would it be ok to give those candidates a false reason for not hiring? It is a law for this reason, you do not get to pick who you discriminate against.

Now I can hear the "I would never...." Really you would to one group but not to another - I call baloney on that.

All I can say is that for ME, I would not hold back that info. Like I said before, if the HR folks are dishonest, that's on them. I personally would not want to deceive my potential employer. If they did not want to hire me for whatever reason, whether it's because I am a woman, pregnant, Asian, fat, or whatever, well again, that's their problem and I wouldn't want to work for them anyway. Not saying it's right, it's just that I would want MY conscience to be clean. There will always be dishonest, prejudice people around, I am just not one of them. And I would not lie or deceive anyone to get a job, just not my style.

 

[gwynne]

Again to me it is not about inconviencing people for a short time - it is about the LAW!!! The law is to protect people from unritious act of discrimination. It applies to all or noone, you do not get to pick & choose.

Believe I know about picking up slack, it is done in many professions.

OK. Most districts I am familiar with have a no overtime policy. No money. So those picking up the slack would be happy volunteers.
Basically, it sounds like a fair and workable solution to both the person out for a month and those left behind to keep the standards up.

We still disagree about only one "best" applicant. That is a rare situation, and almost never happens in teaching.
A new applicant generally goes into a pool that would be considered far behind all those that had worked and done a great job as a sub in that district.

 

[ilovefh]

We still disagree about only one "best" applicant. That is a rare situation, and almost never happens in teaching.
A new applicant generally goes into a pool that would be considered far behind all those that had worked and done a great job as a sub in that district.

This definitely varies from district to district. In the district we currently live in it is VERY rare for them to hire a sub or a para. My sure why, that's just how they work.

In our area in FL there are typically more positions than qualified applicants.

I know some people suggested subbing, and while the flexibility would be nice, it doesn't pay enough to warrant daycare. So I'd either stay home and not pay for daycare or I would work full time.

 

[MickeySP]

As long as you are fine with it being used against you or your kids then fine - me I don't pick & choose the laws I uphold like others apparently

 

[undertheradar]

My opinion is that you should be honest and upfront about being pregnant. The problem that many employers have is the women who go out on maternity leave, get paid for the entire time, and then don't come back. This happens a lot and the employer is stuck paying a temp, in many cases, and the employee at the same time.

As for teachers being held to a "higher standard?" Teachers work via contract years, so if you cannot work your contracted days, who does? That's right, a second employee via substitute teachers. So not only do the taxpayers pay the teacher, they pay for the sub also. Sorry, it just makes sense to wait until the following year, perhaps being a sub after the Winter holidays.

 

[ilovefh]

My opinion is that you should be honest and upfront about being pregnant. The problem that many employers have is the women who go out on maternity leave, get paid for the entire time, and then don't come back. This happens a lot and the employer is stuck paying a temp, in many cases, and the employee at the same time.

As for teachers being held to a "higher standard?" Teachers work via contract years, so if you cannot work your contracted days, who does? That's right, a second employee via substitute teachers. So not only do the taxpayers pay the teacher, they pay for the sub also. Sorry, it just makes sense to wait until the following year, perhaps being a sub after the Winter holidays.

Actually, in my case, they'd only be paying the sub because I would not have the paid sick time to take off. So the school/taxpayers would actually be paying less because subs make less money.

And I didn't say higher standard, I said different standard. Education is no different than other careers, but it is something that is deeply personal to people.

 

[undertheradar]

Actually, in my case, they'd only be paying the sub because I would not have the paid sick time to take off. So the school/taxpayers would actually be paying less because subs make less money.

And I didn't say higher standard, I said different standard. Education is no different than other careers, but it is something that is deeply personal to people.

My mistake. What exactly do you mean by a "different standard?"

 

[MickeySP]

My opinion is that you should be honest and upfront about being pregnant. The problem that many employers have is the women who go out on maternity leave, get paid for the entire time, and then don't come back. This happens a lot and the employer is stuck paying a temp, in many cases, and the employee at the same time.

As for teachers being held to a "higher standard?" Teachers work via contract years, so if you cannot work your contracted days, who does? That's right, a second employee via substitute teachers. So not only do the taxpayers pay the teacher, they pay for the sub also. Sorry, it just makes sense to wait until the following year, perhaps being a sub after the Winter holidays.

Again I am sorry the laws were put in place because of the reasons of dsicrimination, that you do not need to inform. It is because of the past behavior and that people would readily accept that it is ok to discriminate is horrid.

The 2nd bold - again this is not unique to teachers - really isn't. If someone calls out in my job & noone volunteers to stay guess what I have to. I get no choice so my day went from 8 hrs to 16 with a phone call. Now the taxpayers have to pay my overtime & the time for whoever called out, so what. If you do not like the rules of a profession change it. I chose mine & do not protest when I get stuck, when I work holidays or midnights because someone didn't make their shiftwith a may say can be as little as 60minutes notice - that was my choice. The school has to do this for many teachers for many reasons, so by this logic we should allow no teacher time off since a sub will have to be hired?

 

[Rhombus]

Maternity leave here in Canada is 12 months. Bluntly put, as a hiring manager I would simply not even consider a pregnant candidate. There would just be no way and you're right when you say that there are a million and one reasons to find someone else to be a better candidate. Good luck with your move and your job hunt.

I'm not a hiring manager, and I'm in the US, and our company doesn't even consider hiring a pregnant candidate either. Of course you cannot ask the woman if she's pregnant, but if she volunteers the information or if it's obvious by appearance, it's "thank you for your interest in our company." If she is offered a position and springs the news soon after hiring, well, that's what the 90 day probationary period if for.

 

[MickeySP]

I'm not a hiring manager, and I'm in the US, and our company doesn't even consider hiring a pregnant candidate either. Of course you cannot ask the woman if she's pregnant, but if she volunteers the information or if it's obvious by appearance, it's "thank you for your interest in our company." If she is offered a position and springs the news soon after hiring, well, that's what the 90 day probationary period if for.

While your being honest - name that company? They are obvioulsy unafraid of their practices.

 

[morgan98]

I'm not a hiring manager, and I'm in the US, and our company doesn't even consider hiring a pregnant candidate either. Of course you cannot ask the woman if she's pregnant, but if she volunteers the information or if it's obvious by appearance, it's "thank you for your interest in our company." If she is offered a position and springs the news soon after hiring, well, that's what the 90 day probationary period if for.

I know that the purpose of a probationary period is to basically be able to terminate without a lot of cause or paperwork, but to say "that's what the 90 day probationary period is for" basically says if within 90 days of hire we find out you are pregnant, your are fired is just plain wrong. So if you hired a man, and within the first 90 days he needed leave for his cancer treatment, I assume your company would let him go too, correct? (If he knew he was sick, but did not disclose it in an interview).

Believe me, I am in upper management of a good sized organization and we pay attention to labor laws and we do no behave like this. Some of these behaviors really are blatant discrimination.

Also, I have worked full time (tons of overtime for 23 years now out of school). I mean crazy public accounting hours. I never had children, so I never had a maternity leave. However, something can happen to me at any time (or my husband at his job). All I can say is I hope our employers have just a little more compassion and integrity than appear on these boards. I know mine would.

I have also covered for numerous co workers over the years who were on leave, some in the middle of tax season. I am salary so no extra pay. It is called life and for the most part you step up and do it, especially if your co-worker is a good performer. I always figured someone may need to help me out one day.

I understand the cost and the inconvenience, but still...

 

[Minniesgal]

i really don't see the difference to the kids being educated of the OP is pregnant now and needs leave this year or gets pregnant two years from now and needs leave then. this should be a non issue.

at the end of the day female teachers have a right to get pregnant. pregnancy cannot fit into the time when a teacher is not teaching. schools are going to be inconvenienced at some point. makes no difference if it is this year or another.

 

[MickeySP]

Plus I am sure the sub costs less than $300,000 - which BTW is the fine for discrimating for pregnancy

 

[anniemae]

i really don't see the difference to the kids being educated of the OP is pregnant now and needs leave this year or gets pregnant two years from now and needs leave then. this should be a non issue.

at the end of the day female teachers have a right to get pregnant. pregnancy cannot fit into the time when a teacher is not teaching. schools are going to be inconvenienced at some point. makes no difference if it is this year or another.

Exactly, which is why she should be honest so they can work with her to plan out her absence. Now as others have said being honest has it's drawbacks. There will ALWAYS be discrimination in the workplace. No way to stop it. Say someone is not hired because they are over 50, the HR rep will not say, "gee mr. smith we really like you and you are qualified, but you are too old. sorry." No, they will just go with another candidate. No way to stop it. But I personally don't think it's okay to deceive a potential employer just because they may discriminate against me. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[eliza61]

I completely get the economic component and the timing issue. I also know the expense of hiring people. Operations and maintaining margins is my job.

However, I have been around long enough to know that not just pregnancy can cause issues and sometimes the biggest employee problems come from out of nowhere and were not disclosed or detected in the hiring process. I guess I was just shocked to hear so many people basically say they would not hire a pregnant person.

Also, let me be clear. I am not telling her to definitely not disclose her pregnancy. She needs to do what she is comfortable with. I just think she should apply and see what happens. She may not even be selected.

I think one of the problems is that you guys may get the impression that a pregnant women walks in and we automatically discount her. I wish it was that cut and dry, those situations I could stop and fight.

So let me give you an example. last November we went out to colleges for some hiring we needed to do for April. I had 200 candidates that schedule on campus meet and greets, out of that 200 we invited 100 for onsite interviews. now we only had 8 positions. Here's the thing, all of them were pretty much equally qualified so now it comes down to distinguishing yourself from the pack. So I send 8 candidates out to this one project leaders, they are equally qualified but one says I would love the job but I'll need to be gone for 5 weeks shortly. now it's not about not liking pregnant mom's, its about he needs a worker and he needs then immediately and he's got 15 choices.

Remember we have no idea of what type of employees they will be, all we've got are resumes and maybe 4 hours to make a decision. I've only been in recruiting for about 18 months and maybe it's a sad sign if the times but Ive yet to run across any uber outstanding candidate that we couldn't put up aginst 6 more people

Please believe me most H R folks are not callously sitting behind a desk discounting folks without a lot of back and forth

 

[morgan98]

I think one of the problems is that you guys may get the impression that a pregnant women walks in and we automatically discount her. I wish it was that cut and dry, those situations I could stop and fight.

So let me give you an example. last November we went out to colleges for some hiring we needed to do for April. I had 200 candidates that schedule on campus meet and greets, out of that 200 we invited 100 for onsite interviews. now we only had 8 positions. Here's the thing, all of them were pretty much equally qualified so now it comes down to distinguishing yourself from the pack. So I send 8 candidates out to this one project leaders, they are equally qualified but one says I would love the job but I'll need to be gone for 5 weeks shortly. now it's not about not liking pregnant mom's, its about he needs a worker and he needs then immediately and he's got 15 choices.

Remember we have no idea of what type of employees they will be, all we've got are resumes and maybe 4 hours to make a decision. I've only been in recruiting for about 18 months and maybe it's a sad sign if the times but Ive yet to run across any uber outstanding candidate that we couldn't put up aginst 6 more people

Please believe me most H R folks are not callously sitting behind a desk discounting folks without a lot of back and forth

I am not officially in HR but dabble on the outskirts regularly and am familiar with laws. I agree, with all things being equal, it is more difficult to determine with off campus hires. However, if interviewing an experienced candidate, who has excellent references and a strong resume, who otherwise seems like a good performer may need to take a leave, I am just not convinced that not considering them because of pregnancy is the right thing to do.

We hired someone five months ago who is now out on maternity leave. She is a very good employee and her supervisors are fine with her being out and are looking forward to her return.

Our HR department remind us of the laws during the hiring and interview process and over the years have helped the firm work around all sorts of medical leave, pregnancy related or not.