Pregnant When Applying For Employment.

[Trapper John]

It should be up to the woman concerned if she wants to disclose she is pregnant. She shouldn't be compelled to do so however.

In any event I don't think employers have that much to worry about in this regard. While a vanishingly small number of women may try and game the system and take blatant advantage of maternity rights I doubt it happens that often. In addition, finding good quality staff and hiring in general can be an expensive and difficult process so I suspect if a woman is the right candidate then a decent firm will work with her to accommodate her pregnancy. It's this kind of co-operation which helps bind loyalty to an employer and is to their advantage.

A bit of a narrow view if I might say and also a bit dated too.

You may not say so. I would refer you to the forum rules where it says disagreeing with me is forbidden.

Narrow / dated in the terms of my points may be applicable to only certain firms / sectors and a number of women do game the system something else?

Excuse me for not highlighting the bits I'm referring to. Your view assumes that these women are in or applying for jobs in skilled or highly skilled areas, whereas the majority of people this would affect are just expendable cannon fodder.

Loyalty from employees only stretches so far, usually up until an employer wants to get rid of them.

[Avon Barksdale]

It should be up to the woman concerned if she wants to disclose she is pregnant. She shouldn't be compelled to do so however.

In any event I don't think employers have that much to worry about in this regard. While a vanishingly small number of women may try and game the system and take blatant advantage of maternity rights I doubt it happens that often. In addition, finding good quality staff and hiring in general can be an expensive and difficult process so I suspect if a woman is the right candidate then a decent firm will work with her to accommodate her pregnancy. It's this kind of co-operation which helps bind loyalty to an employer and is to their advantage.

A bit of a narrow view if I might say and also a bit dated too.

You may not say so. I would refer you to the forum rules where it says disagreeing with me is forbidden.

Narrow / dated in the terms of my points may be applicable to only certain firms / sectors and a number of women do game the system something else?

Excuse me for not highlighting the bits I'm referring to. Your view assumes that these women are in or applying for jobs in skilled or highly skilled areas, whereas the majority of people this would affect are just expendable cannon fodder.

Loyalty from employees only stretches so far, usually up until an employer wants to get rid of them.

Fair point.

There's certainly an argument to be made that maternity leave is primarily a middle class concern promoted by middle class people for their own benefit.

Also, it unnerves me when you are being polite...

[Trapper John]

It should be up to the woman concerned if she wants to disclose she is pregnant. She shouldn't be compelled to do so however.

In any event I don't think employers have that much to worry about in this regard. While a vanishingly small number of women may try and game the system and take blatant advantage of maternity rights I doubt it happens that often. In addition, finding good quality staff and hiring in general can be an expensive and difficult process so I suspect if a woman is the right candidate then a decent firm will work with her to accommodate her pregnancy. It's this kind of co-operation which helps bind loyalty to an employer and is to their advantage.

A bit of a narrow view if I might say and also a bit dated too.

You may not say so. I would refer you to the forum rules where it says disagreeing with me is forbidden.

Narrow / dated in the terms of my points may be applicable to only certain firms / sectors and a number of women do game the system something else?

Excuse me for not highlighting the bits I'm referring to. Your view assumes that these women are in or applying for jobs in skilled or highly skilled areas, whereas the majority of people this would affect are just expendable cannon fodder.

Loyalty from employees only stretches so far, usually up until an employer wants to get rid of them.

Fair point.

There's certainly an argument to be made that maternity leave is primarily a middle class concern promoted by middle class people for their own benefit.

Also, it unnerves me when you are being polite...

I'm always very polite, right up until I'm not.

[Snookerballs]

As trapper states this is more of a Middle Class employment situation.

For lower class workers the employers always have " Zero Hours" contracts to fall back on regarding Pregnancy

[Major]

Forumuz come out with all sorts of guff but the quqestion remains and refers back to the OP.

Would you as a 6 person business wanna waste ya OWN money??????????

[Avon Barksdale]

Forumuz come out with all sorts of guff but the quqestion remains and refers back to the OP.

Would you as a 6 person business wanna waste ya OWN money??????????

Depends on the business and the candidates.

Let's say you own a small accountancy firm and you have two candidates for the role: a pregnant woman and a man.

The pregnant woman went to a Russell Group uni, trained at one of the big four firm and has a following. She wants to join your company because she wants a better work / life balance. She can work remotely if needs be and it is clear she can potentially bring in a lot of business in the future.

The man has less stellar academics, worked in an ordinary firm and has no following.

In that situation I would choose the pregnant woman.

Also, there's a broader point. It is often said that families are one of the principles institutions for the success of a country or a society. Shouldn't we, as a matter of public good, support them which includes maternity / paternity leave?

[Rockstar]

Forumuz come out with all sorts of guff but the quqestion remains and refers back to the OP.

Would you as a 6 person business wanna waste ya OWN money??????????

Depends on the business and the candidates.

Let's say you own a small accountancy firm and you have two candidates for the role: a pregnant woman and a man.

The pregnant woman went to a Russell Group uni, trained at one of the big four firm and has a following. She wants to join your company because she wants a better work / life balance. She can work remotely if needs be and it is clear she can potentially bring in a lot of business in the future.

The man has less stellar academics, worked in an ordinary firm and has no following.

In that situation I would choose the pregnant woman.

Also, there's a broader point. It is often said that families are one of the principles institutions for the success of a country or a society. Shouldn't we, as a matter of public good, support them which includes maternity / paternity leave?

Your skewed scenario doesn't add up to the opinion you are asserting...

All things balanced...it is lesser headache and more profit to hire a non pregnant person over a pregnant one.

[Avon Barksdale]

Forumuz come out with all sorts of guff but the quqestion remains and refers back to the OP.

Would you as a 6 person business wanna waste ya OWN money??????????

Depends on the business and the candidates.

Let's say you own a small accountancy firm and you have two candidates for the role: a pregnant woman and a man.

The pregnant woman went to a Russell Group uni, trained at one of the big four firm and has a following. She wants to join your company because she wants a better work / life balance. She can work remotely if needs be and it is clear she can potentially bring in a lot of business in the future.

The man has less stellar academics, worked in an ordinary firm and has no following.

In that situation I would choose the pregnant woman.

Also, there's a broader point. It is often said that families are one of the principles institutions for the success of a country or a society. Shouldn't we, as a matter of public good, support them which includes maternity / paternity leave?

Your skewed scenario doesn't add up to the opinion you are asserting...

All things balanced...it is lesser headache and more profit to hire a non pregnant person over a pregnant one.

Yes, presuming all things are equal.

However, in the event that the pregnant candidate can bring more to the business over the medium to long term than the non-pregnant one then it is worth the short term inconvenience.

[Snookerballs]

Forumuz come out with all sorts of guff but the quqestion remains and refers back to the OP.

Would you as a 6 person business wanna waste ya OWN money??????????

Check your facts before demanding that Forum Members should always agree that your posts are right.

An employer claims back Maternity Leave and in certain circumstances it can be enhanced to a higher rate from the Government,
So it is nothing to do with the Firms Money.

[Rockstar]

Yes, presuming all things are equal.

However, in the event that the pregnant candidate can bring more to the business over the medium to long term than the non-pregnant one then it is worth the short term inconvenience.

That's true for every indispensable employee in the eyes of the employer...

[Trapper John]

If women didn't work and did what they are supposed to do, ie stay at home and look after the house and kids and ensure you have clean clothes and a dinner on the table for when you get home, we wouldn't have to be discussing this problem.

Bloody women, you let them out the house to work and this is what happens, we all knew they would never be satisfied and have to keep pushing and pushing.

[Avon Barksdale]

Yes, presuming all things are equal.

However, in the event that the pregnant candidate can bring more to the business over the medium to long term than the non-pregnant one then it is worth the short term inconvenience.

That's true for every indispensable employee in the eyes of the employer...

Undoubtedly and value to the business can depend on a number of variables which outweighs absence from it for a length of time.

With the rise of remote working in some sectors being physically present in the office isn't as important as it used to be.

[Snookerballs]

Emmeline Pankhurst has a lot to answer to !

[Lady Murasaki]

If women didn't work and did what they are supposed to do, ie stay at home and look after the house and kids and ensure you have clean clothes and a dinner on the table for when you get home, we wouldn't have to be discussing this problem.

Bloody women, you let them out the house to work and this is what happens, we all knew they would never be satisfied and have to keep pushing and pushing.

Does equality of opportunity in the workplace between the sexes intimidate you?

[Lady Murasaki]

Emmeline Pankhurst has a lot to answer to !

Yeah, we end up doing everybloodything!