Full disclosure upon application?

[mayerling]

What would you do?

As some of you may know, I recently got my BFP. We don't intend to tell our families for another month and we won't tell others until we reach 13 weeks.

Here's my problem: I'm applying for a job over the next couple of weeks. It's in my field and it's on a fixed-term basis for two years. I'm almost certain I'll be invited for an interview and I think I actually have a shot of being offered the job. If I am offered the job I'll be about 6 weeks along. The job doesn't start until after the holidays, which would put me past the 13 week mark at which point I could let them know. I have no intention of telling them at the interview (I don't want anybody to know and this firm employs a bunch of people I know so word would get around). Now, do you think it's ok to just leave it and tell them once I start and I just let them deal with me having to go on maternity leave a few months down the line? Or should I just not apply because it wouldn't be fair to them?

Of course, I could just stop thinking about this and worry about it if and when I am offered the job.

 

[megumic]

I always take a very feminist position on things like this. Definitely apply, definitely don't tell them, definitely don't worry about it. If your partner was applying to a new job, he wouldn't tell them you're pregnant and feel it would jeopardize anything. You should do the same. Just because you're carrying a baby doesn't make you less qualified or disqualified for the position, and certainly shouldn't hinder you from applying. In my opinion, that is the unfair part, that you feel your pregnancy would be unfair to the employer. That is BS in my opinion, even though I can understand you'd feel that way and I know I would as well. Definitely apply and do not worry about it for one darn second!

And CONGRATS again

 

[QueenB29]

I wouldn't tell them unless/until they offer you a job. You don't want to give them an excuse to not hire you. (I know legally it shouldn't matter, but I wouldn't be surprised if they suddenly found another candidate who was more "qualified.") The one thing I would really be concerned about if I were you, is that if you're hired, you may not qualify for maternity leave at all. The company's private benefits aside, I don't think they're required to give you the Family Medical Leave Act if you're there less than a year. Perhaps someone else with HR experience can jump in?

 

[stephbolt]

I agree with you that you should not disclose anything during the interview. I might bring it up after you are offered the job, but that would depend how things work regarding maternity leave in the UK (I think that's where you are, sorry if I'm wrong!). In the US you have to be at a job 12 months before giving birth in a lot of cases to be eligible for leave, so I would bring it up to discuss my options with the employer. But if it will not affect your leave then I say tell them when you are comfortable, and don't give another thought to whether it is fair or not to take the job. You are a qualified candidate and the fact that you're carrying a baby shouldn't affect your performance and abilities.

 

[mayerling]

Thanks for the advice, ladies.

Regarding maternity leave in the UK, in order to be eligible for paid maternity leave from an employer you have to have been working for them for 26 weeks before the 15th week before your due date. So basically, you have to have been working for them before getting pregnant.

But thankfully, being in the UK means that I can just get unpaid leave from my employer and the government will pay me a maternity allowance of £123 per week for 26 weeks (or is it 39?) as long as I have enough national insurance contributions - which I do. It's not as much as I would get if I was already working for them but it's still something.

 

[monkeyprincess]

I agree in theory that you should not have to tell them you're pregnant during the application process. However, what concerns me a bit about this particular position is that you said it was a two-year fixed term position. To me, that sounds like you are committing to being with them for two years, and they hire you with the expectation you will be there the full two years. I used to be a judicial law clerk for a federal judge here in the U.S., and I was hired for a two-year term. I wasn't married at the time, so it wasn't an issue for me, but I would not have taken the positions if I had intended to get pregnant during the two-year term because the judge was counting on me to serve the full term without interruption. Maybe your situation is completely different, but that is just another angle to consider.

 

[QueenB29]

mayerling, glad the leave at least won't be an issue.

I agree in theory that you should not have to tell them you're pregnant during the application process. However, what concerns me a bit about this particular position is that you said it was a two-year fixed term position. To me, that sounds like you are committing to being with them for two years, and they hire you with the expectation you will be there the full two years. I used to be a judicial law clerk for a federal judge here in the U.S., and I was hired for a two-year term. I wasn't married at the time, so it wasn't an issue for me, but I would not have taken the positions if I had intended to get pregnant during the two-year term because the judge was counting on me to serve the full term without interruption. Maybe your situation is completely different, but that is just another angle to consider.

monkey princess brings up a good point. I think in the UK you can take 6 months to a year off, right? If that's the case, you'd be missing a significant chunk of the job itself.

 

[mayerling]

MP, that's what concerns me; that I will be leaving them during the fixed-term contract. However, it's not the sort of position where the work will be going on without me there, or where they'll need to find somebody else to fill in for me. The work would just be on hold while I'm away and continued when I get back.

I guess this is sort of a pet peeve of mine. I'm fundamentally opposed to people offering fixed-term positions because it means that somebody has to put their life on hold if they take the job. Of course, they could always say that they're not forcing anybody to apply...

 

[Pandora II]

The fact it is a fixed term contract and that you are already pregnant might put me off applying altogether. Is it the kind of work that could easily be put on hold while you were away for a year? You should be able to claim Maternity Allowance if you are not working I think, and the SMP lasts for 39 weeks at present. You will also get £80 a month in Child Benefit after the birth - not much but it pays for shoes and nappies!

If it was a permanent position then I would say to go for it and tell them later on.

I ended up having to sue my employer who tried to make me redundant when I told them I was pregnant - I'd worked for them for nearly 4 years at that point and we were all set to hire my new full-time assistant the week before. Hence I am a little leery about getting into situations where life can be made VERY unpleasant.

 

[mayerling]

Thanks for the info, Pandora. I'm not sure they would be able to make me redundant upon learning I'm pregnant (equal opportunities and all), but I can certainly imagine an unpleasant rapport with my bosses. As for the work, yes I definitely think it's something that could wait. I just don't think it's right for employers to expect women to put their lives on hold for the duration of fixed-term contracts. Also, I'm definitely eligible for maternity allowance as I have been working on a part-time basis and have enough national insurance contributions. I just don't like the thought of having to be unemployed for the entire duration of my pregnancy.

 

[Pandora II]

Thanks for the info, Pandora. I'm not sure they would be able to make me redundant upon learning I'm pregnant (equal opportunities and all), but I can certainly imagine an unpleasant rapport with my bosses. As for the work, yes I definitely think it's something that could wait. I just don't think it's right for employers to expect women to put their lives on hold for the duration of fixed-term contracts. Also, I'm definitely eligible for maternity allowance as I have been working on a part-time basis and have enough national insurance contributions. I just don't like the thought of having to be unemployed for the entire duration of my pregnancy.

I would have agreed before what happened to me happened - and I worked for a large and very well known organisation who would be the last people in the world you would believe would have done it. People who I have told have literally had their jaws drop.

Even if you do have a good case - and I had an extremely strong case - believe me it is a very hard and stressful slog sueing for sex discrimination. It cost me every spare minute of my entire pregnancy, the first 6 months of my daughter's life and many thousands of pounds in legal fees before we settled out of court. Even though I received a substantial sum it was not worth the extreme stress, emotional upset and being extremely ill with antenatal depression for 4 months. So although you legally have protection, in reality you have less than you would imagine and you really do not want to go there.

There is the probability of a probation period in the contract and if there is, during that time you can be let go without much reason and your chances of winning a case on that basis are very slim.

Agreed that you shouldn't be expected to put your life on hold, but you would be risking your reputation and chances of working with that company in the future. It would also be on any references - and that might not go down too well with future employers.

I ran the scenario past a few people this afternoon who are all pretty strong on womens rights in maternity situations and they all thought you should definitely apply until I told them it was a 2 year contract. All four of them said they wouldn't apply for a 2 year fixed term contract knowing that they were already pregnant.

ETA: They all thought that is was fine to get the job and then try for a baby - the chances are that you would be in the second year by the time the baby was due, you would have already built up a relationship with the company before you spring the news on them and it would just be easier all round and better for your reputation.

 

[amc80]

I'm not sure how contracts work, but if you can't complete the terms of the contract, can they let you go? Or is pregnancy protected? As an employer I would be pretty upset if someone knew they wouldn't be able to complete their contract before even starting, regardless of the reason.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Since it is a two year contract I would be honest with them. It really isn't fair to the employer if you can't knowingly fulfill the commitment.

 

[sparklyheart]

​

I'm not sure how contracts work, but if you can't complete the terms of the contract, can they let you go? Or is pregnancy protected? As an employer I would be pretty upset if someone knew they wouldn't be able to complete their contract before even starting, regardless of the reason.

I agree. Other people have said they think it's unfair for a company expect a woman to put her life "on hold" for two years but I think it's unfair to apply for a two year job when you know ahead of time you will be gone for 39 weeks out of that period. They want/need someone who can come work for them for two years and you are already saying you won't be there for about a quarter of the time... If you were to get pregnant in the middle of the two year term then you could deal with that with your employer but to knowingly enter into a contract that you know you can't fulfill seems dishonest to me.

I am completely supportive of pregnant women keeping it quiet when applying for a job without a time limit. The fact that it has a time limitation is what makes applying for the job seem dishonest.

 

[mayerling]

Thanks, everyone, for the replies. I understand what you're saying. I'm in two minds about it too, which is why I'm asking for advice.

Just to clarify, though. Going on maternity leave doesn't mean I wouldn't be able to fulfill the terms of my contract. It just means that the project would be put on hold until my return.

Pandora, I know what you mean about references. It worries me too. And you have a point about the probationary period; it would just give them a blanket excuse to let me go.

 

[Pandora II]

I would definitely worry about the probabtion, I've seen a number of people dismissed in the first 3 months recently.

Sparklyheart - here we are entitled to take 52 weeks off - of which 39 are paid. On top of that, you can take any outstanding holiday leave plus the leave that you accrue during your year off (generally about 6 weeks vacation plus statutory days) so you can be on Maternity Leave for about 14 months.

Mayerling, IIRC you got married quite recently? If so, and you are in your mid-20's upwards and you do apply and get offered the job then I would say that they should anticipate you getting pregnant.

I applied for a number of posts for which I was very well qualified around the time I was getting married. I got shortlisted but didn't get any of the jobs. A couple of my male friends then told me that it was pointless my even applying because I was 36 and about to get married and so had 'Maternity Leave' stamped in big letters all over me. Never provable but definitely true and I do understand the position of the companies since none of the roles would have been easy ones to get maternity cover for.

 

[slg47]

I would definitely worry about the probabtion, I've seen a number of people dismissed in the first 3 months recently.

Sparklyheart - here we are entitled to take 52 weeks off - of which 39 are paid. On top of that, you can take any outstanding holiday leave plus the leave that you accrue during your year off (generally about 6 weeks vacation plus statutory days) so you can be on Maternity Leave for about 14 months.

Mayerling, IIRC you got married quite recently? If so, and you are in your mid-20's upwards and you do apply and get offered the job then I would say that they should anticipate you getting pregnant.

I applied for a number of posts for which I was very well qualified around the time I was getting married. I got shortlisted but didn't get any of the jobs. A couple of my male friends then told me that it was pointless my even applying because I was 36 and about to get married and so had 'Maternity Leave' stamped in big letters all over me. Never provable but definitely true and I do understand the position of the companies since none of the roles would have been easy ones to get maternity cover for.

Pandora this is really interesting...how did the employers know you were about to get married?

interestingly my FI is interviewing for a job tomorrow and the advice in that field is to /not/ mention that you have a wife/girlfriend/etc because they might be less likely to hire you...

 

[Pandora II]

Engagement ring but no wedding band is a bit of a give away. My engagement ring is also a bit unusual not being the standard diamond and so I got asked about it quite often. Being evasive or lying isn't a great way to begin interviews so I was honest.

Plus I worked in politics which is a very incestuous world where everyone knows everyone and there is a complete blend between work and social life so some of them already knew especially as my husband was also a client of several of the companies. Also my maiden name was very unusual, I was a politician at the time and the local papers had announced both my engagement and various things on my wedding (would my dress be in my political party's colours for example).

To be honest, I don't think it's as simple as them actually saying 'nope, can't hire her because she'll get knocked up' otherwise I'd never have got past the first round, but I do think it's a subconcious thought that probably played into them not selecting me as the final candidate.

I'm very suprised that your FI has been told not to mention a wife/girlfriend. In the UK it tends to be the opposite - they like men to be married with kids as it makes them seem more stable and dependable, plus they are more likely to be loyal and long-term employees as they have responsibilities.

 

[slg47]

Engagement ring but no wedding band is a bit of a give away. My engagement ring is also a bit unusual not being the standard diamond and so I got asked about it quite often. Being evasive or lying isn't a great way to begin interviews so I was honest.

Plus I worked in politics which is a very incestuous world where everyone knows everyone and there is a complete blend between work and social life so some of them already knew especially as my husband was also a client of several of the companies. Also my maiden name was very unusual, I was a politician at the time and the local papers had announced both my engagement and various things on my wedding (would my dress be in my political party's colours for example).

To be honest, I don't think it's as simple as them actually saying 'nope, can't hire her because she'll get knocked up' otherwise I'd never have got past the first round, but I do think it's a subconcious thought that probably played into them not selecting me as the final candidate.

I'm very suprised that your FI has been told not to mention a wife/girlfriend. In the UK it tends to be the opposite - they like men to be married with kids as it makes them seem more stable and dependable, plus they are more likely to be loyal and long-term employees as they have responsibilities.

I think it's only because of the field...I think in other jobs they like men to be married. In academia they don't want any women who are going to have jobs and make the man have to move or have other priorities other than work...

 

[Dreamer_D]

I would not tell them and likely would not share I was pregnant until it became impossible to hide. It is none of their business. Pregnancy is part of life.

 

[iheartscience]

I would not tell them and likely would not share I was pregnant until it became impossible to hide. It is none of their business. Pregnancy is part of life.

Ditto!

 

[mayerling]

Dreamer and Thing, your response is encouraging. That's how I see it, but I guess I'm just sad I might be screwing with them by leading them to believe I'll see their project through in the time span they've set...

 

[zoebartlett]

Dreamer and Thing, your response is encouraging. That's how I see it, but I guess I'm just sad I might be screwing with them by leading them to believe I'll see their project through in the time span they've set...

This is the reason I'd most likely pass on the application and wait to apply for another position. I definitely understand Dreamer's and Thing's point and I'd usually agree, but in this case, you already know you'd be putting off your work for a year. Honestly, I don't think it's fair to do that to an employer (especially given that it's only a 2 year contract). I know you said the work would wait, but is it fair to accept a job and then walk away from it for a year? Just out of curiosity, what type of position is it?

 

[Pandora II]

Dreamer and Thing, your response is encouraging. That's how I see it, but I guess I'm just sad I might be screwing with them by leading them to believe I'll see their project through in the time span they've set...

This is the reason I'd most likely pass on the application and wait to apply for another position. I definitely understand Dreamer's and Thing's point and I'd usually agree, but in this case, you already know you'd be putting off your work for a year. Honestly, I don't think it's fair to do that to an employer (especially given that it's only a 2 year contract). I know you said the work would wait, but is it fair to accept a job and then walk away from it for a year? Just out of curiosity, what type of position is it?

I'd take a slightly different view - since I'm not big on loyalty to employers these days - that it is a case of being fair to yourself. A fixed term contract is not a permanent position, therefore you are going to be on the job market again in a couple of years and you don't want to be doing that with current employer not seeing you in a 100% favourable light.

 

[mayerling]

Pandora, the employer rapport issue has been on my mind as well; especially given the UK insistence of requiring a reference from the last employer.

 

[Jennifer W]

I'm with Dreamer and Thing2.

My 'break' into my first research job came about because someone took maternity leave during a fixed term contract, so I'm probably biased. I wouldn't likely have been considered to run the whole project from the outset, because I had no experience, but they were looking for someone with my qualifications in a hurry, who wouldn't mind working on someone else's project design. It was perfect for me. No one was upset or annoyed with the postholder, just pleased for her.

Is it a public sector employer? References from them will not be likely to take a negative tone because you went on maternity leave. Private sector, I'd be less confident of.

References from previous employer can be 'managed' unless it's a tiny firm - someone in a management role in that workplace will like you.

ETA I would apply and if called for interview, attend. You can always make a final decision when they offer the post to you. Don't talk yourself out of what could be a good opportunity at this stage, and get a feel for how the land lies, and how the company or organisation would be likely to respond to maternity leave on a fixed term contract.

Edited for spelling

 

[Pandora II]

Jennifer, just out of interest was the person already pregnant when they took on the contract - as I do think that can make a difference. Pregnancy can happen by accident or be a situation where you just don't know how long it could take - you could get KU the first month or take a year or more, and a woman shouldn't have to put her life on hold for her job.

I do have a friend who went to work for Citigroup - she was 3 months pregnant when she was offered the job. She told them straight out when she got the offer and said that she would understand if they wanted to withdraw it. They said that they were fine with it, but she only took 12 weeks maternity leave and she was exceptionally qualified for the position and they had been searching for a long time to fill the role.

I think in Mayerlings position that it's not a project that someone else could put on hold - they'd have to wait for her to come back to complete the project.

Mayerling, the type of industry is also a consideration. While companies can't actively give you a bad reference there is a way of writing between the lines. If the industry is also small and incestuous that can be a problem as what gets said in person isn't traceable the way a written reference can be.

I certainly don't want to put you off - I think it would be a good thing to go for the interviews etc for example - I'm just thinking from the perspective of someone who was on the receiving end of blatant sex discrimination due to pregnancy, and I know how I felt about reapplying for jobs wondering what had been said about me, what I should say in answer to questions, whether I would be seen as a risk etc and know how that feels.

 

[mayerling]

Pandora, the area I've applied for is a bit incestuous. Everybody knows everybody and word would get out quite quickly. I do think it would be a situation where if they wanted they could easily fire me and hire somebody else, allow me to go on maternity leave but get somebody else to work while I'm away, or put the project on hold and wait for me to come back. So I would be upset if they were miffed that I'm pregnant but I do understand that they would be hiring me on the assumption that I would see the project through.

 

[yssie]

slg that's really interesting. Is he looking for tenure track professorships? When we were in the Bay Area I had the opposite experience - I was advised to always wear my band to make myself look more tied to the area, but I'm a programmer and I guess it makes sense they would worry about high turnover out there specifically, whereas professorships aren't exactly mobile positions so people looking for them are usually willing to stay, so the other concerns like spouses taking up time rise to the top...


ETA: Just realised your post is a week old now - I hope his interview went well!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Dreamer and Thing, your response is encouraging. That's how I see it, but I guess I'm just sad I might be screwing with them by leading them to believe I'll see their project through in the time span they've set...

You cannot predict the future with pregnancy and childbirth, that is part of why I see things this way. This is very negative to say, but it is a realistic point of view. So in my opinon you progress as if you are not pregnant until you have a baby in your arms (exaggerated but you get my point).

I personally did not disclose my pregnancy when I was on the job market and just showed up to the interviews heavily pregnant. I was 7 months along and deferred starting my job by 6 months for mat leave. I really and truly believe that accommodation of pregnant women is a right. Our countries agree (I am in Canada) and have government mandated leave and pay. To me, that means my pregnancy is my business. The end.

I did not tell my employer in my second pregnancy that I was pregnant until I was 18 weeks, even though it meant once I disclosed we had to shuffle the teaching schedule.

In neither instance was there any negative reaction whatsoever.