"Women should reveal baby plans to bosses"
Discussion
Ozzie Osmond said:
For as long as the law stays the way it is the sad fact will be that employing young women is a huge headache.
Out of interest in what industry is the company that you own and/or run? Employing young women has it's challenges just like employing young men. They are different challenges and ymmv with either.Ozzie Osmond said:
As some may know, maternity pay includes an elemnt of "bonus" if a bonus has perviously been earned. One of my colleagues wanted to pay a one-off discretionary bonus to a pregnant woman. The situation was discussed and she promised him that she would say 'thank you' for the one-off bonus and not try to make any further claims based on it. Guess what happened next....?
A "one-off" discretionary bonus does not fall under wages for the sale of maternity pay unless your company has a policy to say it did. "Earned" bonus like periodic target linked/performance would have to be considered.ringram said:
Yeah if the coalition want to help small businesses change employment laws.
Make hiring and firing the bosses responsibility. If he is an arse, then dont work for him.
If you are lazy no matter what minority you come from tough, you will get sacked, no comeback.
If you are good and in a minority you have nothing to fear.
I know a "company" who wont touch certain types of employee because of the strong anti capitalist employment laws. They are straight out of some communist manifesto at present.
If there is no comeback then how can there be no fear.Make hiring and firing the bosses responsibility. If he is an arse, then dont work for him.
If you are lazy no matter what minority you come from tough, you will get sacked, no comeback.
If you are good and in a minority you have nothing to fear.
I know a "company" who wont touch certain types of employee because of the strong anti capitalist employment laws. They are straight out of some communist manifesto at present.
That's not to say that employment law should be too strong - in fact the rules on employment tribunals are far too heavily against companies.
But let's not exaggerate. Like someone said, if you can't cope as a small business with someone going on leave for 6-12 months to have a baby then you have a pretty flimsy business model or are a pretty woeful manager.
oyster said:
if you can't cope as a small business with someone going on leave for 6-12 months to have a baby then you have a pretty flimsy business model or are a pretty woeful manager.
Well thankyou for that guidance. There are many businesses where employees are actually an inmportant part of the machinery and if they decide not to turn up to work for a few months it does actually make life rather difficult. Especially as you don't know if or when they are going to return.Its a bit of a pain in the ass that people still consider women as inferior or a hindrence of some kind when it comes to employment.
So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
Hysteria1983 said:
Its a bit of a pain in the ass that people still consider women as inferior or a hindrence of some kind when it comes to employment.
So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
Thank you for your interest in working for our company, unfortunately you have been unsuccessful on this occasion. We have kept your details on file should any suitable positions become available in the future.So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
BliarOut said:
Thank you for your interest in working for our company, unfortunately you have been unsuccessful on this occasion. We have kept your details on file should any suitable positions become available in the future.
I am no longer a 'threat' to any future employer. I currently do not work, and can no longer have children. Hysteria1983 said:
Its a bit of a pain in the ass that people still consider women as inferior or a hindrence of some kind when it comes to employment.
So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
IMHO, your last paragraph is totally wrong. In both my professional and personal circles in my adult life, when I have had the conversation with women, I could count on one hand the number of them that were 'unsure/undecided' as to the if and when of having children. Some of them I am still in contact with have even now achieved their goals of planned conception within thier desired period and have returned to thier successful careers.So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
Having previously sacked a useless pregnant employee, the only advice to small business owners is evidence, evidence and evidence. Prove they are not fulfilling thier job spec, and you can get rid of them easily.
As for how this may work with the recently-beseeded, wheelchair-bound, minority-group employee, I think it would be a case of taking it on the chin (and in the wallet).
And as for asking the question at interview; I vote YES
fergywales said:
IMHO, your last paragraph is totally wrong. In both my professional and personal circles in my adult life, when I have had the conversation with women, I could count on one hand the number of them that were 'unsure/undecided' as to the if and when of having children. Some of them I am still in contact with have even now achieved their goals of planned conception within thier desired period and have returned to thier successful careers.
Having previously sacked a useless pregnant employee, the only advice to small business owners is evidence, evidence and evidence. Prove they are not fulfilling thier job spec, and you can get rid of them easily.
As for how this may work with the recently-beseeded, wheelchair-bound, minority-group employee, I think it would be a case of taking it on the chin (and in the wallet).
And as for asking the question at interview; I vote YES
I agree, there is no harm in asking the question. Having previously sacked a useless pregnant employee, the only advice to small business owners is evidence, evidence and evidence. Prove they are not fulfilling thier job spec, and you can get rid of them easily.
As for how this may work with the recently-beseeded, wheelchair-bound, minority-group employee, I think it would be a case of taking it on the chin (and in the wallet).
And as for asking the question at interview; I vote YES
Question is irrelevant.
What can you do if they lie?
I know someone who had the choice between a very competent lady with the worlds most annoying nervous laugh of 'a certain age' and a younger lady who was more pleasing on the eye (there would be a lot of client contact with this role so it did count for more than office points) and who seemed to have just as much experience in the area required.
At interview the older lady said nothing about children and it didn’t take the brain of Britain to work out she would be extremely unlikely to needing maternity leave. The younger lady (unbidden) spent a good 10 minutes explaining that she was going back to work having had her child and had absolutely no intention of adding to the family for a myriad of reasons.
Younger lady got the job and after month 13 announced that she might be pregnant...
Having visited their offices not long ago I noted that they had unfortunately had to make a number of redundancies over the last 18 months and that not one single lady was under a certain age.
What can you do if they lie?
I know someone who had the choice between a very competent lady with the worlds most annoying nervous laugh of 'a certain age' and a younger lady who was more pleasing on the eye (there would be a lot of client contact with this role so it did count for more than office points) and who seemed to have just as much experience in the area required.
At interview the older lady said nothing about children and it didn’t take the brain of Britain to work out she would be extremely unlikely to needing maternity leave. The younger lady (unbidden) spent a good 10 minutes explaining that she was going back to work having had her child and had absolutely no intention of adding to the family for a myriad of reasons.
Younger lady got the job and after month 13 announced that she might be pregnant...
Having visited their offices not long ago I noted that they had unfortunately had to make a number of redundancies over the last 18 months and that not one single lady was under a certain age.
rover 623gsi said:
although in reality it would be pretty pointless. If the question is allowed to be asked then why on earth would a woman answer YES if they know it will negatively affect their chances of being offered a job?
Well, surely you could deem it part of the pre-contractual negotiations and therefore in the event that they got pregnant you could then dismiss........... After all, if it's going to be legal to ask it then it would need to be enforceable.
Hysteria1983 said:
Its a bit of a pain in the ass that people still consider women as inferior or a hindrence of some kind when it comes to employment.
So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
I can only assume by your username you are female....So what if it is the woman who has to actually carry a child and shove ot out of her crotch, but the last time I looked into reproduction it took a man (or man juice) to create a baby. Men happily go around spunking into women without the question of contraception.
Its not like all women take on a job knowing that they want to get pregnant in X amount of years. Sure some women might, especially the ones who's biological clocks are ticking, but most of the younger more ambitious women have much more important things to think about than being lumbered with a rug rat.
Eric Mc said:
And what would happen with unplanned pregnancies?
As per normal, legislation gets in the way of trust. The legislation assumes all employers are b
ds.Unplanned pregnancies are a fact of life, it happens, but right now the legislation has two groups of people (employers and employees) trying to deceive each other.
How about this one then.......
Couple go through nearly 4 years, unsuccessfully have 5 attempts at IVF, no joy, all they want is to have a family and build a loving home. An angel comes into their world, and she offers to be a surrogate, amazing! 2nd attempt, unbelievably she falls pregnant!
Intended mother to be, is entitled to NO, that's right ZERO maternity leave. Not even arguing about money, but the law simply states that as she hasn't carried that baby, but will be legally, the parent, as granted by the courts after 6 weeks, she is not entitled to have any time off, to care for, bond or look after the new born baby she has so longed for. The surrogate, is entitled to a full year of maternity pay (if employed) she is self employed, so will go back to work when health allows. So intended mother has to accrue and use all holiday entitlement for the year, isn't allowed to carry over any holiday for this year, and they are even debating whether to allow any unpaid leave. This isnt a small company, this is a large business, employing hundreds of people. No policy on surrogacy, if it's not stated in the law, which it isn't, and if someone could explain why, or how that is right id like to hear it. They don't seem to want to know!!!
Brilliant.
However, as someone who employs people myself, I would like to know plans, and would normally discuss this in our annual appraisals, about the direction everyone wants to go in for the future. We all want different things, and are building the business with this in mind.
Couple go through nearly 4 years, unsuccessfully have 5 attempts at IVF, no joy, all they want is to have a family and build a loving home. An angel comes into their world, and she offers to be a surrogate, amazing! 2nd attempt, unbelievably she falls pregnant!
Intended mother to be, is entitled to NO, that's right ZERO maternity leave. Not even arguing about money, but the law simply states that as she hasn't carried that baby, but will be legally, the parent, as granted by the courts after 6 weeks, she is not entitled to have any time off, to care for, bond or look after the new born baby she has so longed for. The surrogate, is entitled to a full year of maternity pay (if employed) she is self employed, so will go back to work when health allows. So intended mother has to accrue and use all holiday entitlement for the year, isn't allowed to carry over any holiday for this year, and they are even debating whether to allow any unpaid leave. This isnt a small company, this is a large business, employing hundreds of people. No policy on surrogacy, if it's not stated in the law, which it isn't, and if someone could explain why, or how that is right id like to hear it. They don't seem to want to know!!!
Brilliant.
However, as someone who employs people myself, I would like to know plans, and would normally discuss this in our annual appraisals, about the direction everyone wants to go in for the future. We all want different things, and are building the business with this in mind.
oyster said:
But let's not exaggerate. Like someone said, if you can't cope as a small business with someone going on leave for 6-12 months to have a baby then you have a pretty flimsy business model or are a pretty woeful manager.
I think the decision should rest with the owner, not something imposed by Parliament. If the employee is as valuable as she thinks she is then the owner will be prepared to make concessions. In small companies, losing one person, having to employ and train up a temp to replace them (repeat if the temp then gets a permanent job) is a pain that a lot of small businesses cannot afford.tinman0 said:
As per normal, legislation gets in the way of trust. The legislation assumes all employers are bds.
Unplanned pregnancies are a fact of life, it happens, but right now the legislation has two groups of people (employers and employees) trying to deceive each other.
Some employers have turned into unwilling bds.Unplanned pregnancies are a fact of life, it happens, but right now the legislation has two groups of people (employers and employees) trying to deceive each other.
ds because of the legislation
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff