Probation period and pregnancy

[MariaMalac]

How would you manage a situation with an employee who started 1st June 2019, 6 months probation period and now she found out she is pregnant. She is a very good employee, no problems since she’s started. She got pregnant after she started.

 

[fisicx]

I’d say thanks very much but goodbye.

Probably not the nicest thing to do but she will finish probation, you get a few months work then she will be off on maternity leave and may never return.

 

[MariaMalac]

She said she wants to return. Also based on what you can dismiss her? It's a discrimination no?

 

[NicoJ]

One of the employment specialists should post on here in due course, but from my limited knowledge:
1) I would not sack her as, like you said I'm pretty sure that's discrimination (why would you want to anyway if you think she's a good worker?)
2) She will be entitled to maternity leave and will accrue her rights during that time eg holiday pay
3) She will not be entitled to maternity pay due to her length of service being too short so she will need to apply for maternity benefit from the government.

 

[fisicx]

She is on probation so there is no discrimination. You just have to tell them their services are no longer required.

 

[MariaMalac]

After employee announces pregnancy officially and next day you sack her that is unfair dismissal.

We don't want to fire her, she will even be entitled to the SMP because she will be there at least 26 weeks I think. Just gathering info for manager (who is sometimes difficult)

 

[NicoJ]

From the government website you need the following to qualify for maternity pay:

have worked for your employer continuously for at least 26 weeks continuing into the ‘qualifying week’ - the 15th week before the expected week of childbirth

@fisicx - sacking someone because they are pregnant is automatic unfair dismissal so the company would open itself up to an employment tribunal.

 

[STDFR33]

I’d say thanks very much but goodbye.

Probably not the nicest thing to do but she will finish probation, you get a few months work then she will be off on maternity leave and may never return.

But that would be unlawful and make you a hickdead.

 

[Mr D]

OK so besides finding a reason to legally sack someone, what about as the OP says when someone is a good worker and want to keep them?

Anything else the OP needs to know regarding keeping them, besides the fact that babies don't always stick to schedules regarding time off before arriving?

 

[Newchodge]

You should have a risk assessment for the job she does. You need to re-visit that to make sure there are no health and safety risks for a pregnant woman.

You must allow her time off for ante-natal appointments.

Generally just continue to treat her as a valued member of staff.

 

[Bob Morgan]

Why is the Probation Period 6 Months?

 

[Graham Tyers]

I've had exactly this one, apart from mine was a fruit loop and we did sack her.

She took us to tribunal claiming 26k for "damage to feelings" after being employed for three months and us saying we wouldn't take her on after the 3 months probation.

Case took a year and a half to settle.

If she is a good employee I wouldn't hesitate to keep the position open as long as necessary and do whatever I could to help her and her family enjoy the new arrival.

 

[obscure]

Why do companies do probation periods.... they are stupid. You already have a legal probation period of 2 years within which you can fire someone without cause. Telling them they are on three months probation just tells them they need to be on their best behaviour for three months..... meaning you may not see the real them for several months.

 

[Mr D]

Why do companies do probation periods.... they are stupid. You already have a legal probation period of 2 years within which you can fire someone without cause. Telling them they are on three months probation just tells them they need to be on their best behaviour for three months..... meaning you may not see the real them for several months.

Gives employee an idea as to how long they have in order to produce to the right level consistently. It's artificial but then again plenty of things in the world of employees are.

I have had probation extended - the person setting probation had no clue of timescales for results. Also had no clue about targets but I just usually ignored what she came up with.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

'She got pregnant after she started'.....

I'm a little out of touch with this sort of thing but don't most women give it a couple of months before announcing a pregnancy to their nearest and dearest, let alone their new employers?

 

[Newchodge]

'She got pregnant after she started'.....

I'm a little out of touch with this sort of thing but don't most women give it a couple of months before announcing a pregnancy to their nearest and dearest, let alone their new employers?

It doesn't matter. The fact that matters is that she is pregnant. whether she was pregnant when she started or not is irrelevant. She cannot be subjected to any kind of detriment as a result of her pregnancy

 

[ecommerce84]

'She got pregnant after she started'.....

Sounds like they’ve got one hell of an induction.

“You’re now officially one of the team”.

Do you have any jobs going @MariaMalac

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Has the opening post been edited or did I mis-read it? I posted my earlier comment on the basis that it was just over 6 weeks since she started on 1st July?

 

[Mr D]

'She got pregnant after she started'.....

I'm a little out of touch with this sort of thing but don't most women give it a couple of months before announcing a pregnancy to their nearest and dearest, let alone their new employers?

It takes 2 months for a working woman to notice and a couple of weeks for a schoolgirl to notice?
Any idea why the difference in timescales?

 

[Newchodge]

She is on probation so there is no discrimination. You just have to tell them their services are no longer required.

It doesn't work like that. She is pregnant, she is sacked after announcing she is pregnant. Unless the employer has good, documented reasons for the dismissal they would be likely to lose an ET. Discrimination claims are not subject to the 2 year employment before the right to take a claim.

 

[Newchodge]

Has the opening post been edited or did I mis-read it? I posted my earlier comment on the basis that it was just over 6 weeks since she started on 1st July?

I think it always said 1 June.

 

[David White]

Congratulations on your bundle of joy (assuming you are posting about you).

You don't have to tell your employer you're pregnant until the 15th week before your baby is due. If you have been a good employee so far then why not continue to be one and I am hopeful your employer will see that and treat you fairly.

You'll find some good quality information and links to further resources on the NHS site here.

 

[alan1302]

Congratulations on your bundle of joy (assuming you are posting about you).

You don't have to tell your employer you're pregnant until the 15th week before your baby is due. If you have been a good employee so far then why not continue to be one and I am hopeful your employer will see that and treat you fairly.

You'll find some good quality information and links to further resources on the NHS site here.

Hands up who didn't read the original post! LOL

 

[David White]

Hands up who didn't read the original post! LOL

Considering you've not bothered contributing anything to this thread, why exactly are you here Alan?

The original post struck me like it was the pregnant person asking anonymously for themselves.

Keep up with your great contribution to UKBF anyway

 

[Newchodge]

Considering you've not bothered contributing anything to this thread, why exactly are you here Alan?

The original post struck me like it was the pregnant person asking anonymously for themselves.

Keep up with your great contribution to UKBF anyway

Congratulations on a courteous and useful response here, @David White
How anyone with half a brain could read the first post as coming from the employee and not the employer, even without the reinforcement of the latre posts, is beyond me.

 

[David White]

Congratulations on a courteous and useful response here, @David White
How anyone with half a brain could read the first post as coming from the employee and not the employer, even without the reinforcement of the latre posts, is beyond me.

You've been using this forum long enough to know how frequently people post on here pretending not to be the person their asking questions about.

I admit to having missed a couple of the follow up comments which made it clear it wasn't the case.

Regardless, just like your post (and mine now) the last was irrelevant to the topic and unnecessary. We all know too well there's people who thrive off getting attention on here rather than adding value. Let's not add ourselves to that list.

 

[alan1302]

Considering you've not bothered contributing anything to this thread, why exactly are you here Alan?

The original post struck me like it was the pregnant person asking anonymously for themselves.

Keep up with your great contribution to UKBF anyway

I am here for what most people are here for - to get info about UK Businesses.

Keep up with giving information about things people have not asked for ;-)

 

[alan1302]

I admit to having missed a couple of the follow up comments which made it clear it wasn't the case.

The first post made it quite clear.

 

[STDFR33]

The first post made it quite clear.

So someone misread something? Who cares?

It's just derailing the thread when people continue with their pointless sniping and point scoring.

 

[alan1302]

So someone misread something? Who cares?

It's just derailing the thread when people continue with their pointless sniping and point scoring.

The first reply was tongue in cheek reply -hence the 'LOL' at the end of what I put. And to be fair reading and understanding what someone asks is quite important to replies on a forum.

Is derailing the thread like your post then ;-)

 

[Newchodge]

You've been using this forum long enough to know how frequently people post on here pretending not to be the person their asking questions about.

I admit to having missed a couple of the follow up comments which made it clear it wasn't the case.

Regardless, just like your post (and mine now) the last was irrelevant to the topic and unnecessary. We all know too well there's people who thrive off getting attention on here rather than adding value. Let's not add ourselves to that list.

What va;ue did you add when the OP had received all the advice they needed 4 days before you reopened the post?

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Sounds like a handbags at dawn moment coming on...

Woohoo!!

I'm grabbing the popcorn!!

Psst... my money's on Cyndy!!

 

[STDFR33]

Psst... my money's on Cyndy!!

There isn't a winner. It's a bit pathetic really, isn't it

 

[Newchodge]

HE STARTED IT.

OK, apologies.

 

[Mr D]

There isn't a winner. It's a bit pathetic really, isn't it

Use it in the sequel to Fight Club.

Fight Like A Girl Club.