Disclosing pregnancy before start of a new job?

[Anonymous]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1Oe7NfOqNMooHcA5RMRo4PUsKeRyOhc8BDgYRcPiSxRw/htmlview

This spreadsheet has even more companies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed for a (much wanted) job at 28 weeks pregnant. I'm looking at starting it potentially around 33 weeks. Have not yet disclosed (although now it would be visibly very obvious to anyone). At what point should I disclose? How should I navigate the need for leave? I know many would say I was nuts to even apply, but this was a rare opportunity to go after a job closely aligned with my professional ambitions that I've been working towards for nearly two decades.

As a hiring manager, and mom of two toddlers, I would feel much more warmly towards someone who disclosed after accepting the offer but before the first day so I could plan from a training and workload perspective and work with HR to ensure you had a sufficient leave period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, lots of sexism here!

I hired a woman who looked 45 weeks pregnant at the interview (she was short, skinny, and all belly). After we gave the offer, she negotiated to start when Baby was 12 weeks before accepting.

That baby just went to college and Mom still works with us. She is awesome - good employees know that three months is a blip in a career, and anyone can need that kind of leave at anytime. NBD.

Someone diagnosed with cancer is not someone hiding a pregnancy and screwing a new employer.

The literal point of the anti-discrimination law is because pregnant women are not, in fact, “screwing a new employer”. You’re an actual misogynist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, lots of sexism here!

I hired a woman who looked 45 weeks pregnant at the interview (she was short, skinny, and all belly). After we gave the offer, she negotiated to start when Baby was 12 weeks before accepting.

That baby just went to college and Mom still works with us. She is awesome - good employees know that three months is a blip in a career, and anyone can need that kind of leave at anytime. NBD.

Someone diagnosed with cancer is not someone hiding a pregnancy and screwing a new employer.

The literal point of the anti-discrimination law is because pregnant women are not, in fact, “screwing a new employer”. You’re an actual misogynist.

I suspect this anti pregnancy act will be revoked by trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, lots of sexism here!

I hired a woman who looked 45 weeks pregnant at the interview (she was short, skinny, and all belly). After we gave the offer, she negotiated to start when Baby was 12 weeks before accepting.

That baby just went to college and Mom still works with us. She is awesome - good employees know that three months is a blip in a career, and anyone can need that kind of leave at anytime. NBD.

Someone diagnosed with cancer is not someone hiding a pregnancy and screwing a new employer.

The literal point of the anti-discrimination law is because pregnant women are not, in fact, “screwing a new employer”. You’re an actual misogynist.

new poster here

Maternity leave does in fact screw the employer, no matter how much you want to pretend it does not. Employers hire because they need work done. If the employee can't do the work because they are on maternity leave, and the employer can't hire a replacement because they have to save the job for the employee they already hired, how will the work get done?
Either co-workers pick up the slack (which can cause burnout) or hire temps (which is expensive, can be unreliable/not as qualified) or the work just doesn't get done. Explain how this doesn't screw employers?
While some employers might be happy to put up with this for a proven productive employee, I can't blame one for not wanting to start off like this right off the bat with a new one.

[Anonymous]

I also interviewed while pregnant but not showing. Once the interviews progressed enough but before an official offer, I let them know I was pregnant. I figured I didn’t want to work somewhere if that was going to be a problem. I got the offer and as part of the negotiation was able to get a few more weeks than their baseline.

I’ve now been on the receiving end a post-offer notice of a pregnancy (with rights to an 6 month leave) and it’s annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, lots of sexism here!

I hired a woman who looked 45 weeks pregnant at the interview (she was short, skinny, and all belly). After we gave the offer, she negotiated to start when Baby was 12 weeks before accepting.

That baby just went to college and Mom still works with us. She is awesome - good employees know that three months is a blip in a career, and anyone can need that kind of leave at anytime. NBD.

Someone diagnosed with cancer is not someone hiding a pregnancy and screwing a new employer.

The literal point of the anti-discrimination law is because pregnant women are not, in fact, “screwing a new employer”. You’re an actual misogynist.

I suspect this anti pregnancy act will be revoked by trump.

This may be the only thing I agree on with trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I also interviewed while pregnant but not showing. Once the interviews progressed enough but before an official offer, I let them know I was pregnant. I figured I didn’t want to work somewhere if that was going to be a problem. I got the offer and as part of the negotiation was able to get a few more weeks than their baseline.

I’ve now been on the receiving end a post-offer notice of a pregnancy (with rights to an 6 month leave) and it’s annoying.

You must be a boomer. Give me the benefits, and screw the people under me.

[Anonymous]

As a previous poster mentioned, I wonder if you could disclose and talk about if it makes sense to begin before or after your maternity leave? It might make things a bit easier from a logistics perspective for your new employer and also create less pressure to get back to work quickly after having your baby. Of course, this would depend on company need/policies - but something to think about as an option!

[Anonymous]

Y’all are monsters.

In every other developed nation, this is a non-issue. But here…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, lots of sexism here!

I hired a woman who looked 45 weeks pregnant at the interview (she was short, skinny, and all belly). After we gave the offer, she negotiated to start when Baby was 12 weeks before accepting.

That baby just went to college and Mom still works with us. She is awesome - good employees know that three months is a blip in a career, and anyone can need that kind of leave at anytime. NBD.

Someone diagnosed with cancer is not someone hiding a pregnancy and screwing a new employer.

The literal point of the anti-discrimination law is because pregnant women are not, in fact, “screwing a new employer”. You’re an actual misogynist.

new poster here

Maternity leave does in fact screw the employer, no matter how much you want to pretend it does not. Employers hire because they need work done. If the employee can't do the work because they are on maternity leave, and the employer can't hire a replacement because they have to save the job for the employee they already hired, how will the work get done?
Either co-workers pick up the slack (which can cause burnout) or hire temps (which is expensive, can be unreliable/not as qualified) or the work just doesn't get done. Explain how this doesn't screw employers?
While some employers might be happy to put up with this for a proven productive employee, I can't blame one for not wanting to start off like this right off the bat with a new one.

[Anonymous]

The people who have to do their jobs and chunks of yours with no added pay or time off will just loooove seeing your baby pictures.

[Anonymous]

I know somebody who did this. I forget when she told them, but she told them early. She got the job. She said she was comfortable telling them because they would be reluctant to not hire her after the disclosure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not nuts to apply. I’ve successfully done the same and hired a pregnant woman as well. After you receive the offer, let your new supervisor know you are pregnant and ask to discuss how you would be able to manage some maternity leave. You need to be open to a short leave. I only took 8 weeks. I gave my employee 12. Depending on how long the search takes and when they need someone, they could be willing to wait until after you have the baby for you to start as well. All a discussion for after you have the offer. And don’t listen to the poster who said people won’t trust you. That’s nonsense.

I would give you one week maternity leave, if that. Above PP is wrong. You are coming to a job for six to eight weeks and then taking maternity leave for whatever you can finagle and other employees will have to do your job and this does not foster warm feelings for you

And this human hiding behind anonymity is why America is going down the drain. Disgusting.

She's a democrat. A republican would tell her to get back in the kitchen. Two sides of the sexism coin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the they won't trust you PP. I have ben one of those coworkers stuck filling in for an on leave coworker, no extra pay or consideration given. On top of doing that while the position was empty, then having the new hire gone again...not my idea of an ideal coworker. So we won't be having coffee or lunches but I will do my job and yours.

Uhh.... why didn't you ask for more pay?

[Anonymous]

I did something similar with my first. I started just at the start of my third trimester. I had a conversation with my supervisor as soon as I had a formal offer- I didn't want to give up my existing mat leave and good vibes from having been in my job for a while if she wasn't going to be supportive and if I couldn't take leave. It was no big deal. If she had given me a negative reaction I would have stayed in my old job. Even if it's a dream job on paper, you absolutely don't want it if your supervisor is one of the PPs giving nasty responses. That's not just a problem for mat leave- it's going to be a bad place to work in general.