HR professional again. Her loss of benefits through her current employer will trigger a "Qualifying Life Event" for her and her spouse, meaning her can immediately add her to his insurance, as long as they are married and depending on the policies of his employer. I'm not sure why she would need COBRA unless her husband has terrible benefits or they are not really married. |
| If you've decided to resign anyway, why take leave for August? Just resign and have the leave paid out. |
You are assuming they are actually married. She clearly does not want to go on his as they do not want to pay for it and think it is her employer's responsibility. |
Really? You don't seem to appreciate what an incredible luxury it is to have the ability to take as much maternity leave as you want and to get paid time off as well. Most women I know can't afford to take three months off and can only get 4 to 8 weeks paid, or partially paid. As for taking off BEFORE the baby is born, I've never heard of anyone using their leave time to "get ready"--everyone saves it for maternity leave or for all the days you will inevitably take once you have a newborn. My first was two weeks late and I worked up until the day before I was induced. I went into the office for a week and a half past my due date, then worked at home the last few. I would have been bored out of my effing skull, sitting around at home. |
+1. I worked up til the day of with #1 and plan to do so with #2 in a few weeks. I only know of one person who took 3 weeks off before. She was then a week late. She wasted a full month of her 12 week leave doing nothing. Everyone else I know has taken a few days before their due date. |
|
15:38 back. BTW, I meant mgnt doesn't like employees who try to "game" the system, not "buck".
OP, I worked up until the day before my wedding and I worked two professional level job up to the day I delivered. Contrary to what you said, I've never known anyone to take a full month off to prep for having a baby. It sounds heavenly, but companies don't like the upset that a baby brings so usually employees try to draw as little attention to it as possible and hang in the job and try to be as helpful as possible. The only situations that I know of where the mom to be took time off pre-baby was when there was a serious risk and Mom had to be on bedrest either at a hospital or at home before the baby was born. To the HR specialist immediate above: an employee can quality for COBRA whether or not they are fired or resign, correct? But it doesn't sound like OP understands how expensive COBRA is. I've had to COBRA out twice and it was very expensive for a family (I was carrying everyone). Speaking of which, I am wondering if the reason OP is not on her husband's policy is because either a) he doesn't have one; or b) they are not married. |
| OP, if they told you that you could take leave and then changed their mind, is that a crappy thing to do? Yes. Is it illegal? Probably not. |
|
I suspect she knew all along. Her title of this post alone is indicative of someone trying to game the system: "Need HR help - Employee taking away my health coverage because I'm pregnant". Wrong. That's not what's going on. OP is pregnant and is trying to milk her employer for whatever she can get out of the system. It sounds like she (and husband who as "attained" a lawyer) are suit-happy and think they can get the employer to pay for more. In this economy, I am astounded that someone would not understand what a generous package this is (HEY! I'll take that job) and that employers are doing everything not to pay full benefits. It's getting increasingly rare to find them (my last position had no benefits whatsoever) and benefit packages, especially with generous vacation benefits, health days and full medical will continue to dry up over the next few years. I suspect OP's employer was rather taken aback when they hire her for fulltime work and she gets pregnant a month or two later. Although the employer can't say anything, it doesn't make anyone feel very kindly towards that employee - especially in the high-end professional world where you are expected to carry a lot of work. In the private sector, if an employee is thinking of leaving or has lined up a new job, the employee usually takes a vacation to use up all the vacation days, returns, waits a week or so and then gives notice. It sucks and the employer is not thrilled but that's usually the way one does it providing they have a new job in hand and don't have to worry about reference. Also, in the private sector, unused pay and sick days are usually not convertable into vacation days. Fed. Government, yes. Private sector, usually no. So private sector usually line up the next job, take their vacation, come back and give a reasonable notice.
Based upon OP's subject matter line, I think OP is litigious. Husband can "attain" any lawyers he likes but I certainly wouldn't take this case on - especially since I can't get the facts straight. That's always a red flag. OP, I think they are showing you the door. Take it. Be gracious. Try to get on your husband's plan (if married) ASAP. COBRA out, but watch that deadline - it will expire or the amount will suddenly jump after 9 months, I can't remember which. COBRA used to be 9 months and was set up by Congress as a temporary vehicle to help the employee during a time when they might be searching for a new job. But it can get very expensive. |
| OP - haven't read all of the posts but why do you have to resign just b/c you haven't qualified for FMLA? FMLA is just the minimum that's required by law. If your company wants you to stay, they can let you take unpaid leave even though they are not required by law to do so. Also - are you in DC? If so look into what DC law requires - it may be more protective than FMLA. either way, agree with the PPs who recommended saving your leave for after the baby is born. if you are having a healthy pregnancy there's no reason you can't work up until the day or so before you give birth. Just about every woman in my office worked up until her due date unless she was on bed rest or something. I did for my pregnancies and it was fine - plenty of time on the weekends to prepare. The hard part is after the baby is born -getting ready for a baby is not that much work. A month is a really long time to get ready - i think you will be very bored. |
I disagree. I don't think anyone has excoriated OP here. The comments seem to be coming from seasoned women (?) who have been in the workforce and understand how the system works. That's why they are questioning the story. Maternity leave has become rare. Full health benefits have become rare. I have never heard of such a generous vacation policy. It may be that OP doesn't understand the policies, I can't say. In most jobs, you might acquire a half day of vacation pay per two week pay period but most businesses will not allow you to take those paid vacation days until you have been in the position a year. The employer is clearly NOT taking away OP's health benefits "because I am pregnant" as her subject line says. She has worked nine months or so for this company in a fulltime capacity. She's probably just now realizing that those vacation or sick days can't be used pre-baby (???) because she had not "vested" in the job yet. HR is telling her that she can't take that month off, then also expect health care to take care of her and the baby indefinitely. After having only worked fulltime with this company for 9 months, she is behaving as though she expects them to carry her and baby another nine months. That's not how the system works. I once stuck out my neck for a fellow lawyer who was applying for an associate position in my law firm. I recommended her. She showed up and immediately planned to get pregnant and did. I was mortified. Her name was mud. Partners were angry with me because they thought perhaps I saw this coming. And friend behaved as OP is with an "Well, it's my right" attitude. Sure, it is your right, but employers don't like getting used and they don't like paying salaries for workers who aren't there or medical coverage for workers who are not there. You need to use judgment throughout the process and, as some have pointedout, do everything in your power to help the company cover for you while you are out on leave. It sound like OP has burned her bridges, which is too bad - those were some nice benefits. |
Why is it that because she values doing work for her family, it is seen as she has no work ethic? Her loyalty is to her family, not to a job where she can be easily replaced. There is no honoring in dragging yourself to the ground just to gain approval from the communist crew. I mean feminist. Good for you OP for putting your family first. I have kids and I don't leave the house after 37 weeks because I am tired and cranky. So take good care of yourself and that baby. Don't listen to these women who treat their kids like accessories. |
This is full of inaccuracies. |
Try reading the thread before posting next time, PP. Then perhaps you might have something valuable to offer instead of your silly, uninformed post. |
this is the exact opposite of my experience. everyone I have worked with has worked right up until the end unless they had a high-risk pregnancy. pregnancy is not a disability. for a normal office job, it's really the first trimester that's the worst b/c of the morning sickness. |
1000000% agree with this. I don't know what it is with some of the posters here, but it's clear they don't know how corporate America works. Companies do not give two craps about you. They want employees to be 100% loyal to them, but they are never loyal to their employees. I've seen it many times, over and over again where companies screw over employees. Sorry, but all you people who say she should think about her job first are dead wrong. A job is just a job. Family and baby are 100x more important. If this is her plan, it is her plan and you have zero right to attack her. To everyone who says she's screwing her co-workers over, did you read the post where she says she told all her plans back in the spring??? That was months ago. If her HR department or manager didn't approve or like it they should have told her then. Telling her two weeks before she was planning on taking her "approved leave" is wrong. To all the attorneys, if you read she clearly states HR told her how many hours of vacation time she has. So, she knows. She's not calculating the hours herself. So, maybe you don't know everything company and their vacation policy. Sheesh. Most of you should be ashamed. |