No problem. Lemme know the next time you need to whip up some righteous indignation. Gots plenty! 
No problem. Lemme know the next time you need to whip up some righteous indignation. Gots plenty!
Oops. See. What’d I tell ya? :o
She was asking an ethical question, not a legal one. What’s legal is not always ethical. With respect to the marraige issue, it’s still an ethical question. How it is addressed it is up to Stainz, but it should demand at least some thought.
Nope **El Zagna **, it’s a moral issue, not an ethical one. And one that is none of your business, moreover.
To Stainz, I feel for your dilemma. Several years ago, I went for a promotion within the company I was then working for, and I did tell them that I was pregnant, because I thought that it was the correct thing to do. Everyone had assumed I would get the job, including the other candidates. I didn’t. When the news of my pregnancy got out, it was generally assumed that that was why. True? Who knows? Possibly not even the interviewers. (There were other issues - at that time they had never promoted a woman within the technical side of the organisation. Suppose asking them to promote a pregnant one was a leap too far!). Red Stillettos had a good point - don’t assume that you’ll automatically be eligible for the benefirts - check about qualifying times.
Go ahead and do the interview. Ask any questions you have. Tell them about your pregnancy - it’s best to be open and honest, so you start on the right foot. If the pay is about the same, then it could be a smart move, since the government has generous leave and pretty decent benefits. Also, it has fairly good job security. You won’t be in a position where someone can fire you on a whim (unlike companies in “at will” states). I don’t know if Canada has any “at will” situation though. There won’t be layoffs due to poor sales or poor management, or because some boss gave your job to his relatives. You don’t have to worry about your retirement package being changed due to a takeover (unless Canada gets invaded).
You don’t owe your company or any potential empoyer very much. You owe them a day’s work for a day’s pay, and honesty. However, they see you as “business”. If you do not benefit them, you are gone. You must see them the same way. They have to look out for their interests, you have to look out for yours. Work is marketable, just like any other product. You are selling your effort and time, and it is reasonable for you to go for the best offer.
As far as that boss who has an “unwritten” policy requiring 4-6 weeks notification, get HR and upper management on him. Most companies frown on little tyrants who invent rules for no purpose. It is unreasonable and dictatorial. It drives good workers away. Word gets out, and potential new hires begin looking elsewhere. Things happen, and it is the boss’s job to handle it. I can see prescheduling vacation time where you’d be gone for several days, and which you can plan ahead of time, but let’s get real. Life happens, doo doo occurs. Besides, I bet that jerk sure takes time off when he needs to.
If you are considering a position as a “key employee” (the type that would not be subject to the US Family and Medical Leave Act) then you might have an ethical issue about proactively communicating a pregnancy as you seek a new position. Also, possibly, if you were applying to a very small employer, you might have an ethical and a legal issue (in the US employers w/ fewer than 15 people are not subject to the Pregnancy Discrimination Act).
But for a clerical job? With the government? Give me a break! If a business or government is counting on its clerical staff not to take maternity leave it is hanging by a thread that is not likely to hold.
If a failure to disclose pregnancy during the interview “sours the relationship” in any tangible fashion, that might actually be grounds for a grievance/discrimination complaint/lawsuit. I came back into this thread to emphasize this point for the benefit of employers who may not realize pregnancy discrimination is illegal, and the law has some teeth. (I am however speaking re: US, not Canadian law, and re: private employers, not the government, but Canada typically has more protection, not less.)
Some links to facts re: US law on pregnancy discrimination
http://www.pregnancy-info.net/pregnancy_descrimination.html
http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-preg.html
Again, thanks for the advice ( and also thank you to those who recognized El Zagna’s attempts to hijack the thread ). :rolleyes:
The interview is in a few days. I emailed my boss to ask for the morning off, and offered to take it as time without pay if necessary, but no reply yet. Typical …
Any Canadian government workers out there who can help me out with their branch’s policies re: new employees and mat. leave? Maybe I’ll start a new thread …
I am going to go to the interview, do my best to kick some ass, and see what happens from there. Another realistic, yet scary, fact is that I am 35, this is the first time I’ve ever been pregnant, and statistically there of course is a 1 in 5 chance that the pregnancy won’t work out anyway … so I need to put myself first here and then if I am offered the position, I will make my decision when I have more information.
Wish me luck … (in the interview, and in finding something to wear!) 
I’m in the U.S., so this may be irrelevant for Stainz.
However, for those of you advocating telling a potential employer that you’re pregnant (or those who just want to ask about maternity policies), please bring it up with HR and not with the other managers interviewing you. I hate it when candidates bring up pregnancies or other sensitive subjects. Most of my colleagues feel the same way. It makes us damned uncomfortable.
It’s illegal to discriminate against someone because she’s pregnant. Not only do we like to avoid breaking the law, we like to remain above suspicion. That’s why we get a course in what you can and cannot say or ask before we’re allowed to interview anyone. Asking about a pregnancy, plans for a family, etc are all prohibitted.
When a candidate brings up a pregnancy or family plans, suddenly I’m in that grey area where I’m not completely sure what I can or cannot say. I prefer to stay out of those grey areas. They make me nervous.
If you want to find out about a company’s maternity leave policy or discuss anything sensitive, bring it up with HR. They have more training than the other managers. They also know a lot more about company policy than we do.
Good point Maddy - thank you! I hadn’t even thought of it from the manager’s / intervier’s perspective, but it makes total sense.
I have details on what is required for regular maternity leave, and I believe Canadian Federal government extends additional benefits. Is the position Federal, Provincial or Municipal?
Here are some basics on Maternity/Parental benefits: Link
No specific details on government policies, but if you contact your local HRDC office, they should be able to answer all your questions about eligibility in your area and special circumstances with government positions. Again, what level of government is important. They will likely not be able to tell you if your employer will top up your wages from the standard 55% EI will pay.
A previous poster mentioned that they wouldn’t disclose the pregnancy “before a job offer was made.” That’s important. It isn’t just a matter of telling them in the interview or letting them find out when you start to show. You could:
A) Tell them after they make you an offer but before you accept.
B) Post-offer and pre-acceptance like in A), but contact the new HR department and discuss the policy with them instead of with the interviewers, just so they don’t give you grief about not telling them sooner.
It is kind of a grey area. This lets you inform them before you’re really working there, but after they’ve had a chance to consider you as an employee based solely on your qualifications. I don’t know if they would be allowed to withdraw the job offer or not, but at least you would be able to tell at that point if it was going to cause serious tension in the workplace. Also, you wouldn’t be risking termination if there’s an at-will period like another poster suggested.
The distinction between moral and ethical issues is ill-defined, but one school of thought is to see morals as those issues of right and wrong that are between you and your god or within yourself. Ethics, then, involves issues of right and wrong that are between you and other people. That is generally the distinction I make, so to that extent it is true that the question of getting married is mostly a moral issue and one that I have no interest in or, indeed, any business sticking my nose in. But having kids changes everything.
Suddenly your and your boyfriend’s interests will - or at least should IMO - take a back seat to those of your child, and suddenly your decisions will have ethical implications that they didn’t have before. How you should address those ethical questions is best left for another thread. My intention was to merely point out that having children changes the equation, and that what had been the status quo needs to be rethought.
So back to the OP.
Let’s say that **Stainz ** is in her interview and things are going well. The interviewer says something like, “Well, you seem to be just the kind of person we’re looking for. We need to hire someone and get them up to speed quickly because in less than a year that person will need to represent our company at a series of conventions. How does that sound to you?”
Now I would like for someone to explain just how it would be ethical for **Stainz ** to not mention her pregnancy and her planned maternity leave at that point.
Ethics don’t change when you cross a border. Laws do, but not ethics.
Most of the posts here have addressed the legalities of pregnancy and the workforce, not the ethics of it. I hope that we haven’t become such sheep that we are willing to allow lawyers to dictate rules of ethics to the rest of us.
Stainz, I think you answered your own question with this:
You obviously realize that keeping your pregnancy hidden is unethical, and you’re now just struggling with how high a price you are willing to pay for your ethics.
Exactly!
And in this country, if they were to rescind the offer after finding out the candidate was pregnant, that candidate would indeed have a legal case should they wish to pursue it.
I assure you, the government is well aware of our maternity / parental leave policies and have contingency plans in place. It would simply be ill-advised (and have nothing to do with “ethics”) to share information that has no basis on your ability to perform this job prior to actually receiving a job offer.
And El Zagna? The quote you just pulled from Stainz post relates to getting time off for an interview. :rolleyes:
How in the world can you say that not showing up for work for months on end has “no basis on your ability to perform this job”? How easy can this job possibly be that it can be filled by someone who doesn’t even come to work?
Let me remind you - again - that this thread is about ethics, not the law. **Stainz ** asked about an “Ethical Dilemma” not about the legalities of her situation. It’s possible that now that she knows that she is legally protected from having to divulge her pregnancy, the ethical issue has been satisfied for her. Maybe not. Either way, this is IMHO and not GD, and I’ve let my opinion be know. **Stainz ** can take it from here.
El Zagna … your opinions aren’t related to the OP at all … maybe you could start your own thread if you’d like to stay up on that soapbox. :rolleyes:
To everyone else, thanks again for your time and input and for staying on topic.
What I’ve decided to do is attend the interview and ask lots of questions to determine if it truly is a job that I want to take on. Then, if I am offered the position (because it’s federal government I know it could take days or even weeks for them to make an offer), I will ask to talk to their HR department and explain my situation.
This is a clerical position, it is NOT a position of huge responsibility and I have the feeling there would be a dozen other clerks there who do the same type of work, so I certainly wouldn’t be leaving anybody in the lurch.
Maternity leave is a right, and whether I am working for my current employer, or a new employer, SOMEBODY will be short-staffed for up to a year when I have this child.
Oh, Cyros - thanks for the link - I have perused that site. The ironic part is, the job is with HRSDC. From what I can tell, the union for federal government employees provides benefits including mat leave for full-time employees after six consecutive months of employment. But it is DEFINITELY something I will be clarifying before I make any job changes.
S.
My comments regarding the issue of marriage were outside the scope of the OP and I have acknowledged as much, but everything else I have said is directly related to your OP, mostly this part of it:
Now, my opinions may not have been what you wanted to hear, but they *were * related to the OP.
Perhaps instead of going to the HR people at the place you are considering, you could try the Canadian equivalent of OPM for the US government. Basically it’s the HR resource for the entire Federal government, and if you went to them, it may be a bit more anonymous for any questions you may have, without the chance of it getting back to your interviewer/manager (probably slim to begin with though). As I’m sure (it was at mine anyway) that HR and other managers will talk to each other about candidates. Heck, I talked to probably 5-6 different people in my interview process, ranging from the HR director, to a high level corporate officer, to my immediate future supervisors.
Basically, what I’m saying is, while you should be OK going to HR of the company, going higher up to become more anonymous if you wish, might be preferable.
Update:
I was given permission (finally) by Human Resources to take a couple of hours of personal time this morning. I didn’t mention it was an interview, just that it was an appointment.
Showed up for the interview and was told that due to restructuring the position they were recruiting for may no longer be available, and in any case, it was for a maternity leave replacement (how ironic!). So right away of course I wasn’t interested, therefore very relaxed, therefore did a great interview.
Funny how life works out … It would still be great for my ego to be offered the position, but I cannot possibly leave my full-time permanent job for something that is only for one year.
whew … one less thing for this chronic worrier to stress about …