I was offered a job to teach 1st grade, I accepted it. I will sign the contract when I report to work in August. By that time I will be five months pregnant. Should I call and inform my supervisor that I am pregnant now. Or should I wait until I sign my contract. By the way I am not showing. I really want this job. Thanks.
I wouldn't say anything until after you have signed the contract and have a copy in hand. You don't want to give them any reason to deny the contract... and even though they can't technically hold it against you, they could find a reason not to hire due to numbers/finances/etc Could you ask to come in and sign it ASAP rather than in August?
When I last spoke with her reassured me that I had the job and not to worry. She said when I report to work the contract will be ready. I have been unemployed for two years and eagerly seeking a job. I guess I could ask if I could sign it earlier than scheduled but I don't want to seem pushy.
I told my principal right after he offered me the job because I wanted to gauge his reaction. He was very supportive and asked me how I was and how things were going. He also said not to worry about and that we would take care of sub details later. This is a new position, in a new building, for me as well, but I've been with the district 4 years, I will be taking at least 12 weeks off. I would give him a call (or drop in if you have legitimate other things to ask/do) now that you are out of the "danger zone" and let him know as a heads up.
If you do anything, do it in writing (whether letter or email) and keep a copy. That way, if they rescind the offer you will have proof of possible cause.
If you are truly concerned, perhaps you could ask to sign it early. Maybe your bank needs a copy for loan purposes?
We had a discussion on this topic a while back. I said then and still do now that it is a matter of ethics.... Since Pregnancy is a medical condition it should not be held against you but I do believe you need to "Come clean" and let them know. If they rescind the contract because of your Pregnancy you have a reason for legal action. As far as ethics... You have to think about the students having a teacher for 3 to 4 months and then she is replaced, hopefully by one sub, for a month or two, and then she comes back. Just food for thought
I would wait until signing the contract. Have you been approved by the Board? There are plenty of subs everywhere to cover for you. If a teacher was injured, the principal would not have several months notice.
We had this discussion back in 2007 http://forums.atozteacherstuff.com/showthread.php?t=40873 I just think that we need to look at all sides, the teacher's, the district's and the students'.
ikr? Sometimes it sure seems that we women are punished and made to feel bad about our life choices at every turn. We're allowed to take time off for our children. Frankly, no one has the right to bat an eye at that. It's the school's/district's responsibility to figure out what to do if we need to take a leave of absence for a few months, and that's that. When I think about all the comments I read that are "Well, you really need to think about how your life choices will affect your students...." I think about all the men in corporate jobs who have to take leaves of absence for heart attacks. I bet no one ever says to them "Well, you really need to think about how your life choices will affect your banking customers...."
I must have missed that thread back in 2007. Thank goodness. I might still be throwing up a little. I'm off now. I really should start thinking about my daughter's birthday party. She was born August 30. Hmm, what day did we start school that year...I do believe the 25th...my first year of teaching...OH NO! I HAVE RUINED THIS YEAR'S SENIORS! Gasp!
Well, I see that this has become a battle of the sexes but it is not. This would be for any future absence that is known pre employment. If I was applying for a job and I knew that I would need any operation that required a multi month recuperation, I would inform them. The First point is Yes, it would be against the law to be denied the job because of a medical condition. :naughty: The second point is if you know that you will be missing a good part of the year, it is a new job and to not say anything, just does not seem right.:unsure: Is there any possibility that there would be a disruption of the learning process or is it just collateral damage? As we know there are good subs and bad subs. If there is almost a seamless transition between teacher and sub then this is a moot point. :thumb: I'll just go back to my man cave and see if I can slay a windmill :lol:
Women have historically been discriminated against in the workplace. Expecting a woman to either a) be "professional" and not have children while she holds a job, b) resign from a job when pregnant, or c) refuse to apply for or accept a position due to current or future pregnancy is just another example of the kind of thinking that allowed (allows...) gender discrimination to continue.
I am only taking a complete month off. I am using two weeks sick/personal then the two weeks Christmas break that follows. This is my third child therefore it will not require a multi month recuperation!
Having worked with my sister in her glass ceiling problem, I do know and care about gender discrimination The gender card is not in the deck right now. The point is, if you know that there will be something that will affect your ability to be present to do your job you need to inform your prospective employer. A pregnancy, an operation, a jail sentence, a missionary calling, Jury Duty, being a witness... anything that you know will cause you to be out, you need to be upfront with them. If it is a "protected" absence the onus is on the employer to deal with it in a legal manor. That is a very strong point in your corner and letting her/him know shows to your principal that you have a strategy for your absence.
I know this sounds heartless and so un-womanly but I'm so tired of these arguments about gender and discrimination. In actually got into a pretty heated discussion the other day with a feminist which ended very quickly when I brought up her desire to be fully equal yet her lack of desire to be equal and sign up for the draft, if ever needed.
The fact is that the gender card is on the table right now, because it is always on the table and in play. You might believe that a woman is obligated (professionally, morally, legally) to tell her employer that she is pregnant. Perhaps it is because her condition will likely become visible to everyone. The fact remains that a woman's pregnancy is her business and no one else's. She is under no obligation to tell anyone. Do we require men to discuss their medical conditions with everyone? Given that we don't hear a lot about sexual dysfunction and Viagra at our jobs (at least I don't), I'd say that men are not obligated to share medical info with their bosses. If a person needs time off and qualifies for it legally, that's all there is to it. Men and women aren't identical, so there are times when they might need to be treated differently in order to be treated fairly. One such time occurs when women become pregnant. I'm sure that as teachers we, better than anyone else, understand about the differences between what's fair and what's equal.
I really don't get what being a teacher has to do with the situation of getting pregnant and not telling your employer. Being teachers, we should have ethics and not telling your employer before receiving a job isn't ethical or professional. We are in a very political career and pregnancy is one of those things that can become a problem for administrators before you receive tenure.
Perhaps you haven't ever felt discriminated against because of your gender. I have, and it really blows. The reason women are exempt from the draft is that the purpose of the draft is to supply combat troops. Since women aren't allowed to fight in combat on the front lines, there's no point in drafting them to serve. Perhaps if people were drafted for different purposes, this policy would change. As it stands, though, it's not a valid argument in favor of gender discrimination. Not only is it impossible for a woman to register for selective service and therefore a moot point, but also there are many, many, many men who would choose not to sign up for selective service as well. Given that, the issue of selective service isn't a gender issue but a legal issue.
I'm not sure if you were addressing my comment, but I didn't mean that being a teacher is somehow related to getting pregnant and not telling. I meant that being a teacher means that we have many students who each need to achieve goals in our classrooms. We make modifications for our students at times, and we do that because we understand that sometimes treating our students fairly means that we have to treat them differently. Many people are in very political careers. It shouldn't matter if a woman's personal life choice becomes a "problem" for administrators. It's a protected status and will likely remain as such. Therefore it makes no difference whatsoever whether a woman wants to share the news that she is pregnant sooner, later, or not at all.
I believe that a [-]woman[/-] Teacher is obligated (professionally, morally, legally) to tell her/his employer that she/he is going to miss school.
It was a general statement. Either way with respect to the draft, I know many feminists/ women who want to pick and choose when are where they are equal to men. Most women wouldn't want to be equal and able to be drafted. Maybe this isn't PC or what not but most pregnancies in America now are not planner so that most don't see it as a life choice and if it was planned then maybe they should have waited until secure in their career. Just because someone chose to start a family doesn't mean that anyone has to be supportive or continue to employ you. Yes, it's a protected status- which is why most wait until tenured- but they could very easily not rehire you for the next year...
Two-thirds of pregnancies are unplanned in our country, at least according to my gyno. That doesn't mean that all those unplanned pregnancies are the result of irresponsibility. What it does mean is that in every instance of an unplanned pregnancy, there was a man involved. If we're going to start firing and not hiring women who are pregnant when it causes us "problems", then we need to also start firing and not hiring men who have impregnated women. Once that happens, I'll be in full support of firing and not hiring pregnant women (and of course their impregnators). In fact, no one needs to be supportive of a person's choice to start a family. What's also true is that an employer can't fire you for being pregnant, just as an employer can't choose not to hire you on the basis of your pregnancy. If you were good enough to receive an offer when the employer didn't know that you were pregnant, you're good enough to be permitted to follow through with that job.
Lying by omission One lies by omission when omitting an important fact, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. Lying by omission includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions.
Again, no one is required to disclose confidential medical information. It's not lying if you're not obligated to talk about it. I'm not sure why you don't understand that. I can quote the dictionary too, but I don't see how it would be especially useful.
You are contracted to 180-190 days if you KNOW that you will not be there for a large number of them you are not being ethical. It is just the right thing to do
Ethical is not the same as legal. Maybe this will help: Definition of LEGAL 1: of or relating to law 2a : deriving authority from or founded on law : de jure b : having a formal status derived from law often without a basis in actual fact : titular <a corporation is a legal but not a real person> c : established by law; especially : statutory 3: conforming to or permitted by law or established rules 4: recognized or made effective by a court of law as distinguished from a court of equity 5: of, relating to, or having the characteristics of the profession of law or of one of its members 6: created by the constructions of the law <a legal fiction>
Where is the definition of Ethical? eth·i·cal [eth-i-kuhl] –adjective 1. pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct. 2. being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, especially the standards of a profession **EDIT** Legal Dictionary Main Entry: eth·ics Pronunciation: 'e-thiks Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a profession
Got it. When you're an employer and you feel justified on the basis of ethics in firing or not hiring a woman because she is or may become pregnant, you go for it. I'm curious to see how that will hold up in court.
I did cover that, in this case the ethics is not on the employer, it is on the employee, if the employer were to fire the employee it would be BOTH UNETHICAL and ILLEGAL!
I completely agree and understand the idea of ethics, which I feel we should be ethical and professional in our teaching career, but I don't know that I agree that a teacher is obligated to inform the future employer of her pregnancy. Yes there will be a short absence, but since we women are allowed to take a maternity leave, then what obligates us to inform the future employer of a pregnancy? I would be all for it if there wasn't a chance of the district then coming up with some reason to just change their mind. That, then, would be unethical on the district's part, so it's sort of a situation where you have to be looking out for yourself. I would say it's really up to the individual teacher. I myself would likely inform the P, but I don't think we should feel obligated to do so.
Terri says I won this debate so I am going back into my man cave and do my touchdown dance :lol: (I think she just wants me to stop reading the thread out loud) Terri has a BA in Elementary ED, BA in Secondary Ed and BA in Business Management
I think that regardless of the choice there is a huge risk that you are going to have to face. If you inform the P right now, there is the risk of him/her finding an excuse to not give you the contract. If you inform the P in August and you are already showing, it's going to be obvious that you were hiding it from the P and it is not going to look good either. Even if you sign the contract for this year and you can be safe, he/she may retaliate by not hiring you again next year for the fact that you hid your pregnancy from him/her. It looks sneaky. I don’t think he/she will be stupid not to know that you knew you were pregnant when he/she offered you the job. If the P is an honest person he/she may feel offended because he/she knows about the laws protecting people from not getting hired based on medical issues and you didn’t need to hide it from him/her. He/she could have used this time to start interviewing a good quality temporary sub to cover your leave. By the time August comes, many good teachers are already taken and he may not get a chance to find a good replacement for you to cover your leave. I think he would appreciate the advance notice and giving him plenty of time to find a good sub to cover for you. It would also be the best thing for the students. Again, this is a risk regardless of your choice. If you are desperate for money so that it would be very hard for you to be supported financially without this job, then don’t tell the P. You’ll have a job for at least a year, or whatever number of months you can work.
I wish you the best, I'm sure everything will work out fine. When I was pregnant last year I turned down an interview and took myself off the teaching market. The health risks were too much. Also, I was due around testing time, didn't know if the pregnancy would be difficult (which the 3rd trimester was---I could barely walk)...and I don't see how I would have had any leave built up to leave. I guess all districts and states are different. You have to work for 12 months for FMLA to apply here. When I had my medical health emergency and could not give 45 days notice because it was an emergency, they wouldn't allow me to take a medical leave because I was too new, so I had to resign and they tried to revoke my license for breaking the contract (though I never read or signed one, but the board had just approved me to work so technically by law I was bound by contract). I'm just saying, if pregnancy is so protected then other medical situations should be protected as well.
Question: What difference would it make if the Principal was told BEFORE the contract or AFTER? (Hopefully) there would be no difference as far as the behavior/attitude of the Principal and the school BUT the difference lies in the teacher feeling secure that she has that job. There is no harm no foul done if you wait until after the contract is signed. If they get upset with you about doing it that way then you have a whole year to look for another school. personally, I would not want to work at a school who gets upset because I chose to sign my contract and then tell. A GOOD principal will be supportive regardless WHEN you tell them but why open up a door for the district to let you go before you are hired. Yes, it's illegal but some people just don't want to cause "ripples". Also, I found out I was pregnant March of my FIRST year of teaching. I told my principal in April and she still offered me a contract for the next year. She was a supportive P.
