Wasn't chosen due to pregnancy!

Discussion in 'Job Seekers' started by sculteacher, Jul 24, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sculteacher

    sculteacher Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 24, 2007

    One of the jobs I applied for didn't choose me because I am due in September and they didn't want to have to go through the hassle of hiring a LTS. I thought that was illegal?!
     
  2.  
  3. GatorGal

    GatorGal Cohort

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Messages:
    506
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 24, 2007

    They said that was the reason?
     
  4. sculteacher

    sculteacher Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 24, 2007

    This was for a part-time job (working with students who are home schooled).
    Half of the panel knew me, so of course they knew about the pregnancy and when I was due.
    Yes, the secretary mentioned that my due date was not the right timing for the beginning of the school year.

    (I interviewed for a full time position in which one of the panel members ASKED about my plans for when my baby was born--I posted on this Friday. I sure hope the same thing doesn't happen again when I lose out just because I will need to have maternity leave for a few weeks...):(
     
  5. #1 Mrs. H

    #1 Mrs. H Companion

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    1

    Jul 24, 2007

    I don't think it's legal if they actually cite the pregnancy leave as a reason (not sure if the secretary counts). But we all know they can get around it by claiming it's because of some other reason if they really want to.

    I wonder if you'd be better off to broach this topic openly in an interview and state your intentions for time off (esp if it's only going to be a few weeks).

    Good luck to you!
     
  6. Caesar753

    Caesar753 Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,606
    Likes Received:
    2,714

    Jul 24, 2007

    You might want to contact your local Department of Labor office. You can find it in the phone book under the government section.

    I don't think it's legal for them to deny you a job due to your pregnancy.
     
  7. Mrs_Barrett

    Mrs_Barrett Cohort

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 24, 2007

    I interviewed in June for a position. I didn't say anything about being pregnant, because I didn't want to deal with this issue. I'm due September 2nd. When I was waiting to go in the secretary asked me when I was due. :p The reason why I didn't mention the pregnancy, was because one of my references said not to. She has been on many interviews and given the chance to hire between two candiates at the same level and one is pregnant. They tend to go with the one who isn't...But they state other reasons.

    I would definatly check out the reason why they didn't hire you. It is discrimation if they don't hire you because you are pregnant.

    When I was offered my new position, I told the principal right away. I felt a little annoyance that I didn't say anything during the interview, but this was my thoughts on the way she commented on the rest of the conversation.
     
  8. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,959
    Likes Received:
    2,116

    Jul 24, 2007

    Let's face it- a school wants to hire someone who's going to BE THERE. There could be other reasons why they didn't hire you including the consideration of another candidate was available who would be just as good as you and wouldn't be going out on leave right away...It's the same reason why non-tenured teachers are advised to wait until tenure to get pregnant- there are just too many other great qualified teachers out there who want the job who are available... I was on our school hiring committee this year. There were many reasons why one person or another wasn't the right fit. Not being available would certainly be a reason- not that the person is pregnant but that they are not going to be available as compared to another candidate who would be...:eek:hmy: Put this behind you. After the baby gets here and you are ready to go back to teaching then you can find the right place. :rolleyes:
     
  9. sculteacher

    sculteacher Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 24, 2007

    UPDATE: I was offered the full time position that I interviewed for on Friday (different district). :)
    It made me feel a little better--they said that they really liked me and were excited to bring me on board!
    I am taking the 24 hours to think about it, since it is an hour commute and we'd be putting the boys in a preschool. Have to figure out the numbers.
    Thanks for your support! :)
     
  10. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Jul 24, 2007


    I know I may get hit in the head by a brick for this
    but
    One you will be a new teacher
    Two maybe a month in to the school you will need to take time off for maternity
    Three you are asking the district to go to the expense of hiring a LTS and hold your position

    That seems a little unethical to me,

    I know maternity can't always be planed but what are you asking the district to do? You haven't even worked for them yet. if you had been there a year and then they said they couldn't rehire you because of the maternity maybe then.

    If I was going to have back operation and have a one to two month recovery I would not be trying to get a new job for a month. I'd wait until after my recovery.

    Also will you have the sick leave built up even for the delivery time? 2 to 3 days?

    Am I wrong in asking this?
    Putting on a helmet in case any bricks come my way

     
  11. cutNglue

    cutNglue Magnifico

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    9,154
    Likes Received:
    1

    Jul 24, 2007

    I don't think it is unethical because people need to eat. Also teachers only have a specific hiring season really. At the same time, I can see why people have trouble accepting a pregnant woman even if it is illegal to reject them. I would wonder, in their position, if the woman will really come back. I know for my first child I fell madly in love and couldn't make myself return back to work for several years. I converted to a SAHM and would never have dreamed that prior to having him. So my point is, experiences color people's perceptions of the situation. The law is in place for a reason. The law knows that for many, they wouldn't accept pregnant women if they weren't being told they had to.
     
  12. #1 Mrs. H

    #1 Mrs. H Companion

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    1

    Jul 24, 2007

    Oh, you shouldn't worry about the bricks. You do have a valid point. I agree that it is a bit much to expect districts to tolerate for a new teacher, but I don't think it is unethical. Also, aside from the whole district accepting it thing, I don't think it would be in the students' best interest. New teacher, leaves shortly into the school year and is gone a few weeks, then comes back. It certainly isn't ideal to say the least.

    That's why I suggested being up front in the interview and discussing how much (or little) time she plans to take. If the district is actually willing to accept it, more power to her. If it were me personally, I'd call this hiring season a wash and sub after the baby was born. It's a tough spot, but sometimes that's just the way things work out.

    When I was an office mgr for a Dr.s office, I would not have hired someone if I knew they were pregnant. I'll admit that it is wrong to discriminate, but you don't want to train someone and as soon as they get the hang of it, train their temp replacement. In a time when people are banging down the doors to get in, they probably aren't going to have difficulty filling the position. But, you'll never get them to admit they didn't hire her bc she was pregnant! No way!
     
  13. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Jul 24, 2007

    Yes and thank God for the law
    still look at the other side (which is what I am doing here if it was up to me I'd hire you. pregnant, bad back, cancer, sex change whatever should not affect teaching) BUT how does having a teacher for one month, then another for a while and the the first one again affect the children? Just being the devil's advocate here.
    I know this is not PC but you have to think.

    a couple of years ago we had a teach go out for sickness (diabetes) he was out for a week at a time it hurt the children's learning


    The sex change was put in to see if you were reading the post
     
  14. Amanda

    Amanda Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2001
    Messages:
    3,245
    Likes Received:
    100

    Jul 24, 2007

    Congratulations!! :clap:

    I used to be involved in interviewing teachers. It's hard to find a qualified person. I would be happy to choose a pregnant teacher who is only going to be gone for a few weeks as opposed to one who is "gone" the whole year, so to speak.
     
  15. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Jul 24, 2007

    Good Point there #1 Mrs. H
    We are thinking the same here and maybe using "unethical" was too harsh.:hugs: :sorry:
     
  16. txmomteacher2

    txmomteacher2 Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,075
    Likes Received:
    180

    Jul 24, 2007

    We had a teacher leave this year so that she could be closer to home when she did have her baby. Yes she got a new job in the school right in her back yard. Yes she was very pregnant at the interview. In fact I think she is having the baby right before school starts so she won't even be in her class when school starts.
     
  17. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Jul 24, 2007

    Where in Cal did you apply?

    My Cousin is a Principal in Cal
    I want to make sure it wasn't her :rolleyes: :blush:


     
  18. #1 Mrs. H

    #1 Mrs. H Companion

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    1

    Jul 24, 2007


    Well, congratulations! Now at least you know you have a district that is concerned about having a good teacher for its students vs just a body to fill the void.

    How long do you plan to be gone? I ask b/c I wonder how tough this will be on YOU as well as your students. Do you think it will hurt your management plan missing time so quickly in the year? Also, what is the grade level? Older kids would certainly fair better than the younger ones.
     
  19. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,959
    Likes Received:
    2,116

    Jul 24, 2007


    Definitely something to consider when becoming pregnant! :love: And districts need to consider their bottom line- hiring people comes with expenses...they need to consider the obvious ones when hiring someone who is immediately going out on leave...
     
  20. sculteacher

    sculteacher Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 24, 2007

    I am already tenured (at my current district) and when discussing the pay schedule, they (the new district) took into account my tenure status and years teaching. Therefore, I would not be considered a "new" teacher there.
    I also would start the year for about a month before leaving for the 6weeks for maternity leave.
    The grade level is 4/5, so they are older.
     
  21. MrsC

    MrsC Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    14,070
    Likes Received:
    1,886

    Jul 24, 2007

    We had a new teacher begin mid-year --a new class was created so her students were moved from other classes. Within a few weeks of her start, she announced that she was pregnant and would be going on mat leave 1 month before the end of the school year (less than 3 months after she started). The students, then had a long-term occasional teacher for the rest of the year (3 teachers in one year!). Our mat. leave is 1 year, so she worked for less than three months, will be off for a year and is guaranteed a position when she returns. I know that it is perfectly within her rights, but the many changes were very difficult for her students (and the rest of the staff).
     
  22. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,959
    Likes Received:
    2,116

    Jul 24, 2007

    So you were applying for a new POSITION in the district for which you work? I'm a little confused here.
     
  23. #1 Mrs. H

    #1 Mrs. H Companion

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    1

    Jul 24, 2007

    If I'm understanding you correctly, the new district is basically granting you "credit" for your tenure at your current district. Our school has done that for some teachers that have taught 1 year somewhere else, they will apply that 1 yr toward tenure in a new district.
    They have also only allowed 4 yrs credit for someone who has 6 yrs in another district. Its sort of up to their discretion and what you agree on in your contract.
     
  24. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,959
    Likes Received:
    2,116

    Jul 25, 2007

    OK- now I get it. Thanks for clarifying Mrs H- when I went back to re-read it made sense!! They do not do that in my area!!
     
  25. pruckelshaus

    pruckelshaus Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 25, 2007

    I know that this isn't going to be received well, but here goes anyway.

    Why on earth would you be interviewing for positions, knowing full well that you would only get your students through the first month of the school year, only to turn them over to an LTS?

    Pete
     
  26. Caesar753

    Caesar753 Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,606
    Likes Received:
    2,714

    Jul 25, 2007


    Everyone has the right to interview for a job. Are you suggesting that someone with a disability like a chronic illness shouldn't interview for a job because if they get it they might need to take off a significant amount of time due to hospitalization?
     
  27. Iteachtwo

    Iteachtwo Companion

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 25, 2007

    Whether it's illegal or not, I don't know. But I know one thing for sure, people in high positions can pretty much do whatever they want and get away with it. And that's why they have attorneys that can just about back up anything they do. I've learned this from years of experience in the education field and in corporate America as well. So I would just put it behind me and move on to hopefully bigger and better things.
     
  28. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Jul 25, 2007

    YES
    Why is it only one way? If you will affect the School with your "Planned Absents" what does the school get out of it? The school has to keep running. There is a burden that is put on any employer, if I had to pick between a person with 95% attendance (A) and one with 60% attendance (B), I'd pick (A) every time. But if the (B) was was 100% more productive then (A) I would reconsider. (please write a math problem to represent this word problem, a test will follow)

    The laws in effect are to prevent abuses by employers, where is the employers' protection against abuses by employees

    Remember WE work for the employer the employer does not work for us.

    This is like affirmative action (but that is another thread)

    You may have the right but is it RIGHT to do that?

    I am not a fan of big business but come on, we talk about how we get screwed by our employers but to take a job knowing you are going to be absent or leave is just not RIGHT. Now if an employer wants to accommodate you that is fine but to insist they accommodate you that is Wrong.

    What if I was allergic to kids I could insist they accommodate me (work in the District, office doing what?) would that be right?

    Is this a car in every pot and a chicken in every garage?:rolleyes:
     
  29. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,959
    Likes Received:
    2,116

    Jul 25, 2007

    I think this is the question several of us have been dancing around...It's not that this person isn't qualified- it's just better for the kids and the district to have someone in the position who is qualified and going to BE THERE...
     
  30. pruckelshaus

    pruckelshaus Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 25, 2007

    Sorry, but that is completely different, and I'll tell you why I feel that way.

    First, comparing pregnancy to chronic disease is naive. One is (usually) a choice, and has a finite timespan, the other is not and does not.

    Second, many people with chronic disease learn to live with their conditions (including myself -- Celiac Sprue -- and my wife -- rheumatoid arthritis from several sports injuries) and know what their limits are. My wife doesn't look for jobs that require a lot of standing, since that would cause her pain.

    Third, what's to say that her 6 weeks of maternity leave doesn't turn into deciding to be a stay at home mom? Tell me how that doesn't leave the district, the school, the LTS, and the students in the lurch.

    Personally, I feel that by interviewing for a job, you are saying to an employer "I am ready to work for you now, and I currently don't see anything that will prevent me from being there on a daily basis." Were I an administrator (and I am not), I would have no problem passing over the very pregnant candidate for one whom I felt would be there from the school year; for fairness, if the candidate were a man who I knew was going for brain surgery a month after the school year opened, I also would pass on him for exactly the same reasons. The OP differs in that her condition (being 7 months pregnant) is usually very obvious in most women.

    To me, this is roughly akin to saying "I need to find a job so that I can go on disability."

    I realize that this may come off as politically incorrect and even downright insensitive, and it is not my intent to inflame or offend. However, as a man in a certification area (English) that is dominated by women (at least in schools around here), I have no problem with expecting a level playing field.

    Pete
     
  31. mincc

    mincc Companion

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 25, 2007

    Dave,

    I stole your saying and made it my slogan of the week. I am having that kind of week. I need a slogan. Last week I had a word of the week and I wont share that. ;)

    Is this a car in every pot and a chicken in every garage?

    Czacza,

    As for this topic, I agree with what you said:

     
  32. JaimeMarie

    JaimeMarie Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,120
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 25, 2007

    Congratulations on the job! Are you having twin boys? Or do you already have children?
     
  33. Amanda

    Amanda Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2001
    Messages:
    3,245
    Likes Received:
    100

    Jul 25, 2007

    This has gone on long enough. I understand that there is controversy around this topic, but you all are essentially attacking the original poster. It's appalling that this teacher should have to defend herself on this issue. The district with the full-time position HIRED HER, so CONGRATULATIONS are in order. That district obviously saw that she was qualified and are lucky to have her.

    I'm closing this thread.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Members Online Now

Total: 194 (members: 1, guests: 171, robots: 22)
test