Decree And Conscience

2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43

At one women's forum, I once again came across a paradoxical idea for me that a woman, planning children, or being pregnant, should notify the employer about it, that when applying for a job “in a position”, a woman behaves “dishonestly” »In relation to the employer.

Questions of this kind very often come up in individual consultations. Women are seriously torn between plans to have children and a job change or career advancement.

Of course, I can understand the position of employers who do not want to hire "pregnant women" or women who theoretically have the opportunity to go on maternity leave. This is really inconvenient - you cannot fire a pregnant woman, you cannot reduce the position, it is difficult to find another employee at the maternity rate … Someone else may say that “you just teach how to work, and she is on maternity leave. Why take such people? " It's common to hear this from employers on the sidelines. However, few employers would dare to say this openly. We remember that discrimination is prohibited by both the Constitution and the Labor Code.

But when the women themselves say that it is impossible to expose the employer with their pregnancy, to cause him inconvenience, I am at a loss. What is this generation of overly nice and comfortable girls? Remnants of faith in a “good king” (or in a good boss)? The desire to resolve all issues "in personal relationships"?

The question of whether it is fair to the employer to get a job if I plan to have children is a common one. Just imagine, "I'm planning"! That is, she is not even pregnant yet, but simply admitted the thought, being married, to stop using protection.

This is not about cynical deception, theft or anything like that. We are talking about the use of their rights in a state that claims to be considered legal.

I'll write a few obvious things just to remember that this is the case:

• Any company can take care of itself
• As a rule, the system does not personally care about you.
• The basis of a successful business is getting the highest possible profit at the lowest cost, and in the long term. If you, as an employee, reduce the efficiency of the business, no amount of "personal" merit and super-loyalty will help you stay in this job for a long time.
• The relationship with the employer is primarily a business relationship
• No employer will give you back life time and lost opportunities
• Our labor relations are regulated by the Labor Code, where the interests of both the employee and the employer are taken into account. You should not take on additional obligations to the employer in excess of the required
• In some cases, a good employee in 6 months can bring more value to the company than a bad employee over the years. Maybe you are just a good worker?
• No hired manager can guarantee you the fulfillment of any obligations beyond what is indicated in the labor code and your employment contract, since he himself has no guarantees that he will continue to be your manager. Any boss can quit or be fired within 2 weeks, or even faster.
• The employer does not pay for your maternity leave from his own funds, he simply transfers you the money from the social security fund, which has already been paid from your wages
• Any risks associated with pregnancy and temporary absence of the employee are already included in the budget

By being “honest,” “comfortable,” you don't become more valuable. Your contribution to the business will still be evaluated. And no one will ever remember what exactly you donated for the company. Therefore - avoid unreasonable sacrifices. Observe your personal and professional interest. If you can get a new experience, don't give it up because of your family plans. If you are offered a promotion, it reflects your merits, but not your "non-pregnancy".

Perhaps it turned out too emotional, however, maybe it is my emotionality that will help someone to reconsider their view of the relationship with the employer and take care of themselves first of all, and not about some abstract “employer”.