Pregnancy-Maternity-Pregnancy leave

[miss marple]

I didn't plan on getting pregnant on my maternity leave, I wanted to go back to work for a year before we tried for number two.

It didn't work out the way we planned and I wanted to know where I stood.

I can't change our situation, we are where we are...if that adds up to playing the system in your book then I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Hope your life pans out exactly how you plan it.

Weevil, I have worked for this company for over four years, so I have given good service to them, I didn't join them and suddenly had a baby, but now I am at the stage of my life where I would like kids.

I will indeed probably have to resign after my maternity leave, so do you think I should forfeit any pregnancy and maternity leave/pay I am entitled to?

Again, I say I am only following the law and company policy.

[SR71]

Far be it from me to judge, but my take on the matter is perhaps you might gain a little credibility with your audience here if you moved away from talk of entitlement, to one of, responsibility.

What do you think is fair?

What do you think is fair, if you were your employer?

Having answered those questions, why not strike a deal with your employer in the absence of any clarification and take the moral high ground.

At the moment, following the law and company policy, strikes me as stooping to the lowest common denominator.

My wife is a pilot.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

[V1... Ooops]

Originally Posted by Miss Marple

...It is my company's policy for pregnant crew to be grounded from the time they find out on full pay (not sure if that is law or internal only...

Wow, that is quite a remarkable policy - at least, viewed from the perspective that we have here in Canada.

Under Canadian law, a pilot is obliged to disclose pregnancy to her Aviation Medical Examiner when she becomes aware of it, but not to her employer. A normal pregnancy is considered to be a "state of good health", not some kind of disease.

I think that there is a regulation somewhere that requires Canadian pilots to stop flying commercially at the beginning of the third trimester, but that does not create any financial hardship, because there is a requirement for all employers to provide employees with leave for pregnancy. The pilot can still fly recreationally if she wishes, that decision is up to her and her Aviation Medical Examiner.

It sounds to me like your company takes a very conservative approach to things (granting you leave from the moment of conception, so to speak), but, heck, it is a very generous policy, so, it's tough to complain about it unless you really miss flying the plane.

As for the "what-if" scenario presented by the second pregnancy (congratulations, by the way), I think that d105 offered the best answer in the second post on this thread - just ask the HR department how they would like to handle that.

Originally Posted by Miss Marple

...I will indeed probably have to resign after my maternity leave...

Whatever for? It costs employers a fortune to recruit and train good pilots, and presumably after four years with the company, they know you are a good pilot. Just ask them for unpaid leave, and perhaps volunteer to keep your licence current (not necessarily your type rating) on your own dime. Heck, they might respond by offering to keep you current on type if you agree to show up every 6 months for the sim check.

Most employers (at least, mine for sure) are not the least bit upset about pilots taking pregnancy leave, or even longer leaves after that until the kid gets into primary school - they know that the pilot will eventually come back, because they now have one extra mouth to feed!

Michael

[kme]

Two kids is not exactly uncommon in the UK (note - this is a guess).

If any flying female is going to have two, most companies would apperciate it to be twins of course. This is not exactly easy to arrange (Guess nr 2, but if you dont believe it - give it a try and prove me wrong).

What is then the second best?

This might be depending on the company itself and is likely decided by the details of the retraining requirements since the total time off is likely the same? wheather they come in a row or with time in between.

It is not unlikely that one (slightly bigger?) revalidation is cheaper than two.

All of this is of course depending on a job that continue to exist after the period. A company laying of staff would of course be happy to get rid of people staying home on full salary but there is regulations and they are there for a reason - anyone unhappy about the rules should spend time trying to change them or the people making them and not look down on the people affected by the rules.

(I can see that such situations when unexpected very well might wreck havoc with the balances of a small company / family operation and have all respect for people managing to deal with these kind of issues in a civilised way.)

Actually there is no problem to work while pregnant, its just the detail that you might get grounded during parts of it. If the company (management?) does chose not to use this staff for other tasks during this time, then this is the companys decision (taken either on economic/market grounds or just plain inefficient) and has nothing to do with the employee.

I might as well mention that I am from Sweden and we do have a bit different views on such issues in general than for example 411A.

[LilaJane]

Wowowow

Let's put things right!

I am a female pilot, 757 skipper (and valued by my colleagues), 2 kids.

I would have liked to carry on working as long as possible whilst pregnant but:

1. My company wouldn't let me.
2. The local CAA wouldn't let me.
3. The doctor wouldn't let me.
4. I am not sure PAX would have been happy if the FO announced we are diverting due to captain giving birth.

So yes I took time off and my company and colleagues understand it.

The reason stated on my payslip was loss of medical class 1 which cannot be argued.

So all the idiots on this forum, go back to testosterone filled topics and let miss marple get some answers in peace.

Happy new year to all.

Lila

[ManaAdaSystem]

Testosterone vs PMS!

Everybody loves me too! Or else!

[pablo]

IMHO get lawyer counseling and get fair advantage of whatever your contry laws allow you.
Companies also adjust to their most favorable side of the law every day without any moral concerns.

My 2 cents worth... after getting sacked by some random multi-billion dollar corporation that filed +1,5$ bil. profit last year, because I lost my class I medical and not recovered in 6 weeks of UNPAID leave.
(I offered to do office work meanwhile, which they rejected, so I requested unpaid leave to go back home).

And of course congratulations for the baby!

411A I'm surprised to hear an American make an statement like that. I wonder what would happen if a Chief Pilot of a company within the USA writes "1 kid ok, 2 kids go find another career" in an e-mail to a female employee. Maybe a few lawyers are keen on taking a look at it.
Just wondering...

Cheers / Pablo

[411A]

Just wondering...

Wondering not necessary... and no emails required, either.
Emails leave a trail.
If someone was deemed to be 'gaming the system' I can fully appreciate a chief pilots stance whereby...a couple of PC checks would then be failed, then dismissal is right around the corner.
I've seen it happen, in the past.

For the possible 'gamers' in the crowd...when you knocked on the HR door, you asked for work, and if work was provided, a reasonable salary was offered.
You then either said yes or no.
Note...work for salary.
I don't think the HR department intended for no work, but pay anyway.

Illness is one thing...maternity leave 'gaming' quite another.

[miss marple]

Ok 411, are you REALLY saying that maternity leave is 'gaming'?

No one is allowed to take more than what the law says or what the company policy allows, so if you are within the law and only given what those laws/policies say you are entitled to, then please, please, please explain how that is gaming?

Perhaps calling in and saying one is pregnant when one is not and trying to take advanatage of what a pregnant lady is allowed could be gaming, but otherwise surely it is following procedures?

When I knoced at the HR door (as you put it), yes I accepted their job for a fair salary, and they accepted me as a woman knowing full well what the law and their own company policy on pregnancy and maternity leave is and that I am a woman and one day may well request it.

Don't blame the people for following the rules, either change the rules or accept them.

Your shallow and hurtful allegation that I am a 'gamer' is poor and unjustified, you dont know me or my work ethic nor my relationship with my company, you I am afraid are sad, little man and I am shocked to hear how you agree and condone such ethics as to fail someone before they have stepped in to a check of some nature because you dont agree with some other point of view of theirs.

I think that is disgraceful and on top of being a sad little man you are a man of poor moral standing to agree with such a method of dismissal.

[411A]

miss marple seems to have a very large sense of entitlement, and appears to want to game the system to the maximum extent.
No wonder some women have negatives when looking for a job...it's far easier to hire a male, as they don't seem to have so much excess baggage.
miss marple does other women no favors.

[miss marple]

My sense of entitlement is no more than what the company policy states or the law offers.

I am shocked at your hostility towards someone you dont know personally and your desire to make such hurtful allegations.

I asked some simple questions in this thread, and it has been hijacked by the likes of you.

I fully respect your right to an opinion, but all you have done is make unfounded allegations against my motives to have a baby, how dare you since you don't even know me!

You may well disagree with the law regarding pregnancy and maternity leave and pay entitlements, but that is not my fault, go into politics and get them changed, but since this thread was about asking for information and not about the principle behind the law, I ask myself why you take time to argue on here about something that doesn't affect you in the slightest.

[411A]

I fully respect your right to an opinion,

Good, at least you are making progress.

...but all you have done is make unfounded allegations against my motives to have a baby, how dare you since you don't even know me!

You asked questions...it's not my problem that you don't like my answers.

Your motives appear to get as much out of a 'system' as possible, whereas, you don't appear to care in the slightest what potential problems you might cause to others.
This is generally called...a huge sense of entitlement.

To repeat, you do absolutely no favors for other working women.

[miss marple]

You patronising fool!

You asked questions...it's not my problem that you don't like my answers

I did not ask for your opinion on my motivation to have a child, I asked for information regarding the law, you obviously can't read!

Your motives appear to get as much out of a 'system' as possible, whereas, you don't appear to care in the slightest what potential problems you might cause to others.

I suspect you claim all your entitlment when it comes to taxation, is that not your right to claim all you are entitled to, do you have the same opinion of people who claim to their full entitlement, thats all I am doing.

This is generally called...a huge sense of entitlement

If claiming what I am entitled to claim, as I do with my tax and my flight duty times and my rest entitlement and my crew food entitlement makes me have a huge sense of entitlement, then I accept that, but I fail to see how claiming what you are entitled to is anything other than following the policy.

I guess you work beyond your duty limits because you dont respect policy or laws, you therefore also probably dont respect your rest requirement because you dont want to have a sense of entitlement.

See how ridiculous it sounds when someone starts making unqualified allegations against someone they know nothing about.

Other than being argumentative, what positive have you brought to this thread?

[SR71]

1. My company wouldn't let me.
2. The local CAA wouldn't let me.
3. The doctor wouldn't let me.
4. I am not sure PAX would have been happy if the FO announced we are diverting due to captain giving birth.

One suspects there is more to your situation than meets the proverbial eye then....or else, in such circumstances, it is quite right that the legal obligations on an employer to support its employee through this period are comprehensive.

AFAIK, in the UK (like Canada it seems), as long as you meet the obligations of your medical, the company cannot force you to quit flying.

It may try.

JAR-FCL 3 requires that having been assessed pregnant, you will have a multi-pilot restriction placed on your license, and that you may be deemed fit to fly until the end of the 26th week. That process involves you, your AME and, if need be, the CAA.

miss marple,

I wouldn't worry too much about what 411A says, although, you've already taken the bait.

He enjoys the cut and thrust....



It is a shame there is so much cynicism on this thread.

One understands why a company seeks to extract the maximum from it's employees. It is only doing the reverse of what it's employees seek to do to it.

It takes a noble person to break the circle.

And we wonder why there is no solidarity between pilots....

[411A]

...what positive have you brought to this thread?

Exposing you for what you are...someone who expects something for nothing.

Women in the work place...all OK, except that many want special privileges.

Walnut said it best...

Maybe one way to make this fairer for the majority of the workforce is to suspend seniority accrual when the women is not on 90% maternity pay. At least that way hard working male pilots will get their commands a little sooner. My son, who lives in Sweden has a wife who has had three children, all about 2yrs apart, In Sweden I believe a women gets 90% pay for 2yrs. Imagine the cost to the state, and why the tax rate is 60%.

Oh, I can hear the howls of protest now, from the likes of...miss marple
Ohhh, boo hoo

[miss marple]

You truely are a fool!

Exposing you for what you are...someone who expects something for nothing

Do you think a company would be giving something for nothing if they dont have to?

My employer is not a flying club, it is a business, so they pay only what they are legalyl obliged to.

I didnt realise there was sand in the head's of those who live in Arizona too!

[411A]

My employer is not a flying club, it is a business,

OMG, such a revelation.
Having now admitted that your employer is a business (not a flying club), I strongly suggest you stop whining and moaning...and actually, go to work, to earn the salary which you expect.

[Re-Heat]

Wow. There are some stone age and ignorant views on here, which of course you are perfectly entitled to hold. However, it would be rather more beneficial to equip yourselves with the facts re UK employment law before embarking on a crusade against Miss M, who is simply asking a question.

UK employment law is designed to permit a mother to have a child and then return to the same job in which she was previously employed to continue her career.

Airlines are further restricted by the medical fact that flying during the pregnancy is not particularly advisable, except during the second trimester (which I believe some airlines permit).

Logically, if a mother wants 2/3 children in quick succession, it would in fact mean that she is away from her job for a shorter time than would be the case if they were spread out, as the time off for maternity leave post-birth and time off during the pregnancy pre-birth coincide.

Thus, Miss M is in fact a greater asset to the airline, and the business retains a skilled professional once she returns.

As regards to the pay, I don't think it is that clear cut given the few numbers of female UK flight crew. I would expect that, given the grounding during the pregnancy due to medical reasons is at full pay, but maternity leave is not, you would remain on maternity leave pay during number 2 pregnancy, yet return to the full pay once that maternity period expires.

Your contract may differ, but I don't think anything is set in stone legally.

The other matter to consider is that maternity leave can be started up to 2(?) months before birth and ended earlier - if left on the lower statutory pay, that may be a way to manage a return to the flight deck and full pay more quickly.

[miss marple]

I am guessing the vast majority of your 8400 plus posts are argumentative ones since you have added zero value to this thread and with an attitude like yours, I guess your wife should be thankfull because you must spend all your time on here, which means it isn't with her.

I truly pity your wife!

Since you have absolutely nothing to add to this thread, why dont you go and argue with someone else.

[EGCC FO]

Miss Marple well done,

"I am guessing the vast majority of your 8400 plus posts are argumentative ones since you have added zero value to this thread and with an attitude like yours, I guess your wife should be thankfull because you must spend all your time on here, which means it isn't with her"

You beat me to it!!