On Careers

Laid Off and Pregnant: Is There Any Recourse?

By Suzanne Lucas

Posted: August 13, 2009

I found out that my job was considered "redundant" and that I would be terminated at the end of August. I started this job months ago, which involved me paying for my own relocation. I am the only woman in my group and the newest hired. I just found out that I am pregnant. I have not told my boss. Do you think I should tell her? Would it save my job? Also, they are interviewing for my position, which makes it seem like it's not really redundant.

First things first: No one knew about your pregnancy. It played no role in the decision to terminate. Feel free to tell your boss (congratulations, by the way), but don't expect it to save your job. It shouldn't. Pregnancy doesn't protect you from termination. It's illegal to fire someone because she's pregnant, but it's not illegal to fire a pregnant woman.

[See what to do when a dream job isn't.]

Now, about the designation of your position as "redundant" combined with actively interviewing replacements for you. There could be several things going on here:

[See why your coworkers may not be the problem.]

It's perfectly legal in the United States to terminate almost any employee for cause, or no cause. As I said earlier, the pregnancy is irrelevant to the business decision. If you are set on arguing that it's discrimination because you are the only female in the group, keep in mind the following:

So, what should you do? First of all, make an appointment with your boss—a real, scheduled, sit-down appointment. (Don't grab him in the hallway and say, "we need to talk!") When you sit down together, discuss the fact that you paid for your own relocation. It is not unreasonable to ask for compensation for that, given the circumstances. You could argue (and you should) that since this is a "redundant" position, they should have realized that 4½ months ago and not hired you in the first place. Don't mention that you know they are recruiting and suspect that the position is not redundant at all. Why? Because your argument is much stronger if you argue from a position that he should have known the position would be irrelevant in only a few months. If they offer you some severance, expect to be asked to sign a general release.

Second, ask for an evaluation of your work. This isn't to save your job, but to help you identify any potential problems that you could fix for your next job. Even in a true position elimination, there was a reason you were chosen over someone else. (Keep in mind: That reason could be last in/first out, or something similar that doesn't relate to you as a person.) But, if there is something you could fix, fix it.

[See how to survive sabotage and save your job.]

Third, ask for a reference. Clarify what he will say to a potential employer. Again, if your performance has been an issue, this is the time to negotiate the reference. Just hoping that he'll be positive isn't good enough.

Fourth, set your sights on a new job. It's very doubtful you could win this one back. If it's a large enough company, there may be a place for you in another group. Go ahead and look, but don't place all your eggs in that basket. Unfortunately, it's back to the job hunt.

Getting laid off can be devastating, whether you're pregnant or not. The worst thing to do is let that overwhelm you and make you feel helpless. Keep reminding yourself that there are numerous companies out there and that many of them would love to have you as an employee. Then work your hardest to find those companies.

Suzanne Lucas has nine years of human resources experience, most of which have been in a Fortune 500-company setting. She holds a Professional in Human Resources Certificate from the Society for Human Resource Management. She blogs at Evil HR Lady.

many problems

...you want to know why unemployment is so high> There are lots of jobs out there...they don't pay worth a damn, but lots of jobs. Many people won't take a minimum wage job, because they figured out that the job would end up COSTING them more money just getting there than wat they would get in unemployment! The minimum wage is nothing but a joke! There is no way in hell you can survive on that without working multiple jobs... and forget it if you have a mortgage. DEREGULATION is a MAJORE factor in the shape of the current economy. Bank bail-outs? If they would drop those ridiculous interest rates maby less people woul default on loans, and afford the payments on the credit cards. And thet's not forget about the legalized loan sharks known as "Payday Loans" That is just a nasty circle, that unless you can come up with the extra money, it just goes round and round. Thats it for now...too mad to continue

Dan Masters of AZ @ Aug 18, 2009 12:42:37 PM

Laid off and Pregnant also

I was laid off two days ago after only being with the company for 5 months. What happened though is completely crazy in my mind... The previous Friday before I was laid off the book keeper came in and gave her notice that she was done and left 30 min before quiting time!! In the 5 months I've been there I have had nothing to do with the book keeping. I'm the assistant to the marketing and sales director. Anyway I was asked to go through the bills after she left it was soon realized that there were numerous accounting errors. My experience is NOT in accounting but it's pretty easy to figure out PAST DUE is not a good thing. Two days of going through and figuring out we needed a REAL accountant in the office I was let go. Told that because I didn't have the QB experience they needed to sort out the mess that they were just going to hire someone that could do my job and hers. Unbelievable! I was told though not to take it personal, it wasn't my fault.... yeah thanks that will help pay the bills.

A. Hunter of ID @ Aug 13, 2009 18:37:52 PM

JO of TN

Since you asked me to explain my earlier comment (below), I'll try.

Let's start with your statement, "Lower profits due to higher taxes means less capital to spend on human resources"---and turn that around.

In a high-tax-rate environment, lower pre-tax profits due to having spent more on human resources (more people employed) and on more new equipment, too, for that matter,---- means lower taxes to be paid. You want management to have incentive to keep people and grow employment, not to get rid of them and take cash out of the business to go (for instance) to one of today's highly touted investments---emerging market stocks (in other countries).

I saw this actually work very well in practice when I was controller of a manufacturing company in the 1970s and 1980s. C-corp tax rates on the owners, plus personal tax rates on dividends (had any been declared) were much higher than today, especially in the 1970s. To avoid those, the owners stayed in constant growth mode--posting lower pre-tax profits by hiring people like crazy. We grew hundreds of new jobs that lasted decades.

Now the tax laws are such that most people who have a business want to hire as few as possible and pay as little as possible---in order to keep more of the difference.

Not so good. I do not believe that low rates create jobs. I believe it's the opposite. And I believe voters are learning this way too slowly as America finds itself in all this trouble.

Muser of NM @ Aug 13, 2009 16:42:58 PM

Add Your Thoughts
About You

advertisement

On Careers

On Careers

Find savvy job advice from the brains behind top careers blogs, including Jobacle, Ask a Manager, What Would Dad Say, Newly Corporate, Cheezhead, Evil HR Lady, The M.A.P. Maker and Execupundit.

advertisement

advertisement

Subscribe

U.S. News Digital Weekly

A weekly insider's guide to politics and policy — in a multimedia, digital format. 52 issues for $19.95!

U.S. News & World Report

6 months of U.S. News & World Report's print edition for only $15. Save up to 67% off the cover price!