Pregnant and due a week before biglaw start date. Maternity leave? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hello all,

So I'm a 3L starting in NYC biglaw this fall. I just learned that I am pregnant. My husband and I were not planning on having children for a few years, but here we are. It's still very early in the pregnancy, but my due date should be ~a week before my start date.

I know I should go to HR or other contacts at my firm for this question, but as I'm only about 5-6 weeks pregnant, I'd like to be further along before notifying anyone, and I know biglaw HR practices are relatively uniform, so I'm hoping that someone has experience or anecdotes that could help me out.

My question is: Is it possible that I could actually get paid maternity leave beginning on my "start date"? I had always planned on taking the full maternity leave when I eventually had kids, but obviously this is a rather odd situation because I wouldn't even have started work yet. My husband has a job lined up also, but it doesn't pay biglaw money, and I am very worried about living in NYC for a few months on just his salary. If I am only able to push my start date back instead of paid maternity leave, I think I'll probably have to come back to work earlier than I would like.

I have done some research, and I know that taking maternity leave as a 1st year is relatively common, so I'm hoping that the firm will be glad to get it over with at the beginning rather than me getting involved in some matters and then leaving after a few months. Though I could see a scenario where they just suggest to defer my start date a few months instead.

I really just want to make sure this wouldn't be a ridiculous request. What say you TLS?

[emkay625]

This does seem like a ridiculous request. I'm not sure why a firm would agree to pay you your salary when you have not yet begun working for them. This wouldn't be maternity leave, as you have not started yet. Unfortunately i think a delayed start date is going to be the result here.

Does your husband's work offer paternity leave? My guess is best bet would be delay your start date by 2 or 3 months then have him take his paternity leave.

[Anonymous User]

This would depend on your firm's policy but it is most likely that maternity leave (along with all other benefits) wouldn't start until at least 90 days after your start date. While somewhat unusual your situation is fairly similar to people who time lateral moves with expecting children, people usually avoid lateraling while expecting because they don't want to have a child before their new firm's maternity/paternity policies kick in. I believe a delayed start would make the most sense, I understand you aren't happy about it but in the big picture it won't matter, you'll still be in a better position financially than a lot of new parents in NYC! Again there's no way to know until you speak with your firm, but it is most likely you won't be eligible for maternity leave prior being x days into work.

[Anonymous User]

This does seem like a ridiculous request. I'm not sure why a firm would agree to pay you your salary when you have not yet begun working for them. This wouldn't be maternity leave, as you have not started yet. Unfortunately i think a delayed start date is going to be the result here.

Does your husband's work offer paternity leave? My guess is best bet would be delay your start date by 2 or 3 months then have him take his paternity leave.

OP here...

That does make sense (and my husband does get 6 weeks paternity), but here's my thought process. Say I only decide to push back my start date by 4 weeks, after which husband takes his six weeks paternity while I start working. The firm offers 18 weeks paid maternity leave from birth. This is weird but, am I not, after 6 weeks working, then eligible for 8 weeks maternity leave? It's this kinda of awkward situation that I thought a big firm might want to avoid. It just seems odd that if I were to deliver a month later, just by virtue of working a few weeks I would get the full maternity leave, whereas in my situation I get nothing.

I think having worked there for 3 months last summer and the yearlong connection after I accepted my offer makes the relationship different than just some new employee starting a new job who has never worked there. I know this might come off entitled, and that they don't actually have to do anything, but I feel like many big firms would do it as a kind of good-faith gesture. If it's at all possible, I'm going to ask for it. However I won't if the consensus is that I'd be at a high risk of pissing people off for just asking.

[emkay625]

This does seem like a ridiculous request. I'm not sure why a firm would agree to pay you your salary when you have not yet begun working for them. This wouldn't be maternity leave, as you have not started yet. Unfortunately i think a delayed start date is going to be the result here.

Does your husband's work offer paternity leave? My guess is best bet would be delay your start date by 2 or 3 months then have him take his paternity leave.

OP here...

That does make sense (and my husband does get 6 weeks paternity), but here's my thought process. Say I only decide to push back my start date by 4 weeks, after which husband takes his six weeks paternity while I start working. The firm offers 18 weeks paid maternity leave from birth. This is weird but, am I not, after 6 weeks working, then eligible for 8 weeks maternity leave? It's this kinda of awkward situation that I thought a big firm might want to avoid. It just seems odd that if I were to deliver a month later, just by virtue of working a few weeks I would get the full maternity leave, whereas in my situation I get nothing.

I think having worked there for 3 months last summer and the yearlong connection after I accepted my offer makes the relationship different than just some new employee starting a new job who has never worked there. I know this might come off entitled, and that they don't actually have to do anything, but I feel like many big firms would do it as a kind of good-faith gesture. If it's at all possible, I'm going to ask for it. However I won't if the consensus is that I'd be at a high risk of pissing people off for just asking.

I'm not sure you'd be eligible for maternity leave for the birth of a child who was born prior to the time you began working there. And I don't know about law firms or your particular firm, but most other businesses have a requirement that you have been working there for at least one year before taking maternity or paternity leave.

The request would not piss me off, but I would find it ridiculous. And i'm a feminist and pretty big advocate for extended paid family leave. I just don't see why a firm would or should pay an employee who does not work for them yet.

[muskies970]

I think your best bet is to ask the firm directly what their policy is. I wouldn't worry about pissing them off, just phrase the e-mail in a non-entitled way and ask what their policy is in this type of situation.

[emkay625]

I think your best bet is to ask the firm directly what their policy is. I wouldn't worry about pissing them off, just phrase the e-mail in a non-entitled way and ask what their policy is in this type of situation.

This.

Also perhaps while they would not start paying you, you might be able to request an advance on your salary to help ease the financial woes a bit?

[Actus Reus]

Why don't you ask the firm to move UP your start date you so you get a month or two of work (i.e. start right after the bar exam). That's nearly 3 months.

[Anonymous User]

I think you're missing the threshold question which is are you eligible for your firm's maternity leave policy prior to starting work, that's something only the firm can answer for you, but most likely you wouldn't be (but it's all speculation at this point). There's a black and white difference between offering leave to an employee who has been at the firm x amount of time (usually a year) and offering leave to an employee who hasn't started yet or has just started. It appears from your post and replies that you disagree with this, but the vast majority of firms work this way. Again, subject to your firm's specifics, even though you were a summer, etc etc in the eyes of the firm for purposes of benefits, your start date as an associate is your first day at the firm.

Try your best to just ask what your options are in your situation and leave out your rationale and what you think you should be getting.

[84651846190]

It's fucking bullshit that we, as a society, don't have a government-funded maternity leave program. But yeah, as other posters ITT have said, you should just check with your firm.

[Anonymous User]

FYI - I think you may get a "no" answer, not because the firm is being stingy but because it might have an insurance policy that helps cover maternity leave costs. The policy terms are generally what define the HR eligibility requirements.

[Anonymous User]

FYI - I think you may get a "no" answer, not because the firm is being stingy but because it might have an insurance policy that helps cover maternity leave costs. The policy terms are generally what define the HR eligibility requirements.

All the more reason to talk to them, if insurance covers the cost (possible, but less likely then self funded), they might just let you show up for one day immediately after graduation, give you unpaid leave until your eligible for maternity leave (90 days, likely), then put you on maternity leave.

It really depends on your HR/firm culture. Since this wasn't on your radar over the summer, it might make sense to ask around to see if there's a firm committee or network they'll go to bat for you (my firm has a Committee on the Advancement of Womem Attorneys that is a big proponent)

[Big Dog]

....because it might have an insurance policy that helps cover maternity leave costs.

Oh, gosh no. No way a firm would purchase insurance for leave. But they will have a written policy which covers all employee leaves. And that policy will clearly state who and when employees are eligible.

Incidentally, you might also be eligible for ST disability from NY state, but a newbie may not qualify. (California has such a program. But it only kicks in after xx hours worked.)

So, the only answer is to contact HR.

[Anonymous User]

It's also unlikely that a firm can, and would, do anything contrary to their policy as it would raise discrimination issues, i.e. you can't treat one person differently than another when it comes to benefits.

So bottom line, have to ask HR, let us know what they say, and best of luck! But don't be surprised or offended if it doesn't work out, it would be atypical if it does.

[Magic Hat]

....because it might have an insurance policy that helps cover maternity leave costs.

Oh, gosh no. No way a firm would purchase insurance for leave.

Why is this?

[TheFutureLawyer]

x

[Anonymous User]

As is the common theme in this thread, you really need to discuss the situation with your firm's HR department. My firm has a generous firm-wide policy providing paternity/maternity leave for associates that kicks in from the day an associate begins (I took advantage of it during my first year at the firm), but your firm may be completely different. You will not get a better answer on here than you will from HR, and I am confident that asking will have no negative impact on your standing within the firm unless you wait too long and cause a fire drill. If you are worried about looking entitled you could just let HR know the situation and ask what your options are.

[RaceJudicata]

Congratulations!

[Anonymous User]

You'll just have to talk to the HR department, and hope they offer you something better than a delayed start date. Consider it your first real look into how family-friendly their culture actually is, vs. is on paper. If you have any friends or mentors at the firm that you can have a beer-summit style conversation about your situation, that might also be a good option. For now, don't stress, it will all work out, 3 months in nothing in the scope of life, or really a dent in your life long earnings, and 5 weeks is ridiculously early in a pregnancy.

Also, you could consider not moving to NYC until after your maternity leave is over to save some money. If the firm is willing to offer you a delayed start date and you can find a way to swing it financially, even if it means temp living in NJ or something, you might consider an even longer than 3 month delay adjusted start date. Starting a new job after the stress of a new born is very difficult, and you might as well take advantage of this natural "gap" between school and work if you can, not a luxury many have.

Also, get thee on some day care waiting lists right now or you could find yourself without child care when you are ready to start. Newborn and infant rooms are the HARDEST to get into for a first child (most give sibling preferences).

[janefbk]

Okay first and foremost... You cannot predict your due date. You could go into early labor before 37 weeks or be 42 weeks overdue.

Definitely call your firm's HR when you are closer to 10-12 weeks. They won't care. I am sure they get this call more times than you think. They will let you know what your options are. If they will start maternity pay immediately, then take it. If not, defer your start date for at least 3 months. But don't start 8-9 months pregnant. That would just be terrible. No matter how thin you are or how small your belly is at 7 months, you literally BLOW UP the last couple of months like a freaking balloon! I went on maternity leave my first year and the last trimester you are pretty much useless (this is my second baby). It hurts to sit for too long, you are cranky, tired, emotional, hungry, and trust me, "pregnancy brain" is VERY real. Not too mention how uncomfortably painful life is when you have a baby kicking your pelvic bone and rib cage like she is Holly Holms and hiccuping every 4 hours lol. You are also waaaayy too early into your pregnancy to know if this will be a difficult pregnancy or an easy pregnancy. You also don't know if your baby will be a difficult baby or an easy baby. Some babies start sleeping through the night as early as 4 weeks but some babies don't sleep through the night until closer to 3-4 months. I work at a small firm with a 1600 billable hour requirement (but most associates only bill around 1400 because it's such a lax firm) and it is still BRUTAL juggling work with a newborn. And don't even get me started on how horrifyingly painful and tedious breastfeeding is.

One other option is to defer your start date to 2 months and ask if you can start part-time. I worked at Latham & Watkins as a clerk before I went to law school and there were a couple of first year associates who were part-time. They still worked 30-40 hours a week but they seemed a lot less stressed. You can also work from home some days so take advantage of that. I know living on one salary can be tough, especially in a big city, but try your best to slash your expenses, live somewhere cheap, eat cheap and defer your student loans (if you have any). When my husband and I got married we lived off of $40,000 a year in a tiny tiny apartment and date nights were taco bell nights (89-cent burritos!) and a trip to "Hollywood" video lol. 3 months will go by fast.

I think the biggest thing you need to be worrying about right now is taking the bar in your third trimester. But on a positive note.. Congratulations to you and your husband!! Parenthood is tough but oh man it is worth it. There is nothing in this world that can compare to the feeling you get when you first meet your baby.

[jrass]

It's at will employment so I'd be queasy about doing this. They likely won't be upset you're pregnant, but may think you're unreliable based on the decision to take maternity leave before you start. By speaking with HR, you increase the likelihood they tell you to take some maternity leave, which while still being a risky choice would be less so than you suggesting it on your own. In a perfect world you would initially refuse to take it because you're too excited about starting work, and have partners subsequently begging you to take maternity leave, which you reluctantly accept.

[A. Nony Mouse]

It's at will employment so I'd be queasy about doing this. They likely won't be upset you're pregnant, but may think you're unreliable based on the decision to take maternity leave before you start. By speaking with HR, you increase the likelihood they tell you to take some maternity leave, which while still being a risky choice would be less so than you suggesting it on your own. In a perfect world you would initially refuse to take it because you're too excited about starting work, and have partners subsequently begging you to take maternity leave, which you reluctantly accept.

Dude, no. No one is going to buy someone refusing to take maternity leave because she's too excited to start work, and no one is going to beg her to take maternity leave in response. This is just not a rational way to deal with the situation. And it doesn't look unreliable to take some kind of leave before you start - it's simple human biology, she's going to have a baby, she will take some time off. Not dealing with that is what would look unreliable.

[CaptainLeela]

Welcome to TLS

[El Pollito]

that is terrible advice on so many levels

[Mr. Jones]

Just ask.