• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pregnant? You're fired!

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
A touchy subject, but one where I can see both sides of the coin........

news_logo.gif

Pregnant? You're fired!
By Martin Small
BBC Money Programme


Every year, 30,000 women are sacked or forced out of their jobs because of pregnancy and 200,000 more face discrimination, according to the Equal Opportunities Commission.




All this is 30 years after the introduction of laws which made such practices illegal, and which were supposed to safeguard pregnant women in the workplace.

It happens to women in all kinds of jobs, from the lowest paid to the highest.

Take Chanine Boulton, who earned £129,000 a year as one of Canon UK's top photocopier salespeople.

When she had her daughter Layla in 2003, everything seemed fine.

But while she was away on maternity leave, Canon reorganised its sales force - without telling Chanine.

Her best accounts, which generated most of her income, were given to a male colleague. She felt she had no choice but to quit.

"I hadn't done anything wrong," Ms Boulton says.

"They had no reason to treat me like this. They had obviously written me off."

Not just a job

At the other end of the income scale is Sarah Taylor, who earned £14,000 a year as a supervisor for Cablepoint, a small engineering firm in Hull.




In 2002, she suffered a miscarriage late in her pregnancy, but then quickly became pregnant again.

First she had to endure insensitive remarks about her bereavement by her manager.

Then, after she gave birth to her daughter Georgia, her employers refused her request to work part time.

She resigned, feeling that she had been pushed out of a job she loved.

"It was everything I'd worked for and everything I'd wanted to do" Ms Taylor says.

"To other people it was just a factory job. But to me it was my life."

Forced to move

This kind of discrimination can affect not just women, but their whole families.

Sarah Holland was a software developer for a small firm in London, Information Initiatives, where she earned £29,000 a year.

But immediately after she discovered she was pregnant with her son Luke, she was made redundant.

With their income down by two-thirds, she and her husband Dave could no longer afford to stay in their house, and had to move.

"There was no central heating, no double glazing, no hot water system" says Ms Holland.

"My son was very ill because we moved in there coming up to winter, so it was extremely cold and he got chest infections.

"And having to move your child into that environment, you feel like a failure as a mother."

Legal complexities

All three women took their cases to employment tribunals and were found to have suffered unfair dismissal and sex discrimination.

But few follow a similar path.

Of the 30,000 women who lose their jobs each year due to pregnancy, only 1000 go to a tribunal.


Not only may getting pregnant lose you your job immediately; leaving work to have one or more babies costs - and costs a lot




"These are women who are pregnant or who have just had a baby. Really their first focus is not standing up in court and doing a Perry Mason," says Victoria von Wachter, a leading employment barrister.

And even if women can afford expensive lawyers, or have the backing of a union, going to tribunal can be daunting.

"The complexities of the legal points that are now being argued are breathtaking compared with 30 years ago" says Ms von Wachter.

The complexities of the laws concerning maternity in the workplace may help explain some of the apparent discrimination, according to some businessmen.

Steve Noble, a partner in a Bristol-based public relations firm, Publicity Matters, says that smaller companies have to cope with too much red tape.

"Most small businesses spend their time trying to evade regulation rather than actually working with it," Mr Noble says.

"In the end it's tempting just to dump the lot and just muddle through."

Wasted education

But when employers ignore the law and get rid of staff simply because they want to have a child, the consequences can be devastating.

Ms Holland believes that having been out of work for over 2 years now she has lost more than just a job.

"I think effectively my career is over," she says.

"To have it all taken away so abruptly is hard, and you wonder... if all the education you went through was worthwhile."



The Equal Opportunities Commission and charities like Tommy's can provide help and advice on the issues raised in this story. The Forum of Private Business publishes an online guide to employment law. For more information go to the internet links at the top of the story. The Money Programme - Pregnant? You're fired! - BBC TWO at 7pm on Friday 25 November.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/business/4406906.stm

Published: 2005/11/25 07:59:15 GMT
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
This is reprehensible. Given that having babies is in the interests of society as a whole, it is in all of our interests that these laws be enforced.
 

Fluffy

A fool
This is reprehensible. Given that having babies is in the interests of society as a whole, it is in all of our interests that these laws be enforced.
However, our society rewards in the short term, not the long, and therefore it is totally understandable (if totally wrong) to see people act with such an aim in mind.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Sunstone said:
This is reprehensible. Given that having babies is in the interests of society as a whole, it is in all of our interests that these laws be enforced.
The reason there is such controversy over this in England, is that, if women say that they will return to the job after maternity leave, the employer has to keep her job open.

As most social workers advise women to say that they will return to work (even if they have no intention of doing so), small business have suddenly found themselves short of staff, unprepared, and in a mess.

there are always two sides to every argument.:help:
 

Draka

Wonder Woman
michel said:
As most social workers advise women to say that they will return to work (even if they have no intention of doing so), small business have suddenly found themselves short of staff, unprepared, and in a mess.
Provided the woman got pregnant while working at said job, then the employer had about 9 months to prepare for her maternity leave time. If they have that covered then chances are that they can cover if the woman were not to return. To say they are unprepared is laughable. The only instance that I can see where the employer may be unprepared to cover the lost hours is if the woman had a miscarriage or complications part way through her pregnancy and needed some medical time off. But then again...that could happen to anyone at anytime. Someone could be in a car accident and be off work for a few weeks. Most often those people don't lose their jobs...and that's a sudden tragedy...as a miscarriage or premature labor or whatnot would be.

Would a husband fire his wife from his business for having his baby? Men need to think about this. Why punish a woman for nature? If men had babies they would be furious at that treatment. But they don't, women do, and suddenly we are incompetents at work...nice to know our work ability and mental capacity so diminish that we no longer can do the job we did before. Like we lose those things when the baby comes out:rolleyes: .
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Maybe modern capitalism's ruthless pursuit of the bottomline is partly to blame for the firing of women who take maternity leave.
 

thorysus

Member
For whatever reason i just find this practise unacceptable! I can understand that a company may have to fill that spot while that person is gone, and cover thier own butt if they dont return. But if she returned she should be briefed on what going on and restored immetality to her posistion and her same income. Anything else is purely wrong. After all she was quilified for the job before she was pregnate, and during pregnacy why isnt ahe after having a bay! Thats just silly. Now if she wasnt qualified why was she there to begin with!
 
Top