Pregnant? Forget about a new job. (1 Viewer)

[RogueAcademic]

That would only increase the companies image among a few on the extreme left. The extreme left is generally not a desired demographic for a company.

I don't believe this whole article was written just to please the extreme left though...

 

[Pace_T]

those pregnant chicks complaining about this "issue" can go get fucked.

=)

 

[withoutaface]

RogueAcademic is an equal opportunity poster.

 

[Affinity]

The government should create some incentive for businesses to hire would be mothers if they want this problem solved. What the goovernment can also do is to require that parental leave be split up equally between the man and woman. That way an employer has the same problems

By the way, ... taking up a new job after getting pregnant would not make one entitled to maternity leave:
http://www.workplace.gov.au/workpla...3-5D1E93CCBDDF}&NRCACHEHINT=Guest#eligibility

 

[xeuyrawp]

what issue is it of the employer?
why should they take the morally correct option which will cost their business money?

See I wouldn't even put it that way.

I don't think it's immoral for an employer not to hire a pregnant woman. Employers can balance morality and finance, and I don't think there's any issue with not wanting to waste time training someone who you may have to support while training and paying someone else. You hire someone on the assumption that they'll work for a reasonable period of time. Asking an employer to ostensibly waste time on you is fine only if they're happy to do it. Otherwise, it's your own problem, imo.

 

[wikiwiki]

Whoever mentioned unplanned pregnancies, well tough luck. A woman owns her womb, she takes responsibility for what is in it. If she is looking for a job while pregnant, it means an obvious choice was made: to keep a child she cannot afford and not have an abortion.

Can't afford it, don't have it. Women have the power to create or end a potential life. They therefore take full responsibility for it.

Why would employers be morally responsible to fix the lives of women? If you hired a non-pregnant worker they would be gainfully employed in full time work with a chance to continue on, instead of unemployed at the expense of an impaired casual who is looking for a couple of months work but signing a longer contract.

 

[RogueAcademic]

Whoever mentioned unplanned pregnancies, well tough luck. A woman owns her womb, she takes responsibility for what is in it.

Unplanned pregnancies are unplanned pregnancies. I'm not particularly referring to something like teen pregnancies which is, as far as I'm concerned, ridiculously stupid.

As for other circumstances of unplanned pregnancies, at the worst end of the scale it could the consequences of rape, or at the other end of the scale it could include the best intentions with the use of condoms and the pill. But even the pill and condoms do not have a 100% success rate in preventing pregnancy.

Another point which you declined to mention is that it takes two for pregnancy to happen. It's not just about pinning the entire issue on women and their wombs.

Can't afford it, don't have it. Women have the power to create or end a potential life. They therefore take full responsibility for it.

Abortion, and sensitivity towards this very difficult issue, is a whole other problem which this thread isn't about.

 

[townie]

somehow, i know it should be wrong, but in reality, i do have to side with the employers on this one.

BUT, i think we should be careful to avoid "i'm not hiring this woman whose pregnant because she will take leave soon" turning into "i'm not hiring this woman because she might get pregnant and take leave soon"

edit: although, the bigger the company though, the less of an issue it should be. take a company like woolworths for instance, unless it is a highly specialised role, the onus of finding a replacement is much, much less

 

[Slidey]

That's what abortions are for, son.

Given the low fertility rates and higher demand than supply of adoptive babies, I'd strongly recommend people perform a Juno rather than an abortion.

 

[xeuyrawp]

somehow, i know it should be wrong, but in reality,

Why does everyone keep saying that?

Pregnancy is: a) A decision, b) not a decision, or somewhere in between. However, it is most certainly not z) the employer's decision.

I don't see why it should affect employers any more than the decisions or not-decisions of other employees. :-/

 

[Graney]

somehow, i know it should be wrong, but in reality,

I think with the detrimental effect hiring a pregnant woman would have on other employees, the companies revunue, and by extension the shareholders, it's actually morally wrong for a company to employ a pregnant women.

 

[C-Andrich]

Off with her head!

 

[Edward Teach]

i'm SHOCKED to see young people on here having such 1950s views of gender roles

do you all believe a woman's place is to stay at home once she's pregnant?

equal opportunity LAW is supposed to make it ILLEGAL to discriminate against women for being pregnant, it's outrageous to see the pro-discrimination views on this board

 

[iamsickofyear12]

equal opportunity LAW is supposed to make it ILLEGAL to discriminate against women for being pregnant, it's outrageous to see the pro-discrimination views on this board

A man would never get a job if they told employers when applying for a job that they would be wanting to take a few months leave almost immediately after they were hired... so why should a woman in exactly the same situation just because she is pregnant? It is not discrimination at all, it is equality.

 

[Pace_T]

A man would never get a job if they told employers when applying for a job that they would be wanting to take a few months leave almost immediately after they were hired... so why should a woman in exactly the same situation just because she is pregnant? It is not discrimination at all, it is equality.

agree 100000%
get fucked you pregnant sluts. this gender equality thing has gone TOO FAR

BLARHHHH

 

[palex!]

get fucked you pregnant sluts. this gender equality thing has gone TOO FAR

BLARHHHH

its nice to see such sensitivity. asshole.

I agree with the sentiment that men wouldn't get the job if they needed leave etc etc, however, they are NOT in the same position. Unless this hypothetical man needed to take leave to look after another human being 24/7, its not the same. The woman in question has responsibility for a living thing, and that has to be taken account; its not just a question of wanting leave 2 months into a job.
Also, someone already mentioned that getting a job after already falling pregnant does not entitle you to paid maternity leave. so its not a question of having to pay two salaries.
I do agree that the employer may be disadvantaged by taking this woman on, however, her accreditations would make her a valuable employee under different circumstances. There needs to be a system in place for dealing with this situation... maybe, if she signed a contract which meant she was legally obliged to return to work after a pre-arranged period of maternity leave, the employer would be happy to take her on.
Surely there needs to be some sort of special legislation for this sort of thing, because the current laws clearly aren't working.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

I agree with the sentiment that men wouldn't get the job if they needed leave etc etc, however, they are NOT in the same position. Unless this hypothetical man needed to take leave to look after another human being 24/7, its not the same. The woman in question has responsibility for a living thing, and that has to be taken account; its not just a question of wanting leave 2 months into a job.

What the leave is being used for is completely irrelevant.

Also, someone already mentioned that getting a job after already falling pregnant does not entitle you to paid maternity leave. so its not a question of having to pay two salaries.

...but there is still the cost and inconvenience involved in having to hire and train a replacement.

 

[xeuyrawp]

i'm SHOCKED to see young people on here having such 1950s views of gender roles

It has nothing to do with gender roles. If you've read what anyone said, you'd see it has to do with an employee's state of being and its affect on the business community.

do you all believe a woman's place is to stay at home once she's pregnant?

Again, has nothing to do with the argument.

equal opportunity LAW is supposed to make it ILLEGAL to discriminate against women for being pregnant,

I think everyone here knows it's the law, mate. Again, has nothing to do with the argument.

it's outrageous to see the pro-discrimination views on this board

Are you suggesting that when an employer is interviewing two employees for one job, he or she shouldn't discriminate between the two?

 

[emytaylor164]

It depends on the position, i think that in most situations i think that it is reasonable not want to hire a pregnant women cos they will have to go on leave in several months anyway, but it depends on the circimstances, like how long the person is planning on maternity leave for, or if the position is full time, part time or casual.