As much as I hate jumping on the it’s-a misogynist-world-after-all band wagon, a recent study shows that women face serious job discrimination in their child-bearing years.
The BBC reported on a new UK study’s findings:
And 76% of managers admitted that they would not hire a new recruit if they knew they were going to fall pregnant within six months of starting the job…
About 52% of those surveyed said that they considered the chances of a candidate getting pregnant taking into account age and whether they have just got married…
Other findings included only 5% employing someone knowing they were pregnant with 86% saying they would feel “cheated” if someone announced their pregnancy weeks after joining a firm.
The UK offers paid maternity leave, so pregnancy is arguably, more supported by their society than ours. And look at their study results. In fact, most nations mandate it per a 2004 Harvard Study
To put it another way, out of 168 nations in a Harvard University study last year, 163 had some form of paid maternity leave, leaving the United States in the company of Lesotho, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland.
In the US, California was the first state to legislate paid maternity leave, followed by Washington state. New Jersey if finalizing its own bill. However, most American women can only rely on the Family Medical Leave Act. In an interview with USA Today, Debra Ness of the National Partnership of Women and Families commented that
“The top 20 most economically competitive countries in the world have all figured out how to do it,” says Ness. “But not the United States.”
She points out that an estimated 40 percent of the work force is not even eligible for FMLA protection, because there have to be more than 50 employees in a workplace and an employee has to have been there for at least a year
A final note: In the United States women reported 5587 cases in 2007, which is a 14% INCREASE in instances of discrimination in 2006 and a 40% INCREASE compared to 1997. These are just the REPORTED cases of discrimination.
Given the above findings, is being upfront in a job interview about planning to get pregnant or being pregnant really the only option as Christine Hassler suggests in her Huffington Post column?
April 22, 2008 at 9:45 am |
I get syndicated over at Brazen Careerist, where several people left comments. So I thought I’d share some of my own comments from that site as they relate back to the above. Here’s the link
http://www.brazencareerist.com/2008/04/21/why-the-us-workplace-is-among-the-worst-places-to-be-pregnant/#comment-2760
Stephen,
According to the BBC “Legally, a direct question to a potential employee cannot be asked,” so I guess times have changed.
Women are then being discriminated against on the basis of that biological factor.
My dad was out of work for 2 months after triple bypass surgery, as were his friends (the majority of the guys in his department have had heart attacks+) and the beat went on while they were away, without a second though.
Pregnancy is also a medical condition, but it’s treated differently.
Liz, thanks for pointing out Penelope had written on this topic. Here is the link for others who come along:
blog.penelopetrunk.com/2005/05/30/how-to-job-hunt-when-youre-pregnant/
April 28, 2008 at 4:23 am |
If you think a uterus is bad, try walking around with a fat third leg every day.
April 28, 2008 at 8:10 am |
I almost deleted that comment because it’s offensive, but I imagine that’s the knee jerk response for a a decent percentage of men.
You don’t often see lawsuits about men being held back professionally because of their gender, or men being underpaid because of their gender. Race, yes. Penis, no.
April 28, 2008 at 8:50 am |
yeah, think about women who are a different race on top of gebing a women!