Pregnancy can harm job prospects - Where's the Balance?
-
Pregnancy can harm job prospects: poll
Adrian Lim
Tue, Aug 07, 2007
AsiaOne
Women who become pregnant harbour the fear that they may lose their jobs or have their career prospects dimmed.
Nearly seven of every 10 people polled recently felt that pregnant workers were disadvantaged this way.
In the AsiaOne poll of 1,259 people last week, some 30 per cent, or 374 individuals indicated that a pregnant woman faces the risk of losing her job while another 37 per cent, or 466 people, agreed that pregnancy would "affect her promotion prospects."
Only one-third, or 419 people, felt that there was no cause for worry.
The survey followed media reports about Medicorp actress Zoe Tay, who said in this month's issue of Chinese women's magazine Citta Bella that her contract had been "suspended", and that she had stopped drawing income because of her pregnancy.
The 39-year old actress, who is married to pilot Philip Chionh, has a two-year-old son Brayden and is currently seven months pregnant.
The controversial topic has set online chatrooms and forums in Singapore abuzz. In AsiaOne, the forum thread "Medicorp drops pregnant Zoe Tay" has so far received 46 postings and a massive 10,682 public views to date.
Mediacorp has since clarified their contractual policies, saying in a statement that "there is no termination or suspension of contracts for artistes who are pregnant".
It added that "the 12-week full pay (similar to permanent staff on maternity leave) would usually still be paid to pregnant artistes with no obligation or extra commitment" and it "has always adopted a pro-family approach".
Medicorp, however, said it will not disclose the specifics of individual broadcaster-artiste contracts for reasons of confidentiality.
Zoe Tay's revelation of her contractual issues with her employer caught the public eye because of her 'A-star' status as a local celebrity, but she is not the only one unhappy about what she sees as the job consequences of being pregnant.
In the first five months of this year, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) received 36 complaints of pregnancy-related discrimination, compared to the 15 to 28 cases reported annually from 2001 to last year.
It is of no surprise that 67 per cent of AsiaOne readers feel that a woman's career is in jeopardy when she becomes pregnant.
"With the government's efforts to promote work-life harmony and family life, I am appalled and disappointed that women still contend with issues such as getting sacked for being pregnant," said Mrs Valerie Chan in an AsiaOne forum posting.
Mrs Chan, 28, was asked to leave her job as an Operations Executive at a global conference company earlier this year because the company felt that she could not meet the newly-imposed travelling requirements in her downsized department.
This despite her candid opinions she gave to her then-prospective employer during the interview about starting a family which they assured her was fine as they were "pro-family".
However, even if a company chooses to retain a pregnant employee, some 37 per cent feel her career prospects will be affected adversely.
A forum member, Super Gal, said of her experience: "When I was expecting my third child, they didn't sack me but my expatriate bosses gave me so much mental and physical stress such that I had a nervous breakdown and my gynecologist had to induce my labour.
"When I returned after my maternity break, he had the cheek to ask me 'when am I stopping all my nonsense, in other words, getting pregnant'."
A few forum members said that some companies, especially the SMEs (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises) have no choice but to let their pregnant employees go.
Mr Terry Chang wrote: "We employ somebody to work for the company and pay him or her accordingly for what he or she is supposed to contribute to the company. If the employee is new and without past contribution to the company, I don't see why the company is obliged to continue to employ her if she is not suitable for the job."
Zoom58sg said that "most SMEs do not have room for staff to be on maternity", and it would be too much of a financial strain to bear.
Is having a baby a joyous moment parents? To many people, this state of prospective motherhood can turn out to be a tangled web of contractual disputes, mistreatment from the employer, and loss of income and job prospects. -
This is seriously one of the problems the government should solve if they want the birth-rate to go up...
-
What balance are you toking about? This work-life balance is a mere mirage man.
Let the population shrink for all we care. It's not going to affect us in the short or even medium run coz we might not be here anymore..... Besides, they can always depend on "foreign talent" right?
-
In the past, the our 'all-wise-and-scholastic' government harped about and expressed serious concern over the issue of Low Birth Rates.
Now, the one singularly obvious deterent (as well as obstacle) which stops people from having babies stares them in the face, they choose to keep quiet...
I applaude their efforts in getting local employers to hire Older Workers, but if they continue to ignore this issue of Pregnancy Discrimination, 22 companies who jumped on the bandwagon to hire older workers, is definitely NOT going to be sufficient to handle the multitude of older workers soon to become decades down the road...
Hence, I ask; What the HELL, is the Multimillion Dollar Government doing?
-
This is why most of us, inside our heart, known that this 'Work Life Balance' thingy is BullSh*t.
-
This story is different from pregnancy issues but can NTUC or MOM employment laws protect employees from such termination of service? I post here because itÂ’s also about flaws in the employment laws. ThereÂ’s no clause to protect the employees from unfair dismissal. How can an employee seek redress in such circumstances?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ST Forum Online Story Aug 4, 2007
Family devastated after miscarriage and sacking by a company with no heart
TWO months ago, my daughter had a miscarriage.
But worse was to come.
My son-in-law's store needed to do a stocktaking and, as manager, he must be around when the exercise was carried out.
Because of his wife's miscarriage, he applied for emergency leave but, to his surprise, this was rejected.
As he had to be with his wife, he took a week's no-pay leave and, for this, he was blacklisted.
Recently, my son-in-law's services were terminated. The reason given - he was not supposed to let rank-and-file staff to open the store.
But the fact is he needed to attend a company meeting and so he passed the key to his supervisor. Instead, the supervisor passed the key to a rank-and-file worker to open the store.
How can this injustice be allowed to happen?
Shu Yuet Cheng (Mdm) -
its easier to import.
-
You have to pity some of these companies really. Pregnancy can really disrupt a worker's job, not just for a while but for many many months. You can't sack the workers cause doing so is clear discrimation, while you still have to pay the worker. I remember reading before on the straits times how one very small travel agency only employ like 3 people, and when 1 of them got pregnant it was like 1/3 of the work force is gone for a third of a year and the whole agency suffered because of that. People wanting to have children and yet still wanting their pregnancy to not affect their job is often asking for too much. Especially those that want to have more than 2 children.
Of course, the boss that sacked the son-in-law because the daughter had a miscarriage is really being a bastard here, but then again we are not getting the full story. -
sigh, instead of implementing law to have the PM appoint more people who appoint judges..... They should be looking into law that protects pregnant mothers. E.g like if a pregnant mother is asked to leave a company due to layoffs eg... reasonable compensation to give given etc...
-
the travel agency can put up part time employment or short term employment. its a problem that the management need to solve because this is life and people need to have a life outside of work and not make it be the employee fault.
-
best best bestOriginally posted by hloc:This is why most of us, inside our heart, known that this 'Work Life Balance' thingy is BullSh*t. 
-
What company is the son working?Originally posted by googoomuck:This story is different from pregnancy issues but can NTUC or MOM employment laws protect employees from such termination of service? I post here because itÂ’s also about flaws in the employment laws. ThereÂ’s no clause to protect the employees from unfair dismissal. How can an employee seek redress in such circumstances?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ST Forum Online Story Aug 4, 2007
Family devastated after miscarriage and sacking by a company with no heart
TWO months ago, my daughter had a miscarriage.
But worse was to come.
My son-in-law's store needed to do a stocktaking and, as manager, he must be around when the exercise was carried out.
Because of his wife's miscarriage, he applied for emergency leave but, to his surprise, this was rejected.
As he had to be with his wife, he took a week's no-pay leave and, for this, he was blacklisted.
Recently, my son-in-law's services were terminated. The reason given - he was not supposed to let rank-and-file staff to open the store.
But the fact is he needed to attend a company meeting and so he passed the key to his supervisor. Instead, the supervisor passed the key to a rank-and-file worker to open the store.
How can this injustice be allowed to happen?
Shu Yuet Cheng (Mdm) -
Don't know. Not mentioned. There's always this fear of being dragged to court.Originally posted by xiaoxui:What company is the son working? -
The very fact that the government is putting a substantial effort into promoting worklife balance.(eg. worklife advocate in each statboard) is symptomatic of a deeper problem with the worklife culture here in Singapore, especially within the public service.
-
a lot of policies are for show only.
-
actresses has a statement in the contract stated that they can't be pregnant, as there ARE certain roles that's unfit for a pregnant lady. What happened to Zoe Tay...i'm not surprised.
-
I think the govt shld never interfere with what the companies do. The best is to let the market decide. Since Zoe signed the contract, she shld not complain. Shame on her.
-
Read again :Originally posted by Mat Toro:I think the govt shld never interfere with what the companies do. The best is to let the market decide. Since Zoe signed the contract, she shld not complain. Shame on her.
Whereas according to ZoeMediacorp has since clarified their contractual policies, saying in a statement that "there is no termination or suspension of contracts for artistes who are pregnant".
It added that "the 12-week full pay (similar to permanent staff on maternity leave) would usually still be paid to pregnant artistes with no obligation or extra commitment" and it "has always adopted a pro-family approach".
Medicorp, however, said it will not disclose the specifics of individual broadcaster-artiste contracts for reasons of confidentiality.The survey followed media reports about Medicorp actress Zoe Tay, who said in this month's issue of Chinese women's magazine Citta Bella that her contract had been "suspended", and that she had stopped drawing income because of her pregnancy.
Yes it is a shame, a shame that some people don't read before they shoot their mouths off. -
I see tonnes of people touting security as a key reason that renders this regime an attractive place to live in.
I wonder if the same folks actually render provisions for job security (ie. the free world where trade unions and civil suits can be effectively utilised to redress such discriminations instead of having only an inefective state-controlled department to write to as an avenue for redress) and other civil liberties quintessential to safeguarding employment discrimination as any less important as simply living somewhere with a low crime rate... -
It's more an issue of having one's civil liberties and labour rights denied, which is perfectly understandable given that's a parallel shared by all despotic regimes.Originally posted by googoomuck:This story is different from pregnancy issues but can NTUC or MOM employment laws protect employees from such termination of service? I post here because itÂ’s also about flaws in the employment laws. ThereÂ’s no clause to protect the employees from unfair dismissal. How can an employee seek redress in such circumstances?
With compliant and politicised Judiciaries in place and the absence of free trade unions (or any other NGOs that could independently safeguard the interests of the employed), what legitimate avenues could one effectively turn to to have such an issue addressed? -
HUMAN RIGHTS
WHO'S RIGHT?
By Ng Tze Yong
August 09, 2007
HUMAN rights - the mother of all motherhood statements, the cookie-cutter and apple pie statement that can mean anything from the fall of the Berlin Wall to why you should get that pay rise.
It's the free world politician's BHAG - Big Hairy Audacious Goal.
It's why Saddam's hated, Lincoln's loved, and why an American teenager's butt, due for six strokes of the mighty rotan, once riled the US.
It's an ideal so important, yet so hard to pin down.
Soon, human rights may be coming to an Asean conference near you.
Asean recently announced it has agreed to set up a landmark human rights commission.
Will Asean's leaders find their way to a common definition? Just what are human rights? It's a tricky question.
The granddaddy of human rights was a man with the less-than-cuddly name of Cyrus the Great.
King of a Persian empire in the 6th century BC, dear Cyrus carved down his thoughts on a piece of royal clay, promising religious freedom and abolishing slavery for his people.
The Cyrus Cylinder, as the edict became known, is recognised by many as the first human rights charter. A replica actually takes pride of place at the steel-and-glass UN headquarters.
Over the centuries, philosophers took turns to have a crack at the question.
John Locke's take on human rights was sweetly divine, describing rights as gifts from God.
John Stuart Mill's thesis was almost mathematical: One always acts to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
Karl Marx, ever the practical man, issued a war cry: Revolution against the bourgeoisie.
The romantics will say: Human rights is 'the conscience of mankind', 'the highest aspiration of man' and 'the rebellion against tyranny'.
All well and good. But let's try and be a little bit more specific.
Before we get to the 'rights', let's try and figure out the 'human'.
Who's human? Now that's a tough one in itself.
The US Declaration of Independence famously states that 'all men are created equal'.
But it was years before America freed its slaves and gave women the right to vote.
WHAT'S BEEN FIGURED OUT
Today, we've figured out the women and ethnic minorities.
We haven't quite made up our minds about the rights of homosexuals and transient workers.
Not forgetting, of course, the rights of opposition politicians.
It's the million-dollar question, a tricky one, in fact, for several Asean states.
So which comes first? Society's good or one human's rights? Is human rights too amorphous a concept to mean anything?
Taking baby steps before the leap of faith might help.
Mr Simon Tay, chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs, wrote earlier this week that Asean should consider public education first.
Human rights, he wrote, continue to be seen in this region as an alien, 'Western' concept. Public education can reframe that debate.
'Asean's peoples need to understand human rights and see them as being part of their own heritage and beliefs, rather than a Western imposition,' wrote Mr Tay.
Can Asean pull it off?
The way forward might not be as murky as it looks.
The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights already holds the Guinness World Record for being the most translated document - 'more than 300 languages and dialects: from Abkhaz to Zulu.'
Asean, though, will have to find its own language.
There's plenty of thinking ahead for Asean to do. Asean's new rule, ironically, must come from some sort of consensus.
Motherhood will only make it murkier. -
I agree.Originally posted by nonameguy:You have to pity some of these companies really. Pregnancy can really disrupt a worker's job, not just for a while but for many many months. You can't sack the workers cause doing so is clear discrimation, while you still have to pay the worker. I remember reading before on the straits times how one very small travel agency only employ like 3 people, and when 1 of them got pregnant it was like 1/3 of the work force is gone for a third of a year and the whole agency suffered because of that. People wanting to have children and yet still wanting their pregnancy to not affect their job is often asking for too much. Especially those that want to have more than 2 children.
Of course, the boss that sacked the son-in-law because the daughter had a miscarriage is really being a bastard here, but then again we are not getting the full story.
Sometimes we have to look from the company's prospective. It is not cost efficient for them to hire that employee who absent herself or produce a lesser amount of work done for the same amt. of salary she is being paid. It kind of does not justify the wage and, in this case, is a disadvantage to the employers. In this scenario, i am only referring to SMEs as they really need to cut down on their cost in order to maintain their stake in the market.
To be honest, it is a disadvantage to be a working woman who wants to start a family. So I suggest that maybe the pregnant employee take 3 months no pay leave prior to her delievery date but still get to maintain her job. In the mean time, her company can get to look for part timers to substitute her job and might in another way, cut down on their cost too.
My suggestion might not be feasible, but as i said, was only a suggestion for discussion. What are some other alternatives that can be used to solve or tone down this matter?