30,000 women a year lose their jobs because they are pregnant

[MollieO]

So says C4 news tonight. Another staggering statistic is credit crunch redundancy - 3% of men made redundant, compared to 4.5% of men.

sorry that should be 4.5% of women.

Not surprising as women are often working part time so aren't eligible for as much redundancy pay. Add to this the chance that they are more likely to need time off at short notice they are always going to be at a disadvantage when redundancies have to be decided.

There are far more women than men who choose to work part time, or choose not to take on managerial positions, in my workplace, so its not surprising really. I know loads of women who don't want to work a full time week or have the pressure of higher positions - it's not a case of them being discriminated against - it's their choice.

"it's not a case of them being discriminated against - it's their choice."

For many families it's their only choice.

The mother of a child has many maternity options open to them, typically long(ish) periods at some level of pay, then state maternity pay and then a position being held open for them.

The father gets two weeks at very low pay.

So when it comes to deciding who takes the long career gap to raise a child it will almost always be the mother, even in families where the mother might be earning more. The father simply doesn't get the same choices and options.

So women end up realistically being the the one who has to take the break. And then it's their pay, pensions and prospects that suffer because of that.

It will only be a real "choice" when the same options are open to all regardless of sex (yes I know there are some biological restrictions but you know what I mean) and then families will have real options as to how to balance their careers and their family.

Women who take their statutory entitlement and then return to the position held open for them don't suffer the same issues with pay and prospects though.

Many women choose to take additional, unpaid leave, or return part time, or not return at all for a few years, or not push for promotion.

If a woman takes the statutory leave and goes back into her career at the same point, it really doesn't need to make a big difference.

violethill I think it depends on what you were doing before you took maternity leave and what area of work. I don't know anyone who has taken time off in my field who hasn't been adversely affected.

Possibly, though legislation has done a great deal to make things equitable.

I am open to being persuaded otherwise, but IME, every woman I know who might claim to have been adversely affected through having had a baby, have chosen to alter their working patterns in some way, either working fewer hours, taking on less prestigious or lucrative posts, taking unpaid additional leave after statutory leave etc. Whereas generally fathers tend not to.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that btw. I just think there is more frequently an element of choice by the mother than these sort of headlines suggest. I know several women who complain about earning less than the men they regard as their counterparts, when actually these women have made different choices.

I earn slightly less than my DH, and my pension pot is slightly less, because I took 3 short maternity leaves, and worked a 3 day week while they were small. My choice. I wouldn't say it's held me back greatly though.

If you do take time off work (like I have when I had DD) then it shouldn't come as a great surprise that you are disadvantaged regarding other colleagues (that are probably male) if redundancies need to be made.

Where I work has rode the recession well but if redundancies needed to be made then I would expect to be higher up the list because of this than my male colleagues who have taken no or very little time off when their DP/DW had their DC and from the companys POV I can kind of see why.

I think that a lot of credit crunch redunancies are happening in traditionally female jobs. For example TAs and nurses have lost their jobs.

I think it's interesting that people are homing in on teh redunadancy stat and not mentioned the stat about 30,000 women every year losing their jobs because they are pregnant.

Does anyone have any views on that?

Why are they fired because they are pregnant? Let's have a link explaining the stats

Well I didn't see the program!

OP might elaborate. It certainly happens, I am surprised at the number though.

here

They just say that stat.

"I think it's interesting that people are homing in on teh redunadancy stat and not mentioned the stat about 30,000 women every year losing their jobs because they are pregnant."

me too. Interesting that this seems to attract all sorts of comment about maternity leave.

They referred to a report on the programme but didn't say the name of the report. Frankly with sex discrimination and equal opportunities legislation I'm surprised at how high the figure is.

Having said that I was in line for promotion (had been told verbally) but when I announced that I was pregnant I was shoved off to a more junior job than the one I had been doing. The promotion disappeared.

"Frankly with sex discrimination and equal opportunities legislation I'm surprised at how high the figure is."

That means that 1 in 20 women who fall pregnant are in a job and are sacked. That seems either unbelievably or disgustingly high. My personal experiences don't back up that figure, but I'm very curious to see some more evidence.

There's probably been little comment on it because without knowing the study that produced the figure it's just a sound bite that's hard to constructively comment on.

"Many women choose to take additional, unpaid leave, or return part time, or not return at all for a few years, or not push for promotion."

But if those women are a part of a couple then they have options in that area that their male partners do not have. Women end up being the ones to take that initial long career gap because they are the only one who can do so. And when they do return to work they are the ones who have the rights to return to a part time position.

The "choice" isn't between the mother or the father taking that break and then adopting a more family friendly working life. The "choice" is either that the mother does it or no one does it. And that to me is not a choice at all. Women are forced into being the ones to take the career breaks and then forced to deal with the impact of that to their careers.

Norway has a flexible system where the parents can split parental leave between them as they choose to. The result is that the number of men taking paternity leave has shot up to 70% from about 3% and the birth rate has risen.

Here. It came from a book.

Also these stats:

57 per cent The proportion of UK women working in jobs below their skill and qualification levels.

59p Amount a part-time British woman worker earns on average per hour for every £1 a full-time man gets.

Doesn't surprise me at all TBH.

I'm not surprised at that figure at all, I kept DD1 arrival a secrete until I was nearly 8 months pregnant, I'm sure some observant people noticed but since I hadn't announced it nobody could comment.

Part time hours have never been an option and tbh I do think that is where the damage is done, we employed cleaners, spent a fortune at the dry cleaners and ate out a lot to ease the domestic burden rather than do it myself two days a week.

This happened to me 7 years ago...was working for a large listed company and they effectively said I didn't have a job nor one they could replace it with.......I got a lawyer involved and in hindsight got a paltry sum of compensation..........

Many women suffer constructive dismissal in relation to their pregnancy or taking maternity leave.

I had to fight to get my job back. It is only because I work for a major employer that I managed. Even generally good employers can have the odd manager with attitudes which belong with ehe arc.

What I find is shocking is that women are often terrible to each other. If a woman decides to exercise her right to take additional maternity leave then she should not be punished.

There is strong employment legistation but many women are not brave enough to use it. If you are planning a family then its a good idea to join a union. Or if that is not possible contact the CAB or ACAS if you have problems.

Women need to stand up for themselves. People died for our rights and we are not doing our sisters or daughters any favours by being weak.

Another issue is equal pay ofcourse.

I agree reallytired.

Just noticed that the link I gave to the original stats came from 2007. Amazing how the same old stuff gets rehashed as "news"

here's a link to info about the Alliance Against Pregnancy Discrimination which includes Fawcett Society and Citizens Advice.

I lost my job the day I went on maternity leave with DC2. It was technically redundant but my boss let slip that they thought the clients might want a more stable client contact! Anyway they paid me off and I let it go, no time for bitterness. It was horrible at the time as I was the major earner and they just assumed that I would be a SAHM.

Now that's timing....
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11517459

I'm not surprised to see the Scandinavian and Nordic countries up at the top when it comes to lowering the gender pay gap.

As said above they are the countries that don't make it all but certain that the woman will be the one to take a career break and then to work part time.

Woman's Hour on 29th September did a piece on this, worth a listen as raises some interesting points.

It is an utterly shocking number.