Help- work maternity policy is now expectant workers

[DazzlePaintedBattlePants]

Just had to sign off on a risk assessment for one of my team who’s pregnant and it turns out that we don’t have an expectant or breastfeeding mothers H&S policy but now an expectant and breastfeeding workers policy. I want to challenge this on the basis that the protected characteristics are either sex or pregnancy and maternity - does anyone have any good starting points?

It’s a high profile university in the Fens, if anyone wants to chip in…

That sounds so Soviet!

@DazzlePaintedBattlePants

Just had to sign off on a risk assessment for one of my team who’s pregnant and it turns out that we don’t have an expectant or breastfeeding mothers H&S policy but now an expectant and breastfeeding workers policy. I want to challenge this on the basis that the protected characteristics are either sex or pregnancy and maternity - does anyone have any good starting points?

It’s a high profile university in the Fens, if anyone wants to chip in…

I live Fen - adjacent Interested to know if it's where I think....

What ridiculous language.

Expectant workers are those having or showing an excited feeling that something is about to happen, especially something good.

If you google the university name and new and expectant individuals the policy is there for all to see….

@DazzlePaintedBattlePants

If you google the university name and new and expectant individuals the policy is there for all to see….

Found it.. this is supposed to be a leading academic light?

I despair.

Ask for it to be changed to Pregnant and Breastfeeding Workers Policy, as expectant is confusing terminology?

On another page (he) they refer to mothers.

Honestly, the language you're dealing with sounds like they're talking about aliens.

Inclusive for everyone except women presumably.

*(HR)

“New or expectant person”?

“Expectant person” is bad enough, but wtf is a “new person”?

Presumably this is a careless “replace all” mother -> person.

Exactly - I despair. Have sent email…

@DazzlePaintedBattlePants

Exactly - I despair. Have sent email…

Well done. Hope you don't get too much backlash.

It actually really upsets me.

Maybe they could add up the number of women they're upsetting and compare it to the number of people they're trying to be 'inclusive' of?

I want to challenge this on the basis that the protected characteristics are either sex or pregnancy and maternity - does anyone have any good starting points?

I'm not clear what your challenge is though- surely this covers pregnancy and maternity? (Not read the policy though).

Is it that you think "expectant" might not fully overlap with "pregnant"? Or are you saying it applies to expectant fathers?

Is the "new individual" the baby?

So any biological male with a pregnant wife outside of the employer could call themselves an expectant father and apply for all the same benefits as a pregnant woman?
I really want a soon-to-be dad to try it.

They need to change the wording back to expectant mother or, if they really want to be woke, then use pregnant worker.

I think this is clearly very progressive- giving expectant fathers the same rights as expectant mothers. Excellent. It's obviously a big employer that can afford to have two parents off for each baby, very good for equality.

My point is that by incorrectly applying this policy because it’s so bloody unclear, the only losers are women. Not providing breastfeeding facilities for a man makes no difference to man nor beast, so why is there some stupid attempt to be inclusive?? How does this language benefit the women it’s supposed to protect and support?

Because if men and women have equal rights to leave when a baby is born, there's no reason to promote the man, employ the man, over the woman. Either could take a whole year's leave at any moment.

I doubt that's what they intended. But I can't wait for it to be tested by an expectant worker.

All the breastfeeding worker rights only apply to women. No rights are being removed from women. They're being given the right to maternity leave, which will help level things. Very Scandinavian and progressive.

Work policy should be dignified and accept that around the bodily machine of gestation and lactation that there is an entire human being called woman or mother to be.

I think the Equality Act uses sex based language so surely they are not adhering to it if they don’t recognise protected characteristics?

Expectant workers are those having or showing an excited feeling that something is about to happen, especially something good.

Definitely. When do I get my bonus and how much?

It’s for H&S, not parental leave. There is no need for me to keep expectant fathers away from teratogens such as ethidium bromide in the lab, for example.

And compiling statistics on H&S incidents which affect unborn children becomes rather more difficult if suddenly I am looking at incidences involving men as well as women…

*by no need I mean over and above normal H&S procedures

isn't a worker a different status to 'regular' employee?

My work (university) did this, it was what actually peaked me. Ours used expectant parents. I pointed out that that would also include my DH as he too was an expectant parent yet he had not been impacted nearly as much as me by the physical or psychological impact of four pregnancies.

I raised the issue at the time that we had a 23% sex pay gap that pregnancy and return to work policies no doubt contributed to. Without being able to name the problems affecting women’s career progression, how can they possible address them.

I also raised the fact that it was ambiguous terminology that is not consistent with the equality act 2010, the HSE guidance for pregnancy or RCOG guidelines, all of which use the word woman.

The policy is less bad a talks about pregnant individuals now rather than expectant parents.

As someone who has had several pregnancy losses I also raised that expectant parents was problematic for me as I wasn’t necessarily expecting to become a parent, the reason I needed a risk assessment was due to pregnancy and because I am a woman.

I've just read what I think is the page you are quoting.

It states "A 'new or expectant person' is an individual who is pregnant, has given birth within the preceding six months or is breastfeeding."

That doesn't even make sense. If you were to take out 'or expectant person' it says: "A ‘new person' is an individual who is pregnant, has given birth within the preceding six months or is breastfeeding."

Does anyone proof read/sense check these policies? At a university? I despair.

I think the grounds you can challenge this are based on recent legislation/case law.

1. www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/McConnell-and-YY-judgment-Final.pdf . In late 2020 The Supreme Court denied a request to appeal. This means regardless of the gender someone identifies with, and even if they have a GRC, on a child’s birth certificate they are certified to be the “Mother”.

1. bills.parliament.uk/bills/2826/stages See the HoL amendment they managed to change the language from person to mother and pregnant mother. Try to find the debate as it has some good quotes from Lord Robert Winston and others.

Given this new legislation and case law uses mother and requires the mother to be recorded as such on birth certificate you can argue a maternity policy should use the same language. For the rest of the policy gender neutral language such as partner is fine I.e. lesbian partners able to attend 2 hospital appointments, take paternity leave, have shared parental leave etc.