Reforms proposes "Women and Motherhood Protection Act"

[IwantToRetire]

Reform UK has announced plans to become the most pro-family government in British history, with its Women and Motherhood Protection Act.

The Act would bring together key protections currently scattered across different laws, including equal pay, sex discrimination, employment rights, unfair dismissal and maternity leave. Consolidating these in one clear legal framework will give women, mothers and families stronger protections under the law.

Reform UK believes that mothers should be celebrated and protected, not punished for bringing the next generation into the world.

That is why a Reform UK government would increase the time limit for pregnancy and maternity discrimination claims from three months to 12 months, giving new mothers far more time to challenge unfair treatment in the workplace. It would also preserve equal pay, maintain protections against sex discrimination, strengthen safeguards against dismissal during pregnancy and maternity leave, and enhance redundancy protections for new mothers.

The Act would also go beyond existing maternity protections by introducing explicit rights for breastfeeding mothers, protections for women undergoing fertility treatment, and new leave rights for parents who suffer miscarriage or stillbirth.

Reform UK’s Education, Skills and Equality spokeswoman Suella Braverman said: “As the first Cabinet Minister in British history to take maternity leave, and as a working mother of two children, I understand the challenges women face when balancing a career and family life. No woman should ever feel that becoming a mother will hold her back or leave her with fewer opportunities.”

Britain should be one of the best countries in the world to start and raise a family. That means celebrating motherhood, supporting working mothers and ensuring that women are not forced to choose between having children and building a successful career.

As Suella Braverman said: “A Reform UK government will be the most pro-woman, pro-mother and pro-family government in British history."

https://reformparty.uk/news/reform-uk-vows-to-stand-up-for-women-and-mothers

Anyone who thinks that the removal of legislstion thst enables people to challenge unequal pay on the basis of sex is a good thing for women is startlingly naive.

I personally detest Farage but what I detest more is that Labour and the Activist System is making him into some sort of fucking hero of the people because they are so intent on implementing their WEF Agenda. Which the UK did not vote for. But it is the same agenda across the Anglosphere.

Instead of just slagging off Farage and Reform, why aren't Labour and their supporters having a good long look at their own policies and thinking about what is driving people away from them?

Why are Labour not trying to work out why support for them has fallen? They should be thinking about what they are doing wrong that makes a right-wing party with regressive views in so many areas look like a better option to their traditional voters than sticking with the party that some of them have supported for decades.

Precisely.

Because they dont care that the public dont like them. They aren't in it for the public good.

From the Guardian who say it's from a Reform press release:

women will retain the right to receive the same pay for the same work, while ensuring that equal pay law remains focused on genuine cases of pay discrimination rather than allowing courts and tribunals to determine the relative value of fundamentally different occupations

This is not good.

We won the right to equal pay for equivalent work / work of equal value in 1970.

May be, join the Labour Party and go in with your workable proposals and clear vision of what exactly will succeed in doing that.

Christ. I have seen some stupid things written on the Internet before but this is literally the stupidest thing this year.

https://unison.org.uk/news/2026/06/massive-opportunity-change

“I am so proud of our support for our trans community and it will not change, no matter how much some try to shout us down or bully us out of it. I’m in no doubt about this: the Supreme Court ruling was wrong. And the recent EHRC guidance is wrong all over again. So we’re lobbying MPs hard to reject it. And we will keep fighting to change the unworkable, unjust legislation. Our movement has never just sat down and accepted unjust laws. We fight them!”

Andrea Egan is female just FYI...

It certainly had a significant impact on Sandie Peggie and the Darlington nurses, - examples of just two cases.

I, like others, am not convinced this kind of legislation is actually good.

I think there is something to be said for having a mechanism to keep wages at a living wage level, apart from things like student jobs. However, beyond that, there is always a reason one sector offers more pay, and that is almost always that otherwise they can't recruit.

I think this kind of artificiality, which is through our whole pay system, tends to create wider problems.

I think if companies want to pay people different wages, they will orchestrate and frustrate the process to enable the people they want to get more money than the people they don't. That includes councils.

I think it would be in our interests to separate out two things:

• discussion of whether we should vote Reform, including, whether their legislative proposals are good things. (Personally I am so convinced I'll never vote Reform that I'm likely to skip those.)
• discussion of the details of proposed legislative changes that a future Reform government might make, especially, what we would most importantly want to campaign to change.

The reason is that I fear that, like it or not, there is quite likely to be a Reform government after the next election, and if so, there will be a very narrow window of time in which lobbying the new, inexperienced swathes of Reform MPs might succeed in influencing what happens. If there are arguments to be had about what we agree or disagree with about their concrete proposals, the sooner we have them, the better.

People thinking someone else will somehow stop a Reform government making major changes are naive, I fear.

This.

Maybe you need to have a listen to the Tories that ordered stuff, that never ever happened and their tales of how things they tried to implement were blocked and frustrated on purpose.

I agree market forces should be allowed to operate but I'm also concerned about the need for some oversight.
Jobs like nursery work for example can easily attract women due to working hours so no market pressure to pay well. However this is arguably one of the most skilled and important for society, ditto care work.
We need some mechanism to raise these wages. We can do this by regulation eg demanding qualifications [compare gas fitters]. But they will never be a lack of applicants for jobs.

agree with this:

• discussion of whether we should vote Reform, including, whether their legislative proposals are good things. (Personally I am so convinced I'll never vote Reform that I'm likely to skip those.)
• discussion of the details of proposed legislative changes that a future Reform government might make, especially, what we would most importantly want to campaign to change.

Although I was more interested in the suggestions as it is one that FWRers have made themselves that women's equality could (or would?) be better served if it was not just one of a group that has laws to stop discrimination.

Often ideas that later become a reality come from surprising sources.

As we dont have any detail on what they are proposing, we only have the concept of women as a special case.

Or are they intending to do something similar say for the disabled.

@IwantToRetire the 2010 Act was a bringing together of separate individual acts dating back to the 1970s in some cases (eg Sex Discrimination Act) but it added some extras including the infamous 'gender reassignment'.
If Reform plan to abolish the Equality Act as it stands, they will naturally have to replace some aspects such as this.

Gender reassignment protections go back a bit earlier, starting with the Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999 which amended the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.

they will naturally have to replace some aspects such as this

Why would you assume that?

The GRA would still exists for instance.

But if they do intend to replace why pick out Women's Rights (as they see it) rather than saying we think protection from discrimination will be covered by existing legislation.

And the focus on Women's "rights" is about creating a framework that they would say allows women as those who actually have babies, to do that and still participate in the work force.

But so much of this is speculation, as we have limited info.

Try the Communist Party. Left surely.

Really I was actively following UK politics then and that one also passed me by. Labour were in power in 1999 just like in 2004 with the GRA so clearly the T has always been on their agenda.

I thought they were intending to have a "Workplace Fairness" law, and that it would give individuals the right to say they had been discriminated against (and prove it in court?).

But that doesn't cover discrimination say if refused access to a pub or club or whatever because you are (insert characteristic).

Reform is suggesting that the protection of individuals in the workplace would be put in place but without the current statutory protection that emphasises protected characteristics. It states that it is seeking to reduce the economic burden and focus on individual merit does not group identity. There is no detailed replacement provisions published as yet or clarity on how exactly this might work in practice.
https://www.thackraywilliams.com/insights/advice/if-reform-is-in-does-this-mean-your-rights-are-out

But are proposing an individual bill in relation to women. Is that because they think women are more likely to vote for them?

Will be interesting to see local election results later today, early tomorrow.

Outside of the workplace I don't think many people will support a legislative regime that permits a return to the times of "no blacks, no dogs, no Irish".

I see I caused confusion by saying 'right thinking' - I meant you seem to see being homophobic, racist, religious intolerant, ableist and misogynist as the correct way for good people to be. I didn't mean 'votes for right wing parties'.

If you support Labour/Lib dem and Green then yes, you are owning those behaviours, they are a part of those parties' beliefs. That women who are not able to tolerate or cope with men in their spaces - due to disability, trauma, being of different cultures, faiths - are women to be derisive about and dismiss as not worthy of any spaces at all. That's the politics you support.

I don't honestly see the difference between this kind of awful prejudice and any 'right wing' parties.

Edited to add: also noting in this sense you're using 'right wing' meaning 'intrinsically evil' which is equally blindly prejudiced to me. The 'left' parties aren't anywhere near actual 'left' policies now, they just identify as left. I'm not interested in making any party look better than it is, I'm a voter without any home at all. I don't want any of them.

Well in a country that has voted in Reform why would you think that?

They haven't yet voted in Reform to a position where Reform have the power to enable a return to that. And I'm an optimist.

I look forward to seeing what other equality legislation Reform proposes in places of the EA2010.

All these rights already exist and are frequently ignored. Making a great big shiny new Act will draw attention to how problematic female employees are. Women my age have had to avoid drawing attention to the fact we are women to get by in the workplace and it’s still been an uphill challenge. Reform will put a big shiny bow on the ladies and make th sink without trace. Genius! Not