Some heartless women on here! Always the same From smug fertile people.
No, absolutely not. Here's the thing:
Employees can get resentful of one another for all sorts of reasons. You obviously seem to believe that infertility warrants special compassion. But not everyone values having children and a family the same. Other colleagues might feel just as strongly about compensation. Or seniority/career progression. Or takes allocation. Or any number of things.
The point is, people - and this very much includes functioning adults in the workplace - can and do develop feelings of envy and resentment. And while that's not ideal, it can't be helped.
What can be helped is employees becoming someone else's target. In fact, it MUST be helped in the sense that this is something employers are obliged to protect other employees from.
To the victim of bullying it doesn't particularly matter whether they're being targeted for their ability to fall pregnant or to be promoted. They have a right to be protected against this kind of hostile behaviour in the workplace.
Likewise, employers have not only a duty to protect their employees but also a right to protect themselves from the potential legal consequences of them being "understanding" of the bully's situation, i.e. letting them get away with it.
As stated in my first post, firms and managers do have a reasonable expectation of a minimum level of emotional maturity and self-control on the part of their employees, and that's pretty much entirely divorced from the reason for them being upset (unless, perhaps, it's a direct result of the employer's actions). To claim that special consideration should be given to the fact that this is about fertility would, in effect, result in a bias against employees who would value a seat on the board of directors or unpaid time off or any of a million possibilities over a pregnancy. It should be pretty obvious why that's not on.
By the way, I have absolutely no idea whether discrimination over emotional triggers would be a legal issue,so long as it's not over a protected characteristic under the EA. Fascinating question, though. I'll ask legal tomorrow just because I'm curious at this point.