LoginRegister
Nintendo Wii / Wii U Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Anglophobiphile Brawny's Avatar
    Member #
    8228
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI, USA
    Posts
    6,546
    Friends
    24
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    5385-4035-7079-0395

    Pregnancy Discrimination Laws

    Recent laws in the United States have made it illegal to fire, not hire, or pay less money to women because they are pregnant. Sounds like a good thing until you realize that workplaces that must hire these people have to then turn around and give them maternity leave, doctor's appointment times off, and, let's face it, a person is more likely to work less hard when they're carrying a child to full term.

    What're your views?

  2. #2
    God Complex Frogger's Avatar
    Member #
    16994
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    3,763
    Friends
    16
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    9156-1265-6763-2556
    As always, our system is the greatest. Stay working well into pregnancy, you get your money and then a break at the end. You can take a couple more months off, but you won't be paid.
    I love you, Adam.


  3. #3
    40lb box of rape ROB64's Avatar
    Member #
    40281
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,759
    Friends
    46
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    0120-6723-8776-4093
    Hmm, sounds like affirmative action for pregnant women. You can't deny them the job because they're pregnant, even if someone else is better qualified.
    I think the employee should meet certain requirements before allowed to go on a paid maternity leave. Something like working for the company for a year (or longer) before they can get a paid leave. That would prevent people from getting paid without providing something to the company first.

  4. #4
    slightly amused captainff's Avatar
    Member #
    17836
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    807
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    5537-0855-7535-2075
    Quote Originally Posted by Brawny View Post
    Recent laws in the United States have made it illegal to fire, not hire, or pay less money to women because they are pregnant. Sounds like a good thing until you realize that workplaces that must hire these people have to then turn around and give them maternity leave, doctor's appointment times off, and, let's face it, a person is more likely to work less hard when they're carrying a child to full term.

    What're your views?

    Can an employer choose to employ a different applicant based on ability or do they have to give the pregnant woman the job regardless of other candidates?



    In the UK at the moment a woman must have worked for 26 weeks with that company before they qualify for maternity rights.

    ....................


  5. #5
    Anglophobiphile Brawny's Avatar
    Member #
    8228
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI, USA
    Posts
    6,546
    Friends
    24
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    5385-4035-7079-0395
    Quote Originally Posted by captainff View Post
    Can an employer choose to employ a different applicant based on ability or do they have to give the pregnant woman the job regardless of other candidates?



    In the UK at the moment a woman must have worked for 26 weeks with that company before they qualify for maternity rights.
    I'm pretty sure if there's no way to tell the difference between the two candidates and the woman isn't hired, she'd sue and win in the US.

  6. #6
    Bringer of meaty goodness DBloke's Avatar
    WiiChat Moderator
    Member #
    228
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Super Mancyland
    Posts
    18,978
    Friends
    33
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    8041-7231-3447-6164
    Coming soon to over there

    Pregnant women in the army

    Think of it while there giving birth they hate every thing.


    You new? See this!
    W
    ii U FAQ

    Spoiler Alert!

    @D_Bloke - My inane prattle


  7. #7
    Senior Member Skippy's Avatar
    Member #
    10574
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,191
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    Quote Originally Posted by Brawny View Post
    I'm pretty sure if there's no way to tell the difference between the two candidates and the woman isn't hired, she'd sue and win in the US.
    No two job candidates are ever equal.

    You just can't use pregnancy as the reason not to hire them. There can be plenty of other legal reasons not to hire them though.

  8. #8
    . ☆ ☆ ☆ . gidget's Avatar
    Member #
    40723
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    -= ohio, usa =-
    Posts
    2,589
    Friends
    54
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    9999-9999-9999-9999
    if it's an old fat gay minority woman then she'd have a great chance to sue.

    ..

    click logo to join the...
    rainbows & unicorns clan!


  9. #9
    Anglophobiphile Brawny's Avatar
    Member #
    8228
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI, USA
    Posts
    6,546
    Friends
    24
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    5385-4035-7079-0395
    Quote Originally Posted by Skippy View Post
    No two job candidates are ever equal.

    You just can't use pregnancy as the reason not to hire them. There can be plenty of other legal reasons not to hire them though.
    Which is stupid. If she's more qualified than someone else, but she's going to leave you in a month, you still have to hire her?

  10. #10
    Penetrating your mind Ekiushi's Avatar
    Member #
    11013
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Barad-dr
    Posts
    937
    Friends
    11
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    0000-0000-0000-0000
    Quote Originally Posted by Brawny View Post
    Which is stupid. If she's more qualified than someone else, but she's going to leave you in a month, you still have to hire her?
    As a woman, I can see the benefit. I am sure I don't need to go into this.

    However, from a business point of view - I'd be pissed. The hiring, training stage is the most expensive part of the whole procedure, and not only do you have to hire her - you then have to find someone to replace her while she is on leave.

    I can see women taking advantage of this. That, if they didn't get the job they'd sue and say the pregnancy was the problem, despite the fact it may not have been.


    Sig by Deanis


Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts