USA Today reported that �Pregnancy discrimination complaints filed with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) jumped 39% from fiscal year 1992 to 2003.�
Have you experienced this kind of discrimination? Read about the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 atBellaOnline ALERT: Raw URLs are not allowed in these forums for security reasons. Please use UBB code. If you don't know how to do UBB code just post here for help - we will help out!
Last edited by Sylvia - Civil Rights Host; 04/12/0702:11 PM.
It's not within the prerogative of a just government to tell a privately owned business what reasons it needs to fire its employees. Perhaps an owner does not want a woman who may be erratically vomiting in his workplace. Maybe he doesn't like women. Maybe he's a racist and doesn't like blacks or jews. Perhaps he just feels like arbitrarily firing people for no reason in particular. It's the business he owns, it's the salary he's paying. If you don't like businesses that do things like that, then don't shop there. That's the idea of capitalism.
If the business owner and the business were an island onto themselves, you would of course be correct. Yet as long as the person benefits from a multicultural society, one where his female offspring will have the option of choosing careers that are not limited to prostitution or marriage only, where he does not need to live in fear of having a cross burned in his front yard (if he is black) or having an oven door painted on his garage (if he is Jewish), where he does not have to pay exorbitant taxes to benefit those of races he (and others like him) routinely fire or do not hire, and where he is able to peddle his wares to a large audience able to buy, there are certain ground rules set in force by which he will need to abide. The United States Constitution sets them.
If he does not like these rules, he may relocate his business to an area outside the territory governed by these rules. THAT is true capitalism.
OH and lets not forget the Americans with Disabilities act. While a normal pregnancy alone is not normally considered a disability, with the definitions of this act, it could become one very easily. That would make it a VERY touchy thing to fire someone because they were pregnant.
I used to work for a place where the director made MORE allowances for one of the managers to go outside for a smoke break then she did with real physical disabilities, pregnant included. I reported her to HR and they jerked her up short. They actually forced her to have a meeting and inform everyone about the law and ask them to come forward privately if they were disabled in any way.
I was surprised to find out that one of the younger girls in the office was being constantly harassed about her doctors appointments to treat her MS. She had transferred to our department from another within the same company and had no problem in the other department. The director had been aware of her medical status when she was allowed to transfer to our department from the other.
I had never considered myself disabled because of my asthma. I did have to attend regular doctors appointments and from time to time would get sick. Although I never used all my sick time, I was told I was abusing my sick time and they used that as an excuse to not give me as much of a raise as I would have otherwise gotten, in spite of the fact that I always had a doctors note AND the director was completely aware of my medical status when I was hired. I pointed out to HR if they are going to treat me in this way for missing work to attend a doctors appointment they could at least offer us insurance that covered the local quick care places that are open after hours.