Discrimination against pregnant woman working!

[tinfoilhat]

It may be common for business to discriminate but there's an interesting report just out that has quantified the cost to businesses at £280 million a year, which as interesting. Key quote:

 

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/oct/27/maternity-leave-sackings-cost-280m-a-year-says-equality-watchdog

 

That's very very different to taking on someone 7 months pregnant. Taking on someone most of the time is a gamble - can they do the job well, are they reliable, are they likely to push off in 3 months etc etc. If you've had an employee for a years you'd be a dingbat just to let them go because they're pregnant. Take them on? They'd have to be exceptional.

[MSYltd]

Discrimination is such a vilified word.

Discrimination is the ability to see the difference between two things or people.

It is perfectly legal for businesses to discriminate in their recruitment process.

And perfectly legal to discriminate even on protected characteristic as long as it makes any sense.

Authentic Indian restaurant can discriminate against white applicants or non Pasthuni speakers for example.

Scaffolding company can discriminate against disabled, pregnant women or even non pregnant women. Even short and wimpy men.

Modelling company can discriminate on all protected characteristics and some more.

I think everyone can see why.

 

Restaurant that is looking to train someone to work efficiently during busy period of Christmas/new year is in its right to discriminate against someone who will be giving birth around that specific period.

Especially if that work requires manual handling a lot.

 

It would be a criminal offence not to discriminate in some instances as this could put employees health or life at risk.

[Douglas J]

I don't think that's an accurate statement of the legal position. Though it is quite correct to say that discrimination is not necessarily unlawful discrimination.