When Being Pregnant = Career Liability

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by bradl, Apr 18, 2014.

  1. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #1
    From one of the comments about the story:

    "We'll call you whores if you use birth control, fire you if you're pregnant, call you a murderer if you get an abortion, cry that it's unfair that insurance covers childbirth, call you lazy and a drain on taxpayer dollars if you choose to be a stay-at-home mother, and call you selfish if you choose to work. But we're totally family-friendly, we swear!"

    :rolleyes:

    My employer at least at one point did have a conference room set up completely as a nursing/lactating room, privacy blinds and all. But that was about as far as they took it, outside of a longer maternity leave for mothers. Fathers? not so much; they have to burn vacation time for paternity leave. Either way, still a problem with this country all around.

    Oh.. also, as if I need another reason to NOT shop at Walmart.

    http://www.npr.org/2014/04/17/304070037/when-being-pregnant-also-means-being-out-of-a-job

    BL.
     
  2. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #2
    Salina is a ******** so the WalMart story doesn't really surprise me, although its completely ridiculous.

    Unfortunately, workplace treatment of pregnant women isn't much better up here. My wife is 8 months and her work told her she couldn't eat or drink while in her schoolroom even though they had a doctors note on file ALREADY for a previous occurrence that had my wife go to the hospital. Guess what, she passed out again and had to go to triage to ensure everything was alright. Real ****ing geniuses on staff in management there, the doctor basically said to call a lawyer next time it occurs. This is an all woman staff as well so I would expect more empathy.

    Manager also told her shed be demoted when she came back and her seniority would not apply. I told her to talk to the owner as this is strictly against the law and im pretty sure the manager got an earful after that meeting as the owner has 4 kids.

    Only good part of the story is that the government protects your job, parental leave can be taken by either parent and you are basically off for a year to raise your child while getting employment insurance (about 55% pay).
     
  3. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #3
    This woman wasn't fired of being pregnant. She was fired for having a water bottle at her workstation. Which is apparently against company sales-floor policies.

    The human body, even a pregnant one nursing a fetus, simply doesn't need literally constant hydration. We are blessed with a stomach and circulatory system that provides an ample reserve of liquid to keep our organs healthy. If human beings can survive several hours toiling in desert conditions without water, this teenage woman can stand in air-conditioned comfort an hour or two between drinks.

    The doctor who issued this woman the note screwed up. Once he got it into her head that taking her zippy cup away was going to kill her baby, the die was cast.
     
  4. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #4
    All we need now is for you to upload your credentials as a medical doctor.
     
  5. Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #5
    It seems to me to be a mass overreaction by everyone. The pregnant girl, the employer, and NPR. There are real problems in this world and this specific case isn't one of them.
     
  6. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #6
    Was it her choice?

    I personally think the Pregnancy Discrimination Act should be changed.

    Unless someone was raped or we have another immaculate conception on our hands pregnancy is a choice.
     
  7. aerok macrumors 65816

    aerok

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2011
    #7
    Yet again, your logic baffles me
     
  8. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #8
    First world problems.
     
  9. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #9
    The doctor screwed up by not taking into account his patient's job.

    Lets be very clear about this: This wasn't about pregnancy or hydration. It was about this woman wanting to keep a sippy cup at her workstation.

    If the Doctor had given her a note that said: "This patient needs to drink 250ml water every 30 minutes" then her employer could have accommodated her. They'd have let her use the drinking fountain.

    Instead, he set her up to collide with Wal-Mart's sales floor policy, which says no personal drinking items (soda cans, bottles, etc.)

    I think Wal-Mart is a rotten employer. But in this case the woman and her Doctor made some poor choices.
     
  10. Zombie Acorn, Apr 19, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2014

    Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #10
    Sounds like a great plan to make sure all mothers are riding the taxpayer wagon express. Where do you think they will go when they get fired for being pregnant?

    Businesses in the US do very little to accommodate women who are pregnant. Another reason that I am glad I do not live there any longer.

    ----------

    If they had a valid reason to prevent pregnant women, who needed to stay hydrated and often have fainting/heat spells, from drinking water on the floor you might have a point.

    God forbid a pregnant woman take a drink of water between checking people out. I'm sure there would be a customer outrage at the audacity.

    Also you know nothing about this specific mother's medical condition, nor the note the doctor sent.

    Sounds like Walmart paid out some dough to keep this out of the legal system by settling. I don't really blame them as they were going to sink like the titanic if this came anywhere near a court of law. Not to mention the damage it would do to their image when most of their shoppers are likely women/mothers.
     
  11. Ledgem macrumors 65816

    Ledgem

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hawaii, USA
    #11
    I am not a doctor, but I am a medical student in the latter half of medical school.
    You're right that the body doesn't need constant hydration, but you probably also realize that the goal isn't simply survival. We have greatly reduced maternal and fetal mortality and complications compared to those days of "toiling in the desert," but we haven't eliminated them. Losing a pregnancy is a big deal.

    I don't think it's fair to say that she thought she would lose her baby if she couldn't drink frequently. We don't know what she was thinking. For that matter, we don't know the details of her pregnancy or her health. Hydration is important in pregnancy, but she might have had some underlying conditions or complications that made it critical to her case.

    I understand and am sympathetic to businesses, as they have an image to maintain and work to get done. There are some demands that they simply can't meet for pregnant employees. Making an issue over a water bottle seems like a questionable stance to take, though. Is the presence of a water bottle at a one worker's area for a few months such a big deal that it is worth risking the health of the baby and/or the mother?
     
  12. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #12
    They DO have a valid reason for not allowing Sales Associates to keep personal drinking items (soda cans, coffee cups, drinking bottles) at their work station.

    Pretty much every major retailer in the US has this policy: No eating or drinking on the sales floor. For good reason: It is rude and disrespectful to customers, who expect sales staff to pay attention to them, and not be guzzling and slurping as they serve them.

    If Wal-Mart allowed an exception for a pregnant woman, then what is to stop people with just about any imaginable medical condition (obesity, high blood pressure, skin conditions, etc.) to claim the same thing?

    Instead, Wal-Mart offered to let this woman make use of the water-fountains. (How frequently isn't mentioned.) But that wasn't good enough for her. She insisted on keeping her own special cup at her workstation.
     
  13. quagmire macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #13
    Who would I call a person who would lack the empathy to let a pregnant woman take a second to drink between customers? A jackass.
     
  14. samiwas, Apr 19, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2014

    samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #14
    I personally think your favorite law should be changed because it's pointless and stupid and serves little real-world purpose (and is much more of a choice), but, hey…it's there for now.

    Having a water bottle with you is not going to affect their image in any oct of negative way…they are Wal-Mart after all. Let's be very clear that this has nothing to do with protecting images or affecting work getting done. This is about being *******s towards pregnant women.

    I've flat out told my supervisor that I wouldn't follow his "no drinks in the space" rule when I had guys climbing up inside dusty ceilings. They needed to be able to take a sip of water if they got a mouthful of dust.

    I don't know what this woman did at Wal-Mart, but I have never, ever judged someone or deemed it rude if they took a sip in between customers. The article doesn't even say what her position was. Maybe she didn't even have real direct customer contact. If she was a checkout person, and took sips between customers, what's the big deal? If I'm talking to you, and you have a slurpee that you're sucking down, that's rude. Taking a sip from a water bottle is not.

    There is probably one set of water fountains at a Wal-Mart, and if she worked on the opposite side of the store, it could take several minutes just to get to them. Instead, she's trying to keep working and just take sips as needed. She's staying efficient and doing her job instead of waddling across the store ten times a day.

    Again…this is about being an ******* to pregnant women.
     
  15. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #15
    The true reason on the ban for liquids is not rudeness to customers, but preventing employees drinking booze on the job. Or at least that's the only half-rational explanation for it that I can imagine. I mean, really, who is offended by somebody sipping on a drink? Are people offended by breathing as well? :rolleyes:

    As for Walmart 'maintaining its image', well, it has. :mad: You think we've come so far. And then you hear this.
     
  16. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #16
    If they let her have the water bottle with her while working, soon there will be a second and third employee that want to do it. More and more people will have these bottle. Then someone will try putting Sprite instead of water... Then vodka instead of water... If you allow it for one you will have to allow it for all.

    There are jobs that a person who is pregnant cannot do. UPS is a great example. It is a requirement to be able to lift and move packages. Once you can't do your job, you should take leave until you can.
     
  17. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #17
    Agreed. If we let the rabble drink water, who knows what's next? Demands for a living wage?
     
  18. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #18
    Interesting thread. It usually takes until the baby is born to see the pro-life crowd give up complete interest in the mother and kid.
     
  19. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #19
    Liberals (and I include myself in that category) lose more support over nonsense like this than they possibly imagine.

    Nobody fired this woman for being pregnant. Nobody fired this woman for needing or wanting to keep hydrated. They fired her for being an ass. And she lost a minimum wage position that was probably pretty much of a dead-end anyway.

    I don't doubt, for a second, that her Wal-Mart supervisor could have (probably should have) done a better job at resolving the situation. But thats the sort of crappy talent you get for the sort of salary Wal-Mart pays its low-level management.

    Getting Wal-Mart to pay a living wage is a desirable goal. But don't fight it on the basis of giving some tiny subset of the employees special privileges over those of everyone else.

    You win the battle - but lose the war.
     
  20. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #20
    Clearly:

    1. Women should ask permission from their corporation of choice before getting pregnant
    2. Should be fired immediately if they are found to be pregnant without permission, we should start administering piss tests on the first of the month just in case.
    3. When women do become pregnant, they should listen to their manager instead of their doctor, especially Walmart managers because they are super duper bright.
    4. If they think they are entitled to any special privileges for being pregnant and carrying another life within them they should have thought of that before hand and are fired immediately.
    5. Pregnant women taking sips of water between customers is clearly offensive and rude. Who the hell do these people think they are drinking water?
     
  21. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #21
    Hyperbole like this doesn't help anyone.

    Nobody is trying to discriminate against pregnant women. And I think that many/most companies are more than willing to make reasonable allowances to accommodate the requirements of pregnant women; the same way as most decent companies will make allowances for people in wheelchairs or most other disabilities.

    What companies don't want to do is start granting some subsets or minorities special privileges.

    Thats not a racial or sexist thing. Its just good business. Treat every employee doing a job - as far as reasonably possible - the same way.

    And if I don't let cashier Allison (not pregnant) sip water at the register, its not fair to let cashier Brenda (pregnant) sip away, as long as I let them both have reasonable access to clean drinking water/bathrooms throughout the day.
     
  22. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #22
    Except if a pregnant woman requires an accommodation because they she is pregnant. Or a disabled person requires an accommodation because they are disabled. I don't play a lawyer on an internet, but, these issues have come up in my work life and employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations. All this to say: no, you actually don't treat everyone exactly the same way. And, that is the answer why as to why Mildred, who is not pregnant, isn't allowed a bottle of Coke and Bourbon, while Nichole, who is pregnant, is allowed a bottle of water if she needs it.


    That said, I think kids under 30 [that is my reference point for kids now ;) ] seem to me to be obsessed about drinking water all the time. I don't actually get thirsty every 15 minutes unless I am out walking in 100 degree heat.
     
  23. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #23
    It was impressive nonetheless. Sometimes a reductio ad absurdum is the only way to make a point.

    @Zombie Acorn: You forgot the policy for charging the employees for water ... and air.
     
  24. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #24
    The accommodation the pregnant woman needs (at least from a medical standpoint) is the ability to drink water regularly.

    Grant her that. Let her go to the bathroom/lunchroom every 10 minutes if that what the Doctor says.

    But don't let her keep a bottle at her workstation - which a) clearly is unfair to everyone else working there and b) Most Importantly will offend and annoy customers.
     
  25. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #25
    Seriously? Drinking water is offensive? Really? It's water.
     

Share This Page