Today's WSJ (HT - Workplace Prof Blog)is reporting that the number of Pregnancy-related claims filed at the EEOC jumped 14% last year, and are up 40% from 10 years ago.
My original assumption that there must be 40% more babies being born was apparently false. The article attributes the rise in claims to "both changing demographics and a new activism among mothers," but points out that claims are also high because working women don't exactly understand how they are protected:
[E]ven now, 30 years after passage of the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, there is still confusion about what protections it provides. "I thought we were protected," said an advertising executive during a recent gathering of 100 working mothers. "Then I find out we can be fired while we're pregnant, employers can refuse to hire us -- what exactly are our rights?"
Ok, if the law said you couldn't get fired while you were pregnant, or that somebody had to hire you, that 40% jump wouldn't have been such a funny joke (if it ever was to begin with). Of course you can get fired. If you suck at your job, you can always get fired. Well, almost.
You just can't get fired on account of the little Biff or Jilly or Pilot Inspektor you've got in there. And thank God for that. So, a 14% jump based on more empowered women is ok. I think most of us are a little tired of the race/sex/national origin merry-go-round.
Let's do pregnancy for a little while and wait for the inevitable spike in religion cases next year...
Comment Form under post in blogger/blogspot