Secretary claims she was sacked for getting pregnant

Jeremy J Camilleri

Sep 25th 2009, 19:23

Paul Barret..no fault of the employer? as if pregnancy is a fault!!!!!!

Jeremy J Camilleri

Sep 25th 2009, 19:22

For correctness's sake, an employer is legally within his right to terminate employment during probation without giving a valid reason. However, this rule cannot be applied during pregnancy, and as such, this seems to be a very straightforward case. C camilleri, the law is there for all. so your whinings at this stage are pointless. As for competitiveness, fellow EU countries have far better rights for pregnant women. Does that mean that countries like Sweden are not competitive? IT would be good for some folks to do some very simple research before commenting.

Chris Cachia

Sep 25th 2009, 18:00

Alot is being said about what is right and what is wrong. The truth is that equality states that men and women are treated equally, so firing someone for being pregnant should not even be discussed. This case only illustrates the dominance of man in society, some like C Camilleri are also assuming that employers are men! What does he suggest if the employer gets pregnant, should she close the firm? Women should be supported and respected for contributing to all of us. Without pregnant women, society will not exist.

Emma Portelli Bonnici

Sep 25th 2009, 17:38

@Tanya Briffa; i agree with you 100% @ g.scerri + @c.camilleri; Do you suppose we introduce a law where women need to sign a contract stating that they need permission to get pregnant? also, i believe that youre assuming that the employers themselves cant become pregnant....female employers do exist you know, it IS the 21st century after all ;)

r pace bonello

Sep 25th 2009, 15:55

Whatever the outcome this will surely turn out to be a public relations nightmare for the
Company.

c. camilleri

Sep 25th 2009, 15:52

Suppose a company of female employees has half of its staff pregnant, can anyone of the champions below tell us what the company should do? What about the work to be done? Should it close down and wait for them to return or engage temporarily replacements (If allowed) and continue to fork out money for pregnant staff? Please put yourself into the employer position. Can our employers really afford this luxury brought about from Europe. Is this not an other burden imposed upon by Brussels which our small enterprises cannot afford? Do not such measures effect our competitiveness?

J Farrugia

Sep 25th 2009, 14:15

@ Joseph Meli - No one is allowed to play with the laws of Malta. There is a law safeguarding pregnant women and this has to be applied with the full force. A pity she is not in a union otherwise it would have been a different story. As for me I will be boycotting this firm from today onwards. Shame on them.

Paul Barrett

Sep 25th 2009, 11:16

This is one of the cases where it becomes very difficult to decide who is actually right. Rules and rights of employment, employment laws have become a nightmare, especially for the employer.
It is unfair that the lady should loose her job because she became pregnant.
It is unfair that the employer should have to pay her wages when she is not working (through no fault of the employer).
Opinion on just where the line should be drawn depends on which side of the fence you are sitting.

Joseph Meli

Sep 25th 2009, 10:51

While I also agree that both are right in this situation, may I suggest to both parties as to share both rights. That instead of taking 13 weeks, she would voluntary take nine (9) weeks only instead of the...thirteen (13) weeks and to be used the first...five (5) weeks after the birth of the child and then and the other four (4) weeks some..time..later. The other four can be taken..at a later..date.

Knowing that she is a good..secretary for the company and that the..management otherwise would be loosing a good secretary, then In this way, both parties..should be satisfied. Good to take in consideration the name of the Director of this company and I...suggest to the parents (secretary) of the coming..child to name the child [if a boy] the name of the..director.

If the secretary is willing to do..some...minor..work from home, I also suggest to her to..do it in her spare time to help and in the interest of the company. Today most typing is done..by computer and if she does not have a portable one, the company should provide her with one to do such work from home. In that way she is still around.

g. scerri

Sep 25th 2009, 10:41

Ms Bonnici said that in this day and age when there was such a fight against discrimination - it does not seem to bother her of course that after giving her employers only 6 months work she was going to take off 3 months of paid maternity leave. Discrimination seems only to be a one-way traffic. But what can you expect of a world that runs on political correctness!

Tanya Briffa

Sep 25th 2009, 10:01

EU court precedents show that it's very very difficult to get away with firing a pregnant woman, especially as in this case where Ms Bonnici's performance was praised by one partner and she was repeatedly told by the partners that her pregnancy was a "hurdle". Protection of Maternity regulations are very clear. On a social note, if women did not get pregnant the human race would stop and if women did not go to work most men and indeed most families would not be enjoying the standard of living that we have all gotten used to. Good luck Ms Bonnici, I hope you win this one. Male employers need to stop viewing us as a necessary evil and a bit of a joke.

Mark Dalli

Sep 25th 2009, 09:48

This is gonna be a tough decision for the judge or chairman preceeding as both parties are right!
Mrs Bonnici is stating the 13 week maternity leave law and BDO is stating the 3month probation period! both legally correct in my opinion!
Ethically it's another story though :)