Unfair treatment of women due to the potential for pregnancy

[neveengws101-blog]

REFLECTION

Unfortunately, because pregnancy discrimination is so widespread, it was easy to research this topic. Prior to researching pregnancy discrimination, I did not expect that I would become so passionate about this issue. The unfair treatment of women is a constant cycle, whether or not a woman is pregnant. It disgusts me to know that the gift of birthing a child is the reason some women are insulted and harassed where they work. Not only are they insulted, women who strive to maintain their status in the work place lose all recognition for their hard work with the announcement that they’re having a baby. The duration of a pregnancy should not be conflicted with this stress and worry, it should be filled with support from peers, coworkers, and leaders.

I believe that, with constant reminders of why pregnancy discrimination should NOT be allowed, the stereotypical ideologies about women and what women are capable of doing will cease to exist. For over half a century, women have been fighting for what they deserve and that is equality in the work place. Whether it may be something as simple as granting a lighter work load accommodation for a pregnant worker or extending a maternity leave, employers should not feel burdened. If a woman cannot handle her job because of her pregnancy, she can decide that on her own without harassment. In conclusion, researching pregnancy discrimination was more interesting and empowering than I expected it to be.

Photo Creds

[neveengws101-blog]

Additional Resources

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/pregnancy.cfm

This source from the Equal Opportunity Employment commission is helpful in providing a more thorough and exact explanation of pregnancy discrimination and who women can call if they experience it.

http://www.aauw.org/what-we-do/legal-resources/know-your-rights-at-work/pregnancy-discrimination-act/

Another source with the objective to empower and educate women of their rights in the workplace.

http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=110556679&site=ehost-live

This law article discusses pregnancy discrimination cases in the court house, specifically the Young vs United Parcel Service, Inc. case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWzVDBu2v5A

This webinar elaborates on the impact of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, recent new guidelines and amendments to laws in order to create a more pregnancy-friendly work environment and dealing with the nuances of the act. 

http://www.lawfirms.com/resources/employment/discrimination/pregnancy-discrimination-and-its-economic-impact-women.htm

This article reiterates the economic effects of pregnancy discrimination.

Photo Creds

[neveengws101-blog]

Suggested Solutions

The issues surrounding pregnancy are very complex. Prior to reading Liisa Makela’s case study, I would suggest for employers to strive to maintain a high dyadic relationship with his/her employees in order to prevent discrimination in any way. Although maintaining positive, high quality relationships tend to not be a factor in preventing discrimination, I would still suggest to fix this issue starting with employers. Managers, supervisors, employers, etc must be educated and reminded about the causes of pregnancy discrimination. Initiating required seminars for both employers and employees should be the first step in fighting this issue.

If employers are trained to not be discriminating towards pregnant workers, there will be unconscious bias from coworkers. People are quick to think negatively of a woman once she is pregnant. Motherhood triggers stereotypical assumptions that question the dependability, professionalism, and commitment of a worker. Rules and guidelines must be implemented to help reduce the likelihood that negative assumptions will affect decisions made in the work place. The creation of anti-discriminating rules will help maintain a more positive work environment but, the stop of pregnancy discrimination overall depends on cultural changes regarding the way our society thinks and perceives women to be.

Reasonable solutions to an issue such as pregnancy discrimination are difficult to create but one step to prepare potential victims (anyone who can bear children) would be to teach them. Educational classes that teach the legal rights of mothers and fathers in the work place, explain legal acts such as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and emphasis on empowering these potential parents can aid in eliminating pregnancy discrimination in the work place.

The solutions listed above are not direct solutions but can help women be equal to others in the work place.

Photo Creds

[neveengws101-blog]

Summary

My research illustrates why pregnancy discrimination is both physically and mentally harmful to pregnant women. Not only are there chances of losing financial stability, the stress a woman experiences can cause her to have a miscarriage. Studies have shown that discriminating against a woman because of her pregnancy also has a negative impact economically. Another consequences of this issue is that women will be influenced to not bear children in order to maintain their position at work, thus reducing the reproduction rate as well.

Topics discussed in class that relate to this issue are systems of oppression, stereotypes and social norms that women are expected to be a part of, and even harassment. The traditional belief that women are supposed to be housewives that only bear children and do not work is expressed in Betty Friedan’s “From The Feminine Mystique.” Also, an article we read in class written by Milia Fisher titled “Women of Color and the Gender Wage Gap” mentions how women of color are more likely to have lesser wages than white women and men because of the discrimination they face over care-giving burdens. This ties in to pregnancy discrimination because in some situations, racial discrimination is occurring at the same time. Women are being paid less for being mothers and this notion must be stopped in order to achieve feminine justice.

Photo Creds

[neveengws101-blog]

How is pregnancy discrimination an intersectional issue?

The unfair treatment of workers based on their pregnancy/potential to become pregnant is an intersectional issue due to the fact that many factors affect the issue, not just gender. Case studies show that people of color are more likely to face pregnancy discrimination. Many people in our society today still perceive women of different races, specifically Hispanic and African American women, to be of a lesser value than others. This leads to them being the victim of more discrimination in the work place. Not only does race affect the rate of discrimination, the social status of a woman is a significant factor as well. Because women of lower classes are already looked down upon by the general public, it is impossible to not face pregnancy discrimination. These women are unable to fend for themselves when dealing with a more powerful force, which allows the cycle of pregnancy discrimination in their work environment to continue. 

Photo Creds

[womens-rights-in-the-workplace]

[neveengws101-blog]

Institutional Example: Contributors vs Victims

Pregnancy discrimination, as described in my previous posts, is most prevalent among employers vs pregnant employees. The employers are the contributors to this issue. Whether a woman is working a desk job, or employed in a field with more physical obstacles, anyone who is striving for equality must be concerned with how a woman is treated based on her maternal abilities. Women who are successful in their work are prone to lose bonuses, be demoted or even lose their job once they share the news that they are pregnant. For example, the women who submit their stories to the “Pregnant Then Screwed” campaign were facing reductions in their pay, and losing their potential to be promoted because they were pregnant. In other cases, like Young vs UPS, Peggy Young’s pregnancy was not allowed any accommodations and she was denied the right to a temporary light-duty job instead of her usual more strenuous position. The victims of pregnancy discrimination are left financially unstable and sometimes even experience a miscarriage because of these conditions.

Another institutional example I’d like to discuss is pregnancy discrimination in the military. We often forget that women in the military are already more likely to face hardships while working due to their gender and socially constructed stereotypes of women. Women also start experiencing feelings of guilt or shame once they are pregnant. Although there are no restrictions on getting pregnant while on duty, other soldiers have a ridiculous attitude towards motherhood and the accommodations provided towards mothers. If a mother is allowed to miss certain activities because of her pregnancy, she is often perceived as someone who is trying to not do her job.

These negative perceptions need to be stopped in order to protect the mental and physical health of a pregnant woman.

Photo Creds

[neveengws101-blog]

Second Scholarly Source

The objective of A Narrative Approach to Pregnancy-Related Discrimination and Leader-follower relationships by Liisa Makala is to shed light on how victims perceive pregnancy discrimination. In contrast to other studies I have read about, this study sheds light on how women feel during their pregnancy as well as after returning to work. Makela begins by discussing why pregnancy discrimination occurs. She mentions how the biological role of being a mother is perceived by others to replace a working mother’s professional role. People either look at pregnant workers as needing help or a limit on group performances. The pregnancy becomes a public matter in the work place, due to the obvious body changes and maternity leave absences. Pregnant women are expected to be the same, perfect worker regardless of the bodily strains their pregnancy takes on them. Makela mentions that almost half of the women in her case study experienced discrimination on this basis, but a relatively large amount of the rest of the women felt as though they had been treated fairly. Another case study focusing specifically on women who experienced pregnancy discrimination showed that women were empathizing with their employers, and prioritizing business needs instead of themselves. Makela analyzes this leader-follower relationship to further understand pregnancy discrimination.

Makela mentions that women are more likely to return to work when they are supported by their coworkers, and more importantly, their employers. She describes these dyadic relationships (exchanges between a leader and a member) as significant when creating a more positive work environment. The quality of these relationships vary between members but all dyadic relationships affect the intentions, perceptions and actual behavior of workers. Furthermore, a noteworthy part of dyadic relationships involve embodiment, and Makela mentions how this is important because physical appearance are bought into the relationship by the individuals involved. A pregnant woman’s body is changing, thus raising different responses from other people in the environment. To study the relation between dyadic relationships and the likelihood to experience pregnancy discrimination, Makela reveals the narratives of five different women who were interviewed during their pregnancy and had a follow up interview second time about a year and a half later.

The key to the narrative analytics of this study is that the researcher focuses on what is being said and how it is being said. The interpretations of the quality of dyadic relationships between the victim and the employer were concluded based on how the participants of the study discussed their boss during their pregnancy. If a leader’s personality and professionalism was expressed in negative terms, it was more likely there was a low dyadic relationship. In this study, the indifferent dyadic relationships of 2 participants developed into a bad relationship once pregnancy was in the picture, which is not unusual. Three of the women described a high dyadic relationship with their leader but, these women still faced discrimination. Makela concluded that the quality of the relationship between a leader and subordinate does not have any effect on the unfair treatment the worker might experience due to pregnancy. Each of the women spoke of how the reactions they received after announcing they were pregnant caused them to have a shakier trust in their leader. When asked about her relationship with her leader, a participant named Mari answered, “do you mean now or before I told her about my pregnancy?” (687). Conflicts over financial matters, changes in work assignments, denial of training opportunities and conflicts with holiday arrangements arose for each of the participants in the study after the announcement of being pregnant. Employers tried belittling each individual in attempts to get rid of the working mothers. Some women who were in the initial interviews would not even agree to follow up with Makela due to how mentally traumatizing their experiences were. In contrast, other women looked at the discrimination occurring around them in an analytical and practical manner.

I agree with the reasons Makela stated as to why women face pregnancy discrimination but I am quite shocked with the fact that even with a high quality dyadic relationship, women will still face discrimination. The betrayal a woman must feel after placing her trust into someone who discriminates against her based on her pregnancy is mentally traumatizing. The women experiencing these betrayals may carry trust issues with them to future work environments as well, and that is emotionally tiring for them and for employers who may be working with them. Equality will never be achieved if women have to face this cycle of discrimination.

Photo Creds

Source:

Mäkelä, Liisa. "A Narrative Approach To Pregnancy-Related Discrimination And Leader-Follower Relationships." Gender, Work & Organization 19.6 (2012): 677-698. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. 

[neveengws101-blog]

Analysis of a scholarly source

This scholarly article written by Deborah L. Burke reflects on pregnancy litigation and discrimination over the past half century. Burke introduces her thoughts on pregnancy discrimination by reviewing the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (“PDA”), which requires employees to treat pregnant workers the ‘same…as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work’” (996). When this law was first passed, many people considered this to be “special treatment” towards women but the treatment of working women who are pregnant is considered quite opposite of favorable. Judges and juries still had a narrow understanding of pregnancy in the work environment after the passing of this act. Burke also emphasizes that the earlier case wins did not ease the conflicts that parents of young children faced in the work place because the laws mainly protected pregnant workers who could still work uninhibited by their pregnancy.

Burke also discusses the continuing resistance to PDA and how stereotypes about pregnant women still prevail. As of 2009, courts refused to remedy the discrimination from employers towards pregnant employees regarding pension payments. Some lower district courts also refuse to acknowledge the PDA in its written form, thus limiting the potential impact it might have on discrimination cases. Judicial reviewers basically acknowledged the PDA act in the sense that pregnant workers have the right to be treated as badly as non-pregnant workers. Burke mentions specific cases in the text with this view, such as cases ruled by Judge Posner. The only effective way to win these cases was if the plaintiff could identify inconsistencies regarding how an employer applied a light-duty accommodation to a pregnant worker. Even then, lower courts still allowed many discriminatory actions under the conclusion that the actions were “pregnancy neutral”, a defense that employers were using which meant a lighter work load was acceptable for workers with other conditions but not pregnancies. Because of this, the resistance to equal treatment by judicial courts managed to increase despite the textual mandate of the PDA.

Burke states that the resistance to equal treatment is also due to the resilience of cultural norms regarding gender, work and maternity. She claims “the ideologies supporting pregnancy discrimination are at the core of the gender ideologies that subordinate women in the workplace” (1001). Confronting the social constructions of the category of being a mother and a worker is the reason as to why there is little success for pregnant workers in judicial courts. The effect of a woman’s maternity on workplace accommodations almost always ends in discrimination. Burke refers to maternity as a trigger to the descriptive and prescriptive stereotypes that an “impending maternity signals a detachment from paid work” (1002). Because of this, pregnant women are looked at with extreme hostility from their employers, especially if the women is of a lower class.

I agree with Burke’s claims in this essay. Maternity is perceived as a curse instead of a blessing in the work environment because of society’s constructed ideologies. I am in shock considering how many women lose pregnancy discrimination cases when the PDA specifically outlaws the treatment they are experience. Situations like this are what prevent justice on the basis of gender from occurring. My question towards lawyers, judges of the Supreme Court and also lower courts is how does one ignore the obvious TEXTUAL mandates of law when determining what should/shouldn’t be considered as discriminating? My only assumption is that concealing pregnancy discrimination is much easier than most think. 

Photo credits

Source:

BRAKE, DEBORAH L. "On Not "Having It Both Ways" And Still Losing: Reflections On Fifty Years Of Pregnancy Litigation Under Title Vii." Boston University Law Review 95.3 (2015): 995-1014. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Apr. 2016.

[neveengws101-blog]

Analysis of a Web Source: Aleecia Murray on Pregnancy Discrimination in the Work Place

Aleecia Murray’s “Pregnancy Discrimination in the work place” discusses the widespread issue of pregnancy discrimination and how it is “insidious and carefully concealed.” Murray, a principal lawyer who specializes in sex and pregnancy discrimination cases, shares her inside look at how employers in these situations act. She describes the discriminating viewpoint of these powerful people as sympathetic towards working women who are bearing children but also justified based on “economic rationale.” Murray also points out the fact that issues of sex discrimination are not solely based on men not supporting women. She claims “women can be as guilty as being the authors or sponsors of discriminatory conduct.”

Murray proceeds to explain legal actions taken to help stop the discrimination of pregnant women. Although the interpretation of certain laws and application by courts are not easy to simply state, the efforts of the Commonwealth have helped protect individuals and promote anti-discriminatory behaviors in the work place. She also describes how these laws emphasize how important that women bearing children are workers in our economy. Murray states that “we cannot afford, individually or collectively, for these women to not participate.” We should support and encourage women to become working mothers, and this can start by learning more about how employers get away with discrimination at the expense of working mothers and women in general.

There are a variety of methods employers use to successfully conceal their discriminatory ways against women. The most common explanation employers provide towards working women is a restructure solely based on “business decisions.” Other employers enforce working conditions that are too difficult for pregnant women to maintain. For example, they may tell women that bearing a child is not a justifiable reason for less work hours. It is difficult for women to prove that these demotions or loss of jobs are, in fact, discriminatory. In turn, these women are rarely stable enough to pursue legal action against their former employer due to their unemployment and focus on their unborn child.

I completely agree with what Murray states in her article. Employers are very skillful at hiding their discrimination against women. The difficulty in pursuing a former employer in court can put a mental and physical strain on pregnant women, which is why I am not surprised many women eventually give up trying to get justice for themselves. I believe that anti-discriminatory laws are not yet completely effective. An inquiry this article has proposed is what types of women are more prone to discriminate against pregnant coworkers and what is the reason for doing so. Prior to reading this article, I would have thought it unlikely for a woman who has the potential to be pregnant to discriminate against someone bearing a child. All in all, Aleecia Murray successfully introduced pregnancy discrimination in the work place and other significant factors of this issue.

Photo Creds

Source

Murray, Aleecia. "Pregnancy Discrimination in the Workplace." Radio National. N.p., 22 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.

[neveengws101-blog]

Introduction:

An issue that continuously contributes to oppression on the basis of gender is the discrimination towards women because of their pregnancy/potential to become pregnant. Although pregnancy discrimination is illegal, it still occurs regularly, and is a major threat to women in most work environments.Women who face this discrimination are also cautious to take legal action against discriminators because of the fact that their job is the only source of their income and of course, their main priority is their unborn baby. I am interested in this topic because I dislike how women are always limited by others, not just employers, but people who claim that women are just meant to bear children. The idea that women are unable to maintain a hard-working persona since they are looked at in a haze of femininity must be diminished completely.

Photo Creds