RECENTLY, media reports and letters to the press on the contentious issue of pregnant workers being laid off without equitable compensation or non-confirmation of service after the probationary period have raised concern in the workforce, among unions and the authorities.

It would be unjustifiable for a company to terminate or dismiss the service of a loyal worker who has been with a company for years without equitable compensation just because she wants to start a family.

However, a prospective job applicant needs to understand an employer’s concern and burden when a staff gets pregnant during her first year of employment.

Generally, a staff new on the job would take about three to six months – depending on the complexities of the task – to understand and manage it. During this probationary period, the staff is paid a full wage that does not commensurate with her full contribution to the company.

If she were to get pregnant towards the end of her probation period and the employer then confirms her service, this would mean that she would enjoy maternity benefits like 16 weeks of paid leave and time off for regular pre-natal checkups.

During this period, her contribution would be lower than that of the other staff. This is a cost to the employer.

A temporary staff employed while the worker is on maternity leave would be a financial burden to the employer – this would be something a small company can ill-afford.

Alternatively, the redistribution of her job responsibilities among the pool of existing staff would cause resentment and unhappiness, and some may even resign.

A staff who gets pregnant during her first year of employment is a financial liability to a company. In fairness, a new employee should plan to start a family after having worked with the company for more than a year or so to “earn” the benefits.

We all sympathise with the employee, but who sympathises with the employer?