Pregnancy Discrimination?

yankee49

Our company was notified in April that one of our customers was going to a competitor in three months. A pregnant employee knew her job would be phased out. We had an open position in one department for which this employee was qualified. However, I was told not to post the position, "they had something in mind for that slot". The employee asked me when the position would be posted and I had to tell her I had been told not to post it. Long story short, the pregnant employee was layed off and the open job was given to an employee that had given the company a verbal resignation. The pregnant employee was dedicated, good work ethic, and reliable with positive performance evaluations. The one we kept, consistently tardy and complains frequently with mediocre performance evaluations.

When I inquired about the decision, I get "He decided"/"She decided" from management. Apparently no one made the decision and she layed herself off! Of all the employees we layed off (16) this one makes no sense. Could there have been a subtle discrimination due to her pregnancey and her due date in the middle of the busiest time of the year for us?

Leslie

I'm confused, who "laid herself off?" Was the employee they kept also part of the RIF? And what would that have to do with discrimination if she and the pregnant employee were both qualified?

sonny

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-13-03 AT 10:20AM (CST)[/font][p]I think what was being said was since no one in power admitted to making the decision, the employee must have just laid herself off. . It's very foreign to me, but think Yankee was being sarcastic.

Don D

There is no way to know what could have been in the minds of the decision makers. Nor is there much to be gained from speculating about it. Only the shadow knows. If I were the pregnant employee and had wanted to remain with the company and you laid me off and I felt you violated your posting procedures and I felt I was qualified for the position that was filled with someone else and I felt my pregnancy may have been a factor in all that chicanery, I would file a charge. I would let the decision makers speak for themselves as to who did what and why. (and the guys in HR had better have their notes in order as to what they did or did not do).

Shawn

This is an example of why HR should be part of the decision making from the beginning, especially in a RIF situation. You should always understand the rationale for every HR decision. When the time comes to explain who made the decision to lay her off all the heads will turn to you.

mbeam

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-13-03 AT 01:27PM (CST)[/font][p]Would echo the sentiments of the prior postings. Who told her about the layoff? Is there a way to now post the position? I would gather the management team together starting with those who indicated not to post the position and ask the rationale behind why waiting. Bring along the new job description and have the resumes of the two individuals (one in the job and the one layed off) and put new names at the top - Jane Doe and Jo Black.

They should be able to articulate why they would hire one and not the other. If they're not able to do this, the position should be reposted or they should be prepared to deal with the next paragraph...

Remind them of the little thing called personal liability and ask whether they have a good lawyer in mind? If they can't explain to you in factual terms or stumble then have them imagine how well this will hold up in court.... in front of a hostile prosecutor and a jury of their peers.