Pregnancy and Employment: A Literature Review - Crisis Pregnancy ...

Pregnancy and Employment: A Literature Review
Under British law employers are required to carry out a risk assessment for all pregnant women. It was estimated
that in 55% of cases, employers did not carry out risk assessments, failed to pick up risks as part of the assessment
or failed to address the risks identified. Poor levels of risk assessment were most common in the business sector
and among professional occupations, and for women working more than 40 hours a week, with less than one
year’s tenure and with high earnings prior to pregnancy.
Employers’ flexibility towards new mothers was also assessed. Overall, 19% of women reported that they had not
been allowed time off to cope with the illness of their baby or had been denied the opportunity to work more
flexibly on their return to work. Lack of flexibility was particularly high among professional and managerial women
and in the manufacturing and transport sectors.
Impact on decision to return to work
The EOC survey found a relationship between treatment while pregnant and women’s decision to return to work. 10
Overall, 81% of mothers in the sample had returned to work by the time of the survey. Of the women who returned
to work as employees (n=799), 59% felt that their employer was very supportive of the fact that they had a young
child, 26% said their employer was supportive, and 13% felt their employer was not supportive.
Over three-quarters (77%) of those who stated that their employer was very supportive or supportive during
pregnancy had returned to work at the time of the interview, compared to 63% who stated that their employer was
not supportive (Adams et al, 2005). Hogarth and Elias’s analysis of the same survey data suggests that women who
were dismissed as a result of pregnancy (type A discrimination) were less likely to have returned to work within the
period of observation: 62% as opposed to 75% (Hogarth & Elias, 2005, p15). However, women who reported type
B discrimination – ‘financial loss’ – were more likely to have returned to work by the time of the survey (87%). It is
possible that this result arises because the women experiencing financial loss were more likely to be high earners
and to have higher educational qualifications, characteristics that increase women’s chances of returning to work.
As the authors do not control for other characteristics in a model, it is not possible to attribute the differences
identified in women’s propensity to return to work to the manner in which they were treated during pregnancy.
Lack of employer flexibility was found to increase the likelihood of leaving work subsequent to the return (Adams
et al, 2005, p67).
Loss of income
Another significant impact of discrimination was the loss of earnings experienced by those who were dismissed/
made redundant or pushed out of work because of their pregnancy. The problem is exacerbated by the difficulty
women face in obtaining another job while pregnant (EOC, 2005, p24). Similarly, those who report problems such
as demotion, pay cuts, having their shifts cut without agreement and being forced to go on maternity leave or sick
leave earlier than they wanted to will also have experienced financial losses.
Additionally, women dismissed before 26 weeks of pregnancy were calculated to have lost an average of £2,210 in
statutory maternity pay (Hogarth & Elias, 2005, p.iv). As well as the immediate cost, the authors report that women
who recorded discrimination of type A or B experienced a lower rise in their earnings on return to work than those
who were not discriminated against (although, again, other relevant factors are not controlled for in this analysis).
Furthermore, those who experienced dismissal as a result of pregnancy were less likely to return to work at all, and
those who did return spent longer out of the labour market. Both of these factors are likely to depress women’s
earnings in the longer term (ibid).
2.4 Unfair Treatment: Findings of Maternity Rights Surveys (UK)
The Maternity Rights Survey series in the UK has been monitoring women’s take-up of maternity benefits and
women’s employment pre and post-birth since the late 1970s. We focus here on the four most recent surveys,
carried out in 1996 (Callender et al, 1997), 2002 (Hudson et al, 2004), 2005 (Smeaton & Marsh, 2006) and 2007
(La Valle et al, 2008). The methodology of the survey changed over the period, from a postal survey in 1996
and 2002 to a telephone survey in 2005, to a face-to-face, computer-assisted interview in 2007. The content
of the questionnaires and the wording of questions also changed from year to year, which means that precise
10 We discuss the findings relating to women’s decision to return to work and their post-birth employment conditions in Chapters 3 & 4.
PAGE 15