Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Law’s Response to Pregnancy/Workplace Conflicts: A Critique

  • Published:
Feminist Legal Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper considers law’s engagement with pregnancy/workplace conflicts. Drawing on recent research, including original empirical research conducted by the author, I consider how law’s response is ineffective. The nature of this ‘ineffective response’ is explored and in particular I consider the gap between, on the one hand, legal prescriptions and policy ambitions and, on the other hand, the reality of pregnancy/workplace conflicts. In essence, law fails to capture the experiences of pregnant women and new mothers at work and this is reflected in the high number of women experiencing pregnancy discrimination, the low number of women invoking the law in order to gain redress when they do experience pregnancy/workplace conflicts and the low success rate amongst the few women that do bring claims against employers in such circumstances.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, L., McAndrew, F. & Winterbotham, M., Pregnancy Discrimination at Work: A Survey of Women (E.O.C. Paper Series 24, Manchester: E.O.C., 2005)

  • Barlow A. & Duncan S. Family Law, Moral Rationalities and New Labour’s Communitarianism: Part II, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 22(2) (2000), 129–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlow A., Duncan S., James G. & Park A. Cohabitation, Marriage and the Law: Social Change and Legal Reform in 21st Century Britain (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Berns S. Women Going Backwards: Law and Change in a Family-Unfriendly Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bistine S.M. Making Room for Baby, Association Management 37 (1985), 96–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Boch C. Commentary: Case C-32/93, Webb v E.M.O. v. Air Cargo (U.K.) Ltd., [1994] E.C.R. 1-3567 Common Market Law Review 33(1996) 560–563

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, S.B., “Challenging the Public/Private Divide: An Overview”, in Challenging the Public/Private Divide, ed. S.B. Boyd (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), 3–36

  • Caracciolo di Torella E., & Masselot A. Pregnancy, Maternity and the Organization of Family Life: An Attempt to Classify the Case Law of the Court of Justice, European Law Review 26(2002), 239–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghlan, A., “Stress Can Make Pregnant Women Miscarry”, New Scientist 2473 (November 2004)

  • Collinson D., Knights D. & Collinson M., Managing to Discriminate (London: Routledge, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conaghan J. Pregnancy, Equality and the European Court of Justice, International Journal of Discrimination Law 3 (1998), 115–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conaghan, J., “Feminism and Labour Law: Contesting the Terrain”, in Feminist Perspectives on Employment Law, eds. A. Morris & T. O’Donnell (London: Cavendish, 1999), 13–41

  • Conaghan, J., “Work, Family, and The Discipline of Labour Law”, in Labour Law, Work, and Families: Critical and Comparative Perspectives, eds. J. Conaghan, & K. Rittich (Oxford: O.U.P., 2005), 19–42

  • Conaghan, J. & Rittich, K. (eds.), Labour Law, Work, and Families: Critical and Comparative Perspectives (Oxford: O.U.P., 2005)

  • Desai, T., Gregg, P., Steer, J. & Wadsworth, J., “Gender in the Labour Market”, in The State of Working Britain, eds. P. Gregg & J. Wadsworth (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999), 168–184

  • Diduck A. In Search of the Feminist Good Mother, Social & Legal Studies 7(1) (1998), 129–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D.T.I., Fairness at Work Cmnd 3968 (London: H.M.S.O., 1998)

  • D.T.I., Work and Parents: Competitiveness and Choice Cmnd 5005 (London: H.M.S.O., 2000)

  • D.T.I., Work and Families: Choice and Flexibility: A Consultation Document (London: H.M.S.O., 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • D.T.I. Work and Families Bill (London: H.M.S.O., 2006a)

    Google Scholar 

  • D.T.I. Work and Families: Choice and Flexibility: Additional Paternity Leave and Pay – A Consultation Document (London: H.M.S.O., 2006b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffield M. Trends in Female Employment 2002 Labour Market Trends 110(11) (2002), 605–616

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunstan R. Birth Rights: A CAB Evidence Report on Maternity and Paternity Rights at Work (London: National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Employment Tribunals Service, Annual Report and Accounts 2004–2005 (London: T.S.O., 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • E.O.C., Greater Expectations: Final Report of the E.O.C.’s Investigation into Discrimination Against New and Expectant Mothers in the Workplace (Manchester: E.O.C., 2005a).

    Google Scholar 

  • E.O.C., “Press Release: Sacked for being Pregnant” (Manchester: E.O.C., February 2005b, available at http://www.eoc.org.uk/cseng/news/o2_feb_pregnancy)

  • European Commission, Employment in Europe 2001 (Brussels: European Commission, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission, Report from the Commission on Equality between Women and Men (Brussels: European Commission, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Felstiner W.L.F., Abel R.L. & Sarat A. The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, Claiming…, Law and Society Review 14(1980–1981), 631–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredman S. A Difference with Distinction: Pregnancy and Parenthood Reassessed The Law Quarterly Review 110 (1994), 106–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredman S. Women and the Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredman, S., “Precarious Norms for Precarious Work”, in Precarious Work, Women and the New Economy: The Challenge to Legal Norms, eds. J. Fudge & R. Owens (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2006), 177–200

  • Fudge, J. & Owens, R. (eds.), Precarious Work, Women and the New Economy: The Challenge to Legal Norms (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2006)

  • Genn H. Paths to Justice: What People Do and Think about Going to Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory J. Pregnancy Discrimination at Work: A Review of Employment Tribunal Decisions from May 2002 to December 2003 (Manchester: E.O.C., 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpert J.A., Wilson M.L. & Hickman J.L. Pregnancy as a Source of Bias in Performance Appraisal Journal of Organizational Behaviour 14(1993), 649–663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattery A. Women, Work, and Family: Balancing and Weaving (London: Sage, 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston D. & Marks G. The Role of Planning and Workplace Support in Returning to Work after Maternity Leave, British Journal of Industrial Relations 41(2) (2003), 197–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houston, D. (ed.) Work-Life Balance in the 21st Century (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005)

  • James G. The Work and Family Bill: Legislation to Improve Choice and Flexibility?, Industrial Law Journal 35(3) (2006), 272–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, G., Regulating Pregnancy and Parenting at Work (working title) (London: Routledge Cavendish, forthcoming)

  • Labour Party, Labour Party Manifesto (London: Labour Party, 1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, S. & Lewis, J. (eds.), The Work-Family Challenge: Rethinking Employment (London: Sage, 1996)

  • Leighton P. & Evans R. Pregnant Women at Work: A Survey of Small Business Employers in Wales (Manchester: E.O.C., 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard A. The First Eight Years: A Profile of Applicants to the Industrial Tribunals Under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Equal Pay Act 1970 (Manchester: E.O.C., 1986)

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard A. Pyrrhic Victories: Winning Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay Cases in the Industrial Tribunals, 1980–84 (London: H.M.S.O., 1987a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard A. Judging Inequality: The Effectiveness of the Tribunal System in Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay Cases (London: Cobden Trust, 1987b).

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon C. Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1987)

    Google Scholar 

  • McGlynn, C., “Work, Family, and Parenthood: The European Union Agenda”, in Labour Law, Work, and Families: Critical and Comparative Perspectives, eds. J. Conaghan & K. Rittich (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 217–236

  • McKie, L., Cunningham-Burley, S. & McKendrick, J., “Families and Relationships: Boundaries and Bridges”, in Families in Society: Boundaries and Relationships, eds. L. McKie & S. Cunningham-Burley (Bristol: Policy Press, 2005)

  • McRae S. Maternity Rights in Britain: The Experience of Women and Employers (London: Policy Studies Institute, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • McRae S. Returning to Work after Childbirth: Opportunities and Inequalities, European Sociological Review 9(2)(1993), 125–138

    Google Scholar 

  • M.O.R.I., Big Employers Childcare Survey (London: Daycare Trust, 2002, available at www.mori.com/polls/2002/daycaretrust.2002.shtml)

  • O’Grady, F. & Wakefield H. Women Work and Maternity: The Inside Story (London: Maternity Alliance, 1989)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattison H.M. & Gross H. Pregnancy, Work and Women’s Well-Being Work and Stress 10(1) (1996), 72–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Pleasence P., Buck A., Balmer N., O’Grady A., Genn H. & Smith M. Causes of Action: Civil Law and Social Justice (London: H.M.S.O., 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rake K. Women’s Incomes over a Lifetime: Report to the Women’s Unit (London: H.M.S.O., 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodmell S. & Smart L. Pregnant at Work: The Experiences of Women (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1982)

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon N. Lesbian Perspectives on Pregnancy and the ‘Written Statement’ of Rights and Responsibilities Proposed by the EOC (Cardiff: E.O.C. Wales, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart C. Law, Crime and Sexuality (London: Sage Publications, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sohrab J.A. Avoiding the ‘Exquisite Trap’: A Critical Look at the Equal Treatment/Special Treatment Debate in Law Feminist Legal Studies 1(2) (1993) 141–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spelman E. Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought (London: The Women’s Press Ltd., 1988)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabor M. Pregnancy and Heavy Work, Occupational Health and Safety 2 (1983), 17–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, M. (ed.), Public and Private: Feminist Legal Debates (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1995)

  • Weir, G., “The Economically Inactive Who Look After the Family or Home”, Labour Market Trends (November 2002), 577–587

  • Williams J. Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What To Do About It (New York: O.U.P., 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A., “Sectorial and Occupational Change: Prospects for Women’s Employment”, in Labour Market Structures and Prospects for Women, ed. R. Lindley (Manchester: E.O.C., 1994)

  • Wynn M. Pregnancy Discrimination: Equality, Protection or Reconciliation?, Modern Law Review 62(3) (1999), 435–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young V. & Morrell, J. Pregnancy Discrimination at Work: A Survey of Employers (Manchester: E.O.C., 2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Grace James.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

James, C.G. Law’s Response to Pregnancy/Workplace Conflicts: A Critique. Feminist Legal Stud 15, 167–188 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-007-9055-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-007-9055-0

Keywords

Navigation