Woman gets damages for pregnancy job snub

I think this is sad.

The owner was correct.

She had only work there for two weeks.

I think she was just looking for a pay day.

This does nothing to help women as more owner will not hire people like her for part time work because they don't want to have to pay the money like this owner.

This sounds like worker rights gone wrong.

I agree 100% with dwb. The fact that she taped the interview is enough to show that she was after a pay out. She was only doing work experience with no promise of a job at the end of it. So she was not even employed by the company. who in their right mind would employ someone who would be going on maternity leave in a few weeks.

And once again common sense doesn't seem that common in Sweden...

All other pregnant women from now on who cannot secure temporary employment can thank this golddigger.

Pregnancy should not preclude a persons ability to get a job. If she expressed interest in the position then she should legitimately be considered.

Bias against pregnant women is a silent, rarely talked about but frequent occurrence. Even in Canada, pregnancy and discrimination go hand in hand far too frequently. There have been cases brought before the courts and employers reprimanded for their rights violations.

If she was being discriminated against why shouldn't she record their violation of her rights? It's against the law to discriminate based on race and religion, why should this be any different?

the employer was wrong for being forthright. you can't tell the lady that she wont be employed even before she has handed in her aplication letter even if you know she wont get the job on that count? more so, why discuss the specifics of an application or rationalize the merits or demerits of an application with the applicant? is that a provision in the law? if the employer had been wise and didn't hold these discussions, the lady wont have tapped the conversation in the first place. that said, pregnant women should be supported and encouraged to work as much as possible. at the same time, pregnant women shouldn't go out in search of jobs at the eleventh hour given that they will soon give birth and proceed on 12-18 months of maternity leave. this is borderline scamming of a company.

I guess she can set her foot there again since her new (or now former i guess) would call her all sorts of things. But I hope it was worth the price. I think it's a shame that honesty doesn't pay, being truthfully about not being to be able to hire her for her soon-to-come-pregnancy. Now they might not be able to hire anyone instead. Good job!

@Canada_Girl

I agree 100%

Sounds like someone had it in for her.

Canada Girl is right on this matter.

Canada girl is so right..........I think it's a good thing now days to record conversations regarding jobs, money and position in a company. So many employers say one thing and do another.......I have been through that with working for lawyers who are so good at talking out of both sides of the mouth. Now days I get everything in writing, if it's not in writing then it's being recorded. I learnt from lawyers no less, it's called "Cover your ass".

Sherian Elizabeth, I think you now have it backwards. Here we have an employer that said one thing and did precisely the same. He/she was honest and open. And look where it got him/her.

The employer would not have been forced to pay damages if he/she had lied and said "there have been shortcomings in the way you handled your duties, and therefore we unfortunately cannot hire you". Then the woman who was recording the conversation would have had no basis for a damages claim.

Lesson to employers: you are encouraged to lie.

This, unfortunately, sounds like another reason why this discrimination against women gets perpetuated. I personally work in an organization that has more than 90 women, and my wife is pregnant as well. The difference here is that my organization is big enough to plan for at least 4 or 5 women being away on maternity at any given time (And yes, there always are), and my wife's organization values her skills and experience and knows that it is worth the wait for her to come back. A small company that hires a pregnant woman needs to go through the entire recruitment process again in a few months, as well as only be able to offer a temporary position, which usually attracts the less qualified. To abuse her temporary placement as part of a "labor market" scheme (ie she was unemployed and there through Arbetsförmedlingen) is just wrong, especially after just a two week placement. All this does is drive the reasons underground - smaller companies will be far more wary about hiring women between 25-35, and lose out on a valuable resource pool. And those women lose out on job opportunities. I appreciate the need to have babies and maternity leave, but the respect needs to go both ways - for many, their small company is what stands between them and the unemployment office, a much worse of life for their families and the few employed there, and this places certain restraints.