How the labour law protects new mothers
--:--
Pregnant employees are strongly protected under South African law. There are no fewer than six pieces of legislation that require employers to treat pregnant and post-pregnant employees with the greatest of care. One of these pieces of legislation is the Code of good practice on pregnancy and after birth (
The code, issued in terms of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA), is aimed at protecting pregnant and post-pregnant employees. It obliges employers to encourage women employees to inform the employer of their pregnancy as early as possible so as to ensure that the employer can assess risks and deal with them. The employer must also evaluate the situation of each employee who has informed the employer that she is pregnant and assess risks to the health and safety of pregnant or breast-feeding employees within the workplace.
The employer must then implement measures to protect pregnant or breast-feeding employees and supply them with information and training regarding risks to their health and safety and measures for eliminating and minimising such risks. The employer is also required to maintain a list of jobs not involving risk to which pregnant or breast-feeding employees could be transferred.
The employer should note that, even where an employee who has already given birth is fully well, the illness of the newborn baby entitles the employee to time off to look after the child. In the landmark case of De Beer vs SA Export Connection the employee gave birth to a twin and took one month’s maternity leave by agreement. As the babies were both ill by the time the leave period was up and the mother applied for another month off. The employer granted her only two more weeks’ leave and, when she did not return to work, she was dismissed.
The employee referred the matter to the labour court claiming that the dismissal was automatically unfair because she had been fired for reasons related to her pregnancy. Section 187 of the Labour Relations Act classifies a dismissal as automatically unfair if the reason for the dismissal was related to the pregnancy of the dismissed employee. The employer argued that the illness of the children did not relate to the pregnancy. That is, it argued that the phrase in the act “reasons relating to pregnancy” refers to the mother herself and not to the newborn children.
The court decided that the phrase in the ...
The code, issued in terms of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA), is aimed at protecting pregnant and post-pregnant employees. It obliges employers to encourage women employees to inform the employer of their pregnancy as early as possible so as to ensure that the employer can assess risks and deal with them. The employer must also evaluate the situation of each employee who has informed the employer that she is pregnant and assess risks to the health and safety of pregnant or breast-feeding employees within the workplace.
The employer must then implement measures to protect pregnant or breast-feeding employees and supply them with information and training regarding risks to their health and safety and measures for eliminating and minimising such risks. The employer is also required to maintain a list of jobs not involving risk to which pregnant or breast-feeding employees could be transferred.
The employer should note that, even where an employee who has already given birth is fully well, the illness of the newborn baby entitles the employee to time off to look after the child. In the landmark case of De Beer vs SA Export Connection the employee gave birth to a twin and took one month’s maternity leave by agreement. As the babies were both ill by the time the leave period was up and the mother applied for another month off. The employer granted her only two more weeks’ leave and, when she did not return to work, she was dismissed.
The employee referred the matter to the labour court claiming that the dismissal was automatically unfair because she had been fired for reasons related to her pregnancy. Section 187 of the Labour Relations Act classifies a dismissal as automatically unfair if the reason for the dismissal was related to the pregnancy of the dismissed employee. The employer argued that the illness of the children did not relate to the pregnancy. That is, it argued that the phrase in the act “reasons relating to pregnancy” refers to the mother herself and not to the newborn children.
The court decided that the phrase in the ...