Pregnant Women: Maternity Rights at Work (Hansard, 4 June 1998)

§ The Minister of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Clinton-Davis)
My Lords, the current legislation gives comprehensive protection to women dismissed for any reason relating to pregnancy or childbirth. However, we recognise that difficulties may arise because of the uncertainty over the status of the employment contract during extended maternity leave. The Fairness at Work White Paper, published on 21st May, proposes that legislation should provide for the contract of employment to continue during the whole period of maternity leave.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. I note that while he said that the legislation provides comprehensive protection, he did not say that it provides effective protection. Is he aware that NACAB and many other bodies report a constant stream of dismissals for pregnancy and of people returning from maternity leave being told things such as that the only work available is on the night shift, which one 465 might be tempted to regard as constructive dismissal? Has he any proposals for making the law more effective than it is at present?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I am obliged to the noble Earl for his continuing interest in this important issue. If we have laws on the statute book, it is of course important that they are enforced and are capable of being enforced properly. That is something which we are examining with care and which we have forecast in the White Paper. Ultimately of course it is for the complainant to take the matter to the appropriate tribunal or court. If she does not do so there is nothing very much that one can do about that. Part of the job is to keep people properly informed of their rights. That is something that we have done and will continue to do.

§ Baroness Lockwood
My Lords, welcome though the proposals in the White Paper Fairness at Work are, is the Minister aware that there is still the important question of ensuring that the measures are enforced? Is the noble Lord aware that, for example, at present the Equal Opportunities Commission receives something like 15 complaints a month about women being dismissed once they have announced their pregnancy? It is not simply a question of ensuring that rights are known but also that responsibilities are known and recognised by employers. Will he take steps to ensure that the new measures are sufficiently publicised?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, my noble friend is right. But it remains for the complainant to take the appropriate action. It is not a matter that is punishable criminally. The Government have a duty to extend knowledge as far as concerns employers and employees about what is happening. A DTI booklet, Maternity Rights, provides plain English guidance on the rights available. In addition, other departments provide guidance on the legislation. The Department of Social Security produces information as regards babies and benefits. The Health and Safety Executive provides useful information in that regard. The Government are using their best endeavours to make sure that the rights of people are known and understood on both sides.

§ Lord Gisborough
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the more rights and protection given to pregnant women, and the more costs put on employers, the more difficult it will be for those people to gain jobs because employers will avoid employing them?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I could not disagree more fundamentally with the noble Lord. In order to achieve a workforce that is co-operative, helpful and involved in a company, a management also has duties to ensure that it behaves in a civilised way. Both the previous government and this Government have taken that point on board. We feel that there is a case for real improvement in this regard.

§ Baroness Turner of Camden
My Lords, is the Minister aware that it appears that many employers are 466 ignorant of the fact that they will receive reimbursement for the cost of paying a woman maternity pay while she is on maternity leave? Could that be made more widely known? Perhaps then employers would be less inclined to ignore the law.

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I do not think that there is overwhelming evidence of an exodus from responsibility on the part of employers. There are serious situations which have to be addressed. I take note strongly of what my noble friend properly suggests.

§ Lord Milverton
My Lords, does the Minister agree that it is wrong and disgraceful for an employer not to fulfil his duty as regards a woman having a child? In fulfilling one of women's most lovely functions, is it not unfair that women should be penalised and unable to continue a career, as is right for any woman to be able to do?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, the noble Lord has addressed all the relevant points in that fairly brief intervention. The task of the Government, and part of the role of the White Paper Fairness at Work, is to use their best endeavours to seek to promote a family friendly culture at work. Sometimes it does not exist, and we have to rectify that position.

§ Baroness Carnegy of Lour
My Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Turner, mentioned the booklet Maternity Rights. It is extremely clear for the recipient, as is the package for employers. Problems in arrangements may be considerable for employers, but does the Minister agree that the information cannot be faulted? It is extremely clear.

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, clearly where people do not take advantage of rights that are available to them it gives rise to a prima facie assumption that something is going wrong in the information available. It is important therefore for us to look at the situation, as my noble friend suggests. I am sure the noble Baroness agrees that that is the appropriate role for the Government.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, perhaps I may refer to a case that is well known to the department. A shopkeeper's wife became ill. He advertised for someone to undertake the work that his wife had done in the shop. A lady responded on the telephone to the advertisement. During the course of the telephone call she let the shopkeeper know that she was pregnant. In a civilised way the gentleman in the shop said that the work involved quite heavy lifting and he did not think that it would be suitable for her. Not even having gone further with the application, the lady successfully sued for discrimination. Is that a fair burden on an employer?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, the noble Baroness refers to a hard case of which she has knowledge and I do not. I shall not therefore comment on the specific circumstances. She seems to make the assumption that the whole of the legislation is impaired because of a single case or a minority of cases.
467 I think that one will always have difficult situations in relation to the enforcement of the law, whether civil or criminal. I shall look into the case if the noble Baroness will let me have the details. I do not have them. They are not in this voluminous and very useful document that I have before me.

§ Lord Vinson
My Lords, the Minister wrote to me on this subject a year ago, but perhaps he forgets that he signed the letter. I queried the fact that a £2,000 fine should fall on this small shopkeeper and asked whether somebody should be responsible for the costs of the pregnancy of a third party with whom he has had no biological association. That seemed to me to be wrong. Does the Minister recall my letter?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I recall every single letter I have ever signed.

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, what I sometimes forget is the detail.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, the Minister is undoubtedly correct that it is the responsibility of the woman to make a complaint. However, does he agree that between the firm and a woman who has recently given birth, lost her job and lost statutory maternity pay there is a real inequality of power? Will he give attention to the doctrine of a level playing field? Will he remind employers that if they take the advice of the noble Lord, Lord Gisborough, they will lose a large proportion of the workforce in this generation and an even larger one in the next.

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I thought that I had dealt with that question. Yes, of course, there is an inequality of power, but this is not the only area in which that occurs. I welcome the fact that we have concentrated on this important issue. No doubt the noble Earl will continue to raise these matters. I do not wish to encourage him too much—he needs little encouragement—but it has been a useful exercise.