Singapore courts side with US bank to dismiss pregant employee

[nayr69sg]

We have to listen to both sides of the story.

As an employer, frankly I would prefer to have less disruption in my work flow. Occasional NS obligation (1~3 weeks) is tolerable. Imagine 3 ~ 4 months. If the employee have been serving the company diligently and for a couple of years I can understand her situation. I came across some employee cut short their leaves as they knew their company is short handed, some were willing to work from home. During their absent they still keep in contact with their staff at work.

On the other hand some of them after joining the company, few months later (usually after confirmation) say they are pregnant. Do you think it is fair for the company to bear the burden of finding a replacement (which is not easy to find). In the first place you haven't even contribute anything yet still make full use of the system.

If you are trying very hard for a kid all along and it came unexpectedly, you should discuss with your management and volunteer to resign if there is too much hassle. And when you jolly well know that when you are in a new job, there are many ways to prevent pregnancy. Condom for a start.

I am sure in the above case, the employee hides her pregnancy and try to beat the system. That is why the verdict was against her.

IQ and Race

You so sure? Actually she informed at around 8 weeks pregnant.

But obviously you dont support maternity leave benefits lah.

Good to know what you sinkies are like.

Seriously you should ask WP to campaign a d say if they become govt will cancel all maternity leave. And allow companies to fire pregnant women. And protect NS men instead.

 

[AhMeng]

See another one dont support maternity leave.

Only just me different lah.

Sinkies condemn pregnant women working! Ho say!

All these remind me of many years ago when a subordinate of mine who is single but became pregnant. I had to fight tooth and nail for her to be entitled to the company's 6 months maternity benefits as the cheebye fuckup company does not give such benefits to unmarried mum giving birth. Pua cheebye to these HR fuckers

 

[bobby]

See another one dont support maternity leave.

Only just me different lah.

Sinkies condemn pregnant women working! Ho say!

I remember got 1 kwai lan woman who said that Singapore women getting pregnant is liken to Singapore men serving NS.

 

[bobby]

Also associated with staff with young children is the constant "urgent" leave to care for their babies...you think they give a fuck about your business?

 

[nayr69sg]

All these remind me of many years ago when a subordinate of mine who is single but became pregnant. I had to fight tooth and nail for her to be entitled to the company's 6 months maternity benefits as the cheebye fuckup company does not give such benefits to unmarried mum giving birth. Pua cheebye to these HR fuckers

Well looks like it will become worse now.

married mother also will kena fired.

But look on the bright side, it is what the sinkies WANT!

 

[nayr69sg]

Also associated with staff with young children is the constant "urgent" leave to care for their babies...you think they give a fuck about your business?

Good. Please tell Worker's Party to have laws that will demand that mother's with young children NOT BE ALLOWED to work.

 

[Hypocrite-The]

Yeah lah. My sinkie wife got sacked after got pregnant lost her source of income.

Happy now?

Tat is yr problem bcos u are a fucked up provider..u run yr own organisation n see if u sing the same tune...I had nasty experiences with preggies n m&ds gaming the system...so they can rot for all I care..I stick my neck out for them n also Kenna from them n top mgt..even my boss also Kenna because we chose to do the right thing. N u try explaining to the board the drop in productivity..n u try dealing with the complaints from fellow colleagues about their increase workload...in the end I took on the extra workload..n wat about my own family? N to hire an extra person have to justify n train etc..in the end better to just take on extra duties myself n palm off the easy stuff to the subordinates n they still kpkb. N after maternity leave still no end to baby sick n all tat crap...if cannot afford babies on single income n one parent cannot provide for all ..than don't breed. U can't afford it. The company is not social services

 

[Leongsam]

Simple question to you.

Do you think becoming pregnant should become a valid reason for Sinkie employers to FIRE their staff?

There is no need to JUSTIFY. Just say yes or no.

If I have a small business to run and I depend on my staff for the business to remain viable I would like to retain the right to deal with employees that want to procreate in a manner that will protect my interests and NOT the interests of a pregnant employee. After all I own the business and there are other employees who depend on me to pay their bills.

Imagine what would happen if I have project that requires a skilled coder and I hire a female to do the coding work while I and other members of my staff work on other aspects of the business.

A week after I hire her she tells me that she is 4 months pregnant and will be taking 6 months off to have her baby. What am I supposed to do?

 

[Hypocrite-The]

Well looks like it will become worse now.

married mother also will kena fired.

But look on the bright side, it is what the sinkies WANT!

Singkies also want pap...n why the oppos don't bring this up n put pap to shame? Good to embarrass the pap bcos women are the biggest Pappie supporters..n this affect the sisterhood...n where is AWARE
..

 

[nayr69sg]

Tat is yr problem bcos u are a fucked up provider..u run yr own organisation n see if u sing the same tune...I had nasty experiences with preggies n m&ds gaming the system...so they can rot for all I care..I stick my neck out for them n also Kenna from them n top mgt..even my boss also Kenna because we chose to do the right thing. N u try explaining to the board the drop in productivity..n u try dealing with the complaints from fellow colleagues about their increase workload...in the end I took on the extra workload..n wat about my own family? N to hire an extra person have to justify n train etc..in the end better to just take on extra duties myself n palm off the easy stuff to the subordinates n they still kpkb. N after maternity leave still no end to baby sick n all tat crap...if cannot afford babies on single income n one parent cannot provide for all ..than don't breed. U can't afford it. The company is not social services

Yes I see your point totally.

Actually I encourage all of you to contact your MP and tell them to STOP ALL MATERNITY BENEFITS NONSENSE!

Also please spread this so that more companies will learn how to fire pregnant staff.

Really please spread it. The more pregnant women get fired the better for productivity in sinkieland. Also will save the males from having to explain to board and all.

Spread it. Let it go viral. The key phrase is "We determined your role to be REDUNDANT before we knew you were pregnant. "

 

[nayr69sg]

If I have a small business to run and I depend on my staff for the business to remain viable I would like to retain the right to deal with employees that want to procreate in a manner that will protect my interests and NOT the interests of a pregnant employee. After all I own the business and there are other employees who depend on me to pay their bills.

Imagine what would happen if I have project that requires a skilled coder and I hire a female to do the coding work while I and other members of my staff work on other aspects of the business.

A week after I hire her she tells me that she is 4 months pregnant and will be taking 6 months off to have her baby. What am I supposed to do?

Yes I can see that point of view Sam. Small business cannot afford this.

But State Street Bank and Trust is not a small business.

In any case, I see your point. So please spread this method on how to fire pregnant staff. It is a landmark case. The Employment Claims Tribunal has ruled in favor of the Corporation to dismisss an executive staff who got pregnant.

There is no need to even show evidence. As long as you go to court and say "We determined her role to be REDUNDANT BEFORE we knew she was pregnant" Can already. The judge says will believe you as you say under oath. No need letters or emails or further evidence.

PLEASE SPREAD THIS! Let companies learn how to do it! Help your fellow sinkies correct the INJUSTICE of maternity benefits!

 

[bobby]

If I have a small business to run and I depend on my staff for the business to remain viable I would like to retain the right to deal with employees that want to procreate in a manner that will protect my interests and NOT the interests of a pregnant employee. After all I own the business and there are other employees who depend on me to pay their bills.

Imagine what would happen if I have project that requires a skilled coder and I hire a female to do the coding work while I and other members of my staff work on other aspects of the business.

A week after I hire her she tells me that she is 4 months pregnant and will be taking 6 months off to have her baby. What am I supposed to do?

Good point.

All those who plan a family and yet want to get paid...please work for the gahmen or large corporations who can buffer their absence with a large staff pool.

Small businesses cannot afford these privileges.

 

[nayr69sg]

Good point.

All those who plan a family and yet want to get paid...please work for the gahmen or large corporations who can buffer their absence with a large staff pool.

Small businesses cannot afford these privileges.

Yes. Please help spread the playbook on how to fire pregnant staff.

"we determined your role to be REDUNDANT BEFORE we found out you were pregnant"

 

[Hypocrite-The]

If I have a small business to run and I depend on my staff for the business to remain viable I would like to retain the right to deal with employees that want to procreate in a manner that will protect my interests and NOT the interests of a pregnant employee. After all I own the business and there are other employees who depend on me to pay their bills.

Imagine what would happen if I have project that requires a skilled coder and I hire a female to do the coding work while I and other members of my staff work on other aspects of the business.

A week after I hire her she tells me that she is 4 months pregnant and will be taking 6 months off to have her baby. What am I supposed to do?

U hire her in 1 week u can sack her immediately...n hire a new one. How much disruption is there? If the disruption is soo big deal u are a fuck up boss. U try dealing with an experienced employee who was trained for the 1st year n worked on the 2nd yr n got preggie on the 3rd yr...n the after maternity take leave etc cos baby sick...n b4 maternity she sick..n custs kpkb...n answering to the board..n the director tat kpkb the most was a woman with kids herself..n the kpkb from fellow colleagues.. all bcos me n my boss try to do the better thing for her..n don't even get me started on the m&ds n minahs.

 

[nayr69sg]

You guys have made me see the light!

Please help spread how to fire pregnant staff.

"we determined your role to be REDUNDANT BEFORE we found out you were pregnant"

 

[bobby]

You guys have made me see the light!

Please help spread how to fire pregnant staff.

"we determined your role to be REDUNDANT BEFORE we found out you were pregnant"

You obviously have an axe to grind over this matter.

 

[Leongsam]

U hire her in 1 week u can sack her immediately...n hire a new one. How much disruption is there? If the disruption is soo big deal u are a fuck up boss. U try dealing with an experienced employee who was trained for the 1st year n worked on the 2nd yr n got preggie on the 3rd yr...n the after maternity take leave etc cos baby sick...n b4 maternity she sick..n custs kpkb...n answering to the board..n the director tat kpkb the most was a woman with kids herself..n the kpkb from fellow colleagues.. all bcos me n my boss try to do the better thing for her..n don't even get me started on the m&ds n minahs.

If I can sack her immediately then that's fine. If I am forced by law to fund her pregnancy I would opt not to hire any females.

The worst bitches are those that come back after their pregnancy and resign immediately and the employer is forced to fund them for another month while they do nothing.

 

[Leongsam]

You guys have made me see the light!

Please help spread how to fire pregnant staff.

"we determined your role to be REDUNDANT BEFORE we found out you were pregnant"

You are assuming that this statement was a lie. Perhaps they offered sufficient evidence to prove their case.

 

[AhMeng]

Yes I can see that point of view Sam. Small business cannot afford this.

But State Street Bank and Trust is not a small business.

Yep. Absolutely correct.

 

[Hypocrite-The]

We have to listen to both sides of the story.

As an employer, frankly I would prefer to have less disruption in my work flow. Occasional NS obligation (1~3 weeks) is tolerable. Imagine 3 ~ 4 months. If the employee have been serving the company diligently and for a couple of years I can understand her situation. I came across some employee cut short their leaves as they knew their company is short handed, some were willing to work from home. During their absent they still keep in contact with their staff at work.

On the other hand some of them after joining the company, few months later (usually after confirmation) say they are pregnant. Do you think it is fair for the company to bear the burden of finding a replacement (which is not easy to find). In the first place you haven't even contribute anything yet still make full use of the system.

If you are trying very hard for a kid all along and it came unexpectedly, you should discuss with your management and volunteer to resign if there is too much hassle. And when you jolly well know that when you are in a new job, there are many ways to prevent pregnancy. Condom for a start.

I am sure in the above case, the employee hides her pregnancy and try to beat the system. That is why the verdict was against her.

IQ and Race

If the woman was an asset to the organisation n she is committed... It is an easier work around...but for everyone employee tat is like tat..9 are the opposite. I would dare say..the one tat is committed was the one tat got promoted n eventually moved on in their careers. I take my hat off to them....but due to the 90%...I now discriminate against young married chicks n those with young kids n m&ds n minahs. No reason to risk it for a 1 in 10 chance..tat also means a 90 percent failure rate.