Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site timeinc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!timeinc!greenber From: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: women,pregnancy,contracts, etc. Message-ID: <350@timeinc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 22-Jul-85 22:54:39 EDT Article-I.D.: timeinc.350 Posted: Mon Jul 22 22:54:39 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jul-85 03:24:37 EDT References: <573@ttidcc.UUCP> Reply-To: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Organization: Time, Inc. - New York Lines: 50 In article <573@ttidcc.UUCP> regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) writes: >.... Then, you can >write a contract (PLEASE use a lawyer as a safeguard) that states they >certify that they anticipate _no_ interruption to their work capabilities >during the specified time period. Under this type of contract, either a >male or female employee who breached it because of prior commitment would >be required to reimburse you for damages in some form. > Basically, that is what I did. I have this really nice 17 page contract that says all that you suggested in wonderful legalese. I must ammend the last sentence: please add the following: "unless breach was caused by pregnancy". An employer has no option: pregnancy is a special condition. My lawyer put it to me this way: "You want to go before an judge and try to sue a pregnant women??" > >Also, as I've said, you can further protect yourself under the laws by >asking this question of ALL applicants, not just women, and applying it's >expectations to BOTH men and women. Maybe the guy didn't screw you over >in this case, but you'd be a fool to hire only men in the future, because >there is one with guppies out there waiting to take advantage of you, too. I'm gonna have to go back to Writing 101: I really didn't mean to imply that I would never hire a women again. Some of my best SO's are women! :-) What I meant to say is that a situation exists that is a special case, that can happen only to women, and that an employer really can do nothing about it. This special priv that a women has *may* cost her jobs. So having a maternity leave clause in a contract or special laws dealing with pregnancy may not benefit the women after all. As a side note: I have hired women since then and will continue to hire an *qualified* applicant as the need arises. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York --------->{vax135 | ihnp4}!timeinc!greenber<--------- I highly doubt that Time Inc. would make me their spokesperson. ---- "I was riding a wombat this morning, 'till it broke its leg. I had to shoot it" -- Ranger on Camel