Cricket Australia Asks For Pregnancy Details Before Contacts

larus

Well-known member

Jul 7, 2003

6,580

In the land of hope and expectation....

• Dec 16, 2016

• #1

Hmm. This will get people up in arms I bet.

Cricket Australia has asked female cricketers to declare if they are pregnant before signing a central contract.

They currently honour central contracts if someone becomes pregnant during the term of the contract (I assume they are annual contracts).

So, is this sexist or is it reasonable to notify the other side that you won't be able to fulfil your contracted duties? In effect, by signing the contract and knowing they are pregnant (thereby unable to carry out their side of the contract) are they 'defrauding' C.A.?

(Should say contract in the thread title).

 

Last edited: Dec 16, 2016

whitelion

New member

Dec 16, 2003

12,828

Southwick

• Dec 16, 2016

• #2

Contacts or contracts - you decide..

 

Paul Reids Sock

Well-known member

Nov 3, 2004

4,458

Paul Reids boot

• Dec 16, 2016

• #3

It will get some people up in arms, however it is not that far different from here in my view. Don;t you have to have been in a company for longer than 6 months in order to claim maternity leave?

We may not outright ask it but it is included within T+Cs for a lot of jobs.

I would also say they probably have a duty of care to expectant mothers with cricket balls flying around that can do significant damage

 

larus

Well-known member

Jul 7, 2003

6,580

In the land of hope and expectation....

• Dec 16, 2016

• Thread starter
• #4

Paul Reids Sock said:

It will get some people up in arms, however it is not that far different from here in my view. Don;t you have to have been in a company for longer than 6 months in order to claim maternity leave?

We may not outright ask it but it is included within T+Cs for a lot of jobs.

I would also say they probably have a duty of care to expectant mothers with cricket balls flying around that can do significant damage

Click to expand...

I guess it depends what the motive is. If it's H&S, then there can be no complaints.

If it's to allow them to make decisions on whether to award a contact to someone, well, to me, that is reasonable.

 

Paul Reids Sock

Well-known member

Nov 3, 2004

4,458

Paul Reids boot

• Dec 16, 2016

• #5

larus said:

I guess it depends what the motive is. If it's H&S, then there can be no complaints.

If it's to allow them to make decisions on whether to award a contact to someone, well, to me, that is reasonable.

Click to expand...

I would guess the official line is the former with some having the latter as their actual motives. It is very easy for me as a man to agree with them on that and say that you wouldn't want to award a contract knowing you would have limited return on your investment. However with my wife having to go through redundancy/bullying out of work 7 years ago when pregnant with mini Sock then I can understand why people would find this difficult to take.

 

E

Exile

Objective but passionate

Aug 10, 2014

2,367

• Dec 16, 2016

• #6

To be fair, they are only asking that the players declare if they ARE pregnant, at the point of signing the contract. I think that's pretty reasonable. Obviously they'd still get full maternity rights if they were to fall pregnant DURING the contract term.

If someone knowingly pregnant were to sign a 12 month contract, without disclosing that to their prospective employer, that would be pretty unethical in my opinion.

 

Cheshire Cat

The most curious thing..

Nov 4, 2006

11,440

Sitting on a bough of a tree a few yards off...

• Dec 16, 2016

• #7

Should test the men as well.

 

bn1&bn3 Albion

Well-known member

Jan 15, 2011

5,625

Portslade

• Dec 16, 2016

• #8

Seems completely fair to me..