The Australian politician who was forced to resign because she was pregnant. Yes, really.
Amber-Jade Sanderson is a Western Australian politician.
She’s a Labor member of the WA Parliament’s upper house, the Legislative Council.
She is also pregnant. And while most women can just take maternity leave while they take time off to have their baby, Ms Sanderson has been forced to resign from two Parliamentary committees — all because of one outdated rule.
On Thursday, Ms Sanderson told the state Parliament she was “disappointed” she had to resign from the Public Administration and Uniform Legislation committees, which are made up of Legislative Council members who undertake certain tasks on the Parliament’s behalf.
As she explained, she had to quit because the current Parliamentary rules don’t easily allow committee members to be replaced part-way through an inquiry.
That means a member has to resign in order to be replaced.
Quitting the role carries a financial cost. But just as importantly, appears to discriminate against pregnant women in a way that’s otherwise unheard-of in 21st century Australia.
Related: 12 life lessons you learn during maternity leave.
“I am sad to say that it is with some disappointment and frustration that I take leave of this place to have my baby,” Ms Sanderson said in the statement.
The Member for the East Metropolitan region of WA added that while other Australian workplaces can’t legally force a resign from a position because of her pregnancy, the Parliament hadn’t kept up.
Top Comments
Sorry, this is a sensational headline, and it does not accurately reflect the reality of the situation. I work for a state upper house (Legislative Council), and committee obligations are different from 'a job'. I also happen to know the Clerk of the WA parliament personally (he was my boss when he worked in a different state), and as a very experienced lawyer and clerk, he understands the policies/legislation better than anyone. There is no doubt in my mind that this is simply a matter of parliamentary procedure. I am in favour of workplace equality and flexible working arrangements for parents (where possible), but it is unfair of this particular politician to try to grab the spotlight in this manner - she has not been 'forced to resign' at all. As an aside, when I worked for the RAN, I was required to 'come ashore' twice when pregnant (losing my seagoing allowance and seniority) - this doesn't mean I was 'forced to resign' from my job (which was a seagoing position and had no land-based equivalent) - it means that I wasn't able to fulfill the obligations of my work at THAT TIME, and needed to stand aside whilst I was unable to (pregnant women are not able to serve at sea due to concerns with exposure to radiation and the general hazards associated with trying to stay upright on a moving platform!) I didn't ring the papers! It was just reality!
Don't have an issue with this - she didn't lose her job... stop trying to twist it into something it isn't. She can't fulfil the obligations of the role for that particular committee, therefore, she needs to be replaced. So straight forward I'm confused why this has to be made an "issue".