Comité SST

The protective reassignment of the pregnant worker: myth or reality?

At a time not so long ago, the right to a protective reassignment for a pregnant worker simply did not exist. Since its implementation in 1981, this ground-breaking preventive measure every year enables thousands of Quebecers to work during their pregnancies, as long as they are assigned to tasks without danger to them or to their unborn child. It is only failing an assignment to such tasks by their employer that they can stop working and receive the indemnities stipulated in an Act respecting occupational health and safety.

Despite these unmistakeable benefits, this measure generates more controversy than ever. Today, it is not rare to hear comments such as “Me, my mother milked the cows the morning of her delivery!” or still “Before, women worked up to the end of their pregnancy and no one complained!”. Some also denounce the costs generated by the application of the For a Safe Maternity Experience Programme. Others cast doubt on its effectiveness which, according to them, has not been demonstrated. It must be said that the lack of knowledge of the hazards linked to the working conditions may explain such reactions, without forgetting the gender biases and stereotypes that can exist in this area. But what is it exactly?

The hazards identified and the main recommendations made by the physicians in occupational health are based on epidemiological studies and scientific research. Furthermore, some hazards are unanimous in the many existing banks of medical recommendations. The knowledge on the causal relationship between the work performed and the adverse pregnancy outcomes have improved over time. It is henceforth known that certain working conditions can be associated with a premature birth, to a delay in intra-uterine growth or psychomotor development, to a congenital malformation, to low weight for the gestational age, to a spontaneous abortion or to the birth of a stillborn.

The organizational hazards refer to working conditions that can disturb the biopsychosocial balance of the pregnant worker such as night work, rotation or an irregular work schedule. It is widely documented that these working conditions, in particular night work, can cause a miscarriage or a premature birth.

More than 50% of the claims accepted by the CSST for a protective reassignment (preventive withdrawal) concern the hazards linked to ergonomic constraints such as prolonged sitting or standing, restrictive positions, handling heavy loads and the pace of work. Also added are the risks of falls and assault linked to safety.

Among the many chemical hazards that can have a negative effect on the embryo or the fetus, there is, among others, the handling or exposure to anaesthetic gases as well as the handling of antineoplastic medications. There are also the hazards linked to physical constraints like ionizing radiation to which the pregnant worker should never be exposed.

As to the biological hazards regarding the microorganisms present in the work environment, the medical recommendations are to eliminate the tasks of the pregnant worker where she is in danger of suffering injuries from needle sticks or cuts, a splash to the mucous membranes or exposed to blood or other biological fluids. She must also not have close contact with pediatric clientele or an adult clientele known or suspected to be contagious because of illnesses such as tuberculosis, influenza or any other flu-like syndrome.

In light of this information, it is clear that a protective reassignment of the pregnant worker is an essential preventive measure for a woman, because of her pregnancy, and for the health, even the life of her unborn child. The employer representatives who complain of the too high costs of the For a Safe Maternity Experience programme only have to offer working conditions exempt of danger to the pregnant workers so that they can both stay at work and live in peace during their pregnancy. Because reality goes beyond the myth, all efforts have to be made to optimize the application of this measure that is beneficial to all of society.

Do you know ?

According to a recent study on stress, conducted by the researchers at the Douglas Mental Health University Institute of Montréal, the obstetrical complications of low birth weight and delay in physical development of the child are all aspects that can be influenced by prenatal maternal stress.

When a complication of pregnancy or a risk of miscarriage requires a work stoppage, the pregnant worker is not entitled to a protective reassignment because she has to be medically fit to work. However, she is entitled to a special leave, the duration of which is determined by a medical certificate, in accordance with clause 22.19A-a) of the FIQ 2011-2015 collective agreement.

Your local union team can guide you in your steps concerning the exercising of the right to a protective reassignment for the pregnant or breast-feeding worker. They can also help you assert your rights with your employer and with the CSST.

If you work in more than one centre of activities or in more than one institution, you have to proceed in the same way to identify the hazards linked to each one of your positions and to exercise the right to a protective reassignment for the pregnant or breast-feeding worker.

Under section 122 of an Act respecting labour standards, an employer must, of his own initiative, transfer a pregnant employee if her working conditions are physically dangerous to her or her unborn child. The employee may refuse the transfer by presenting a medical certificate attesting that her working conditions are not dangerous as alleged. It is therefore not sufficient that an employee who refuses to be transferred simply sign a letter removing responsibility from the employer.

Under section 122 of an Act respecting labour standards, an employer must, of his own initiative, transfer a pregnant employee if her working conditions are physically dangerous to her or her unborn child. The employee may refuse the transfer by presenting a medical certificate attesting that her working conditions are not dangerous as alleged. It is therefore not sufficient that an employee who refuses to be transferred simply sign a letter removing responsibility from the employer.