Pregnant firefighter takes city to CCMA

A pregnant firefighter working for the City of Cape Town has taken the municipality to the CCMA, citing unfair discrimination in the payment of allowances.

Samantha Alexander complained to the SA Municipal Workers' Union when she was told that she stood to lose the 23% of her basic monthly salary that is paid in allowances.

Cape Town's executive director for safety and security, Richard Bosman, said Alexander would not receive the allowances because she was unable to function as a firefighter, or work shifts, while pregnant.

Alexander has been a firefighter for the past 10 years and on top of her salary received allowances of about R3175 a month.

She has been on light duty since she announced her pregnancy to her boss.

Her baby is due in February.

The union said female firefighters were unfairly discriminated against by the City of Cape Town and that men who were "non-operational" nevertheless received their full allowances.

The union's organiser, Archie Hearne, said the city had rolled back the years in the fight against discrimination against pregnant women.

"The city claims that its actions are justified in the context of fire-fighting. Samwu dismisses the action of the employer as discriminatory," said Hearne.

Samwu will take the case to the Labour Court and the Equality Court in an attempt to get the city's policy changed.

Bosman said the shift allowances were paid for being on standby at a fire station, for working night shifts, and for Sunday and public holiday work.

"Pregnant firefighters will not be able to perform work such as fighting fires, rescues, and attending to accidents because this would endanger their health and that of their foetus," said Bosman.

He said men who were unable to fight fires were not paid all their allowances but, because they were able to work 12-hour shifts, were entitled to 10% .

Labour lawyer Michael Bagraim said the practice of paying special allowances only for duties performed was widespread and the City of Cape Town was no exception.

He said it would not be wise to pay allowances to people who could not carry out their duties for an extended period, such as during a pregnancy.

"Males are off for a day, a week, not three months. I don't think that's discriminatory," said Bagraim.