Australian Report Highlights Pregnancy Discrimination and Sham Redundancies

A 2014 national evaluation by the AHRC

A recent study by the Australian Human Rights Commission exposes an alarming reality. Expectant mothers and women who have recently given birth frequently endure hostile work environments. Many find themselves pushed out of their roles through deceptive practices known as sham redundancies. These actions create a massive roadblock on the path toward gender parity. The document emphasizes that pregnancy-based discrimination disproportionately harms vulnerable populations. Affected groups include migrant women, First Nations communities, individuals with disabilities, and members of the LGBTQ+ community.

During the preparation of the report, the institution hosted roundtable discussions with dozens of parents, lawyers, and community activists. One detailed case study in the Balancing Actreport focuses on Luisa, an experienced human resources manager in the healthcare sector. Just one month after she informed her boss of her pregnancy, the company proposed making her redundant. The report notes that the employer questioned who would support her after the baby's arrival since her family lived overseas. Luisa explained that her husband planned to take parental leave and that she intended to return to work shortly. Even though she offered to work part-time, the termination proceeded anyway.

Anna Cody, the sex discrimination commissioner, argued that urgent reforms to the Sex Discrimination Act are necessary. She believes the current legislation has failed to keep pace with a changing society and no longer adequately protects women and families. Cody explained that many women delay sharing pregnancy news with their bosses out of fear of losing their jobs.

Frequently, when a woman announces she is pregnant... she will be subjected to either performance management, or if she is in insecure work – and we know migrant women and those targeted by racism are more likely to have insecure and casualized shift work – the shifts dry up, Cody stated.

The third situation is redundancies – and they are «sham redundancies». They are not necessitated because the job is no longer required or has been relocated, but because they no longer want that woman to work in that role because she is pregnant and going to be leaving.

A 2014 national evaluation by the AHRC found that 49 percent of surveyed mothers experienced discrimination during pregnancy, parental leave, or upon returning to work. Cody noted that while discrimination remains widespread, determining whether conditions have improved is difficult. The commission plans to pressure the federal government into funding a new national inquiry. Georgie Dent, executive director of Parenthood, told the National Press Club in September that launching a new inquiry is critical.

„It needs to be reinstated,” she said at the time. „We cannot fix what we have stopped counting.”

A 2024 study by the University of South Australia involving 1,048 employed parents revealed staggering numbers. About 89 percent reported discrimination during pregnancy, 85 percent during parental leave, and 92 percent upon returning to work. Formal complaints submitted to the human rights commission jumped from 52 in 2023 to 71 in 2025. Cody observed that complaints brought to the Fair Work Commission were even higher, yet many parents still fail to report workplace discrimination.

The Australian Human Rights Commission currently takes

„If we make losing a job look like a redundancy, the employer is the one who has all the evidence to show whether the job has truly gone, and yet it is the complainant, it is the woman, who has the onus, that burden, to bring a complaint,” Cody said.

„We know that when women have a baby, or are pregnant, it is a very vulnerable time. And then to layer on top of that, «Now it is your responsibility to make a complaint either to the Fair Work Commission or to the Australian Human Rights Commission», sometimes that is just too much.”

The Australian Human Rights Commission currently takes up to a year to assign a mediator after a complaint is lodged, creating a significant backlog of cases. The commission’s report, scheduled for publication this week, discovered that some parents received reduced responsibilities after welcoming a child. Others suffered from dwindling shift allocations or zero professional development opportunities. New parents also encountered steep barriers when requesting schedule flexibility and safe accommodations for breastfeeding.

Another case study featured Michelle, who told the commission she lost her job after asking for longer shifts instead of numerous short shifts. She needed this arrangement to care for two toddlers and her terminally ill father.

„Her workplace responded to her request by stopping her shifts and terminating her role,” the report noted.

Meanwhile, Emily told the commission she was discouraged from taking lactation breaks while employed at a technology startup, even though the company maintained a clean, accessible, and secure lactation space.

„They expected her to work uninterrupted for long hours, and she could not take her lactation breaks. While the space and policies were available, the culture and attitudes in her workplace made Emily feel unsupported and led her to stop breastfeeding her baby earlier than she wanted.”

The human rights commission altered this name for the report.