4 ms·
My understanding is it was very common for teachers to be fired/contracts not renewed as soon as they announced they were pregnant. Not sure why you think a lin
by brohoolio 7y ago
My understanding is it was very common for teachers to be fired/contracts not renewed as soon as they announced they were pregnant. Not sure why you think a link to a site like freebeacon backs you up.
I understand that people might not like her policies, but this stuff is clearly targeted swift boating. It doesn’t add to to the discussion.
- walshemj 7y agoin 1971 absolutely back then. I have worked for UK companies that until 76 or so women who got married where forced to resign
- egdod 7y agoGeneralizations don’t support Warren’s claim in particular.
- egdod 7y agoI think a link to the historical record backs me up.
- perl4ever 7y agoIf what it says in the link is true, records say her contract was renewed and she says it was not. Then she left a few months later. It's perfectly plausible that she could have been "constructively discharged" on account of her pregnancy, which morally would amount to the same thing. But I think based on what is written, either that article or Warren has to be lying about specifics. As a Democratic primary voter, I'm indifferent to this story, and will probably go with Warren if everyone else does, but if I cared, obviously I would check on the source, no matter how disreputable the publication. Edit: I reread it a few times and now I think it's just BS framing by the Free Beacon. She had her contract renewed, but she resigned at the end of the school year, I'd assume before the new contract took effect. Probably was told she had to. To assume her story is perfectly consistent, you just have to assume they noticed she was pregnant in those couple of months.