Mogal Mervyn, My two cents based (solely) on the info made available....thus far
1: IF the expected day of delivery was within 6 weeks from the date of Going Off on Leave OR IF the young ladies' obstetrician had provided a medical certificate recommending bed rest/ reduced activity etc, the HERALD would be in the wrong (and in violation of the Maternity Benefits Act 1961) 2: IF NOT, please advise me WHY you believe the Herald is in the wrong? 3: HOW is the Herald decision - gender biased? 4: On the face of it, there is a TINY but IMPORTANT difference between what the HERALD wrote and what Sequeira noted. Please vide Appendix infra BTW: I believe that IF "internal" email has to be publicly made available, it should be referred to accurately. Do you disagree? jc Appendix: (1) GM Operations to Devika Sequeira: "In the first instant our company does not have a provision for granting MATERNITY LEAVE FOR LONG PERIODS." (2) Devika Sequeira to GM: "(.....) you insisted the organisation DOES NOT HAVE MATERNITY LEAVE" > On Nov 1, 2014, at 9:08 PM, Mervyn Lobo <mervynal...@yahoo.ca> wrote: > > Folks,Any publication that wants to be believed has to set high standards for > its staff. > When a publication publishes one set of values and practices another, all it > is doing is saying to its readers, go elsewhere. Or we do what we want here > and are not willing to follow minimum standards of decency. > I salute Devika Sequeira. I now know which journalist in Goa has principles. > Mervyn > > > ------------------------------------------------- > ??????? has applied for leave without pay (since you insisted the > organisation does not have maternity leave) and followed all the official > procedures in consultation with the HR department who told her how to go > about taking leave for the delivery of her baby. Her application was sent > well on time. > > Are you saying an employee who is about to deliver a child and is the last > stages of her pregnancy should come to office? > > Your attitude is gendre-biased and shocking to say the least. > > Devika Sequeira > Editor-Magazines > > ---- > On 18 October 2014 11:17, GM Operations <g...@herald-goa.com> wrote: > Dear Devika, > > In the first instant our company does not have a provision for granting > maternity leave for long periods. It has never ever been granted to any one > in the past. Hence your approval for ?????? leave stands null and void. > > Further more we are not in a position to provide any replacements for the > Review magazine at this moment. > > Michael. > > ---- > > On 17 October 2014 12:56, Devika Sequeira <devikaseque...@gmail.com> wrote: > To > GM, Herald Publications > Oct 17, 2014 > > Dear Michael, > > You will recall Zarine Ahmed who used to work here earlier as a reporter/ > features writer. > Zarine was a good reporter and diligent in her work but had to leave over > some health complications. > She is now much better and wants to return to work in the Herald and would > make a good temporary replacement for ?????? who is on maternity leave till > May. > Zarine would like to join Herald Review from now till June after which she > wants to study for a year to do the BEd degree. > I hope you agree to take her on. > > regards > > Devika > > >
