paying fee's and pregnant

[michele44]

hi ladies

my daughter was almost to target and she has just found out she is pregnant we are all over the moon!!!

now the question is...if we go to class on monday as usual, can she call target now!! then tell the consultant next week she is pregnant to avoid fee's with her being so close to it?

thanx xx

a very happy gran to be

 

[geordie_lass21]

It's a tricky one, I am target and had been for almost a year before getting pregnant. I don't have to pay but I don't think the SW system makes it that easy for them.
Once I went out of my target range they said I would need to pay (by this point I was maybe 13/14 weeks so they all knew not just my consultant). You don't need to pay tho.

My consultant had to call head office tho and force system to state am target (there isn't a pregnancy option within their system).

 

[michele44]

thanx for the reply xx.... but do you have to pay if your not at target and fall pregnant, even though you have been going for a good while?..because whilst pregnant your hadly likely to get to target or feel the pressure to..thanx again xx

 

[geordie_lass21]

I think u have to pay then yes. Lots of ppl continue to lose when pregnant esp if they have lots to lose. If ur close to target u probs won't lose weight tho. If u look at the sticky there is a SW pregnancy sticky. I would set ur target now then tell them in few weeks.

 

[WelshJojo]

thanx for the reply xx.... but do you have to pay if your not at target and fall pregnant, even though you have been going for a good while?..because whilst pregnant your hadly likely to get to target or feel the pressure to..thanx again xx

You could always speak to your c and temporarily call target maybe?

 

[michele44]

thank you ladies, my daughter is already a skinny mini lol, and only had 4lb to target, i think would have took her to 9 and half stone and she is 32, this is her 1st baby and wants so much to enjoy it without the pressure, and think its unfare that she will have to continue paying when she is inlikely to get down to her original but yet keep on the plan and able to watch her weight...she says she isnt ready to tell the consultant yet so going to call target and tell her in a few weeks thanx you all xxxx

 

[Ophelia105]

It might even be unlawful under the Equality Act in terms of providing goods and services.

 

[Starlight]

It might even be unlawful under the Equality Act in terms of providing goods and services.

I'm what respect??

 

[Shirleen]

It might even be unlawful under the Equality Act in terms of providing goods and services.

Pregnancy isn't an illness or disability, no-one is prevented from going whilst pregnant. SW is a voluntary thing anyway. But if they're at target and only gain the recommended 28lb then it ought to be the same as other target members.

 

[Ophelia105]

Sorry - my understanding of the Equality Act is that it covers pregnancy as a separate protected characteristic - not as a disability etc. I admit I'm not an expert bu I think that it might be

 

[Ophelia105]

Worth looking at. I know that in some cases it is unlawful to treat people unfairly because they come under a protected characteristic. I suppose it depends if making people who have reached their target weight pay their fees just because they are pregnant is seen to be fair or not.

 

[MadameLaMinx]

Get her to call target. 4lb is neither here nor there. She can reset her target lower once she has had the baby if she wants to (the consultants do have the discretion to reset to less than 7lb where they feel like the member isn't just trying to pull a fast one, which obviously your daughter isn't.) Might be worth her paying for another few weeks to see if she does actually make target first, but otherwise, she may as well just call it where she is.

 

[Starlight]

Worth looking at. I know that in some cases it is unlawful to treat people unfairly because they come under a protected characteristic. I suppose it depends if making people who have reached their target weight pay their fees just because they are pregnant is seen to be fair or not.

I think that would be really pushing it lol. You're not paying BECAUSE your pregnant

 

[tarka]

I think I would ask to call target, but I'd definately wait until after the 12 week scan before telling your consultant (and everyone else for that matter!).

 

[Ophelia105]

I think that would be really pushing it lol. You're not paying BECAUSE your pregnant

But I think that would be the case. If u r at goal u don't pay and if you are at goal, get pregnant, put on weight because of your pregnancy then and go over your goal you would have to pay. Because you are not at goal, because you are pregnant.

As there is no case law it would take a direct challenge and unless anyone ever decides to do that then we will never know.

I have no argument about this but perhaps SW just needs to consider it if there is a challenge - if not already done so.

 

[Starlight]

Youre not at goal because youve gained weight - end of story. Whats caused the gain is really irrelevant. Where do they draw the line, a lot of people put a hell of a lot on over pregnancy not all down to the baby either, if a target weight member has a baby and is then 3 stones over her target should they get it free til they get to target again? It would be a minefield, and at the end of the day lets face it, SW is a business. If SW were saying to target members, youre pregnant? Oh congratulations thatll be a fiver a week now, thats different.

I honestly cant for a second see how its discrimination. I dont imagine its something anyones going to challenge anyway, SW have set their rules, to challenge it as discrimination would cost a lot more than the money youd be saving.

 

[kingleds]

I imagine if anyone were to challenge it SW would simply refuse to accept members who were pregnant like i believe a lot of other Slimming Clubs do.

As Starlight sad, SW aren't there to make value judgements based on the reasons why someone is gaining weight. A lady in my class has gone out of target cos she is on chemo & steroids. She's still expected to pay if she wants to come to group, and some might consider that she has a far more legitimate claim for it to be unfair, as she did not have a choice in having chemo etc.

 

[jaylou]

I think you are "allowed" to gain up to 2 stone when pregnant.

Has the OP spoken to a consultant re the rules?

 

[Ophelia105]

Youre not at goal because youve gained weight - end of story. Whats caused the gain is really irrelevant. Where do they draw the line, a lot of people put a hell of a lot on over pregnancy not all down to the baby either, if a target weight member has a baby and is then 3 stones over her target should they get it free til they get to target again? It would be a minefield, and at the end of the day lets face it, SW is a business. If SW were saying to target members, youre pregnant? Oh congratulations thatll be a fiver a week now, thats different.

I honestly cant for a second see how its discrimination. I dont imagine its something anyones going to challenge anyway, SW have set their rules, to challenge it as discrimination would cost a lot more than the money youd be saving.

That's fair enough although as I said before there is no case law so it will be interesting to see what the outcome would be if anyone does decide its worth a punt with a clever lawyer. Then it wouldn't be us who decides. Just because it's a business does not exempt SW from such a challenge - as far as I am aware. I'm not expert but there have been plenty of cases of indirect discrimination (setting out a policy or procedure which - on the face of it - treats people the same but by doing so disadvantages certain groups of people) which people have not seen it as discrimination but the courts have ruled otherwise. At the moment it's academic until when/ if someone decides to challenge. And as you say, Starlight, it maybe that no one ever does.

 

[kingleds]

I'm still not really clear what they would actually challenge though? Being at target means staying within 3lbs of a set weight. Or you pay. Not really sure how you could claim discrimination on any basis?