It has been reported that Nompilo Maphumulo, better known by her on-screen name Nosipho, has been fired from the SABC 1 show Uzalo in the wake of rumors that she is pregnant. Maphumulo is one of the few Uzalo actors who have been with the show since it first aired in 2015 on SABC 1.
The actress Nompilo, who is currently starring in the drama Uzalo as the pregnant fiance of a pastor, is rumored to be expecting a child of her own in real life, according to some sources.
Fans are convinced that she is pregnant despite the fact that she has repeatedly denied having a child, and they speculate that this may be the reason why she is ending her relationship with Uzalo.
“Both the fake belly that I’m wearing on set and the way I act out the part of a pregnant woman have been praised by the director. Because of this, everyone believes that I actually am pregnant. I can definitively say that I’m not pregnant. She lied to the press and said that there was nothing baking in the kitchen.
There are rumors that the actress, who is 40 years old and expecting a child, was fired from the show because of her pregnancy. She is leaving with Menzi Biyela, who plays Pastor Gwala, her fiance, and they are leaving together.
Nosipho is one of the few actors on Uzalo who have been a part of the show ever since it first aired, which was eight years ago.
On social media, she has been asked a myriad of times if her departure from Uzalo was related in any way to the fact that she is expecting a child. However, the actress claims that she has been ignoring the questions by laughing at them.
“Uzalo let me go because they understood that it was the right time for me to depart.”
She proclaimed, “I’m the luckiest actress in the world.” “If my memory serves me correctly, there are fewer than five of us actors who got our start when Uzalo made its debut on television screens in 2015. Therefore, everyone had a wonderful time, and it was an amazing experience.
She summed up by saying, “Now it’s my time to bow out.”
Nosipho asserts that she was not fired from her position at Uzalo because of her pregnancy. She also refutes the rumors that she is pregnant.
According to the law firm Webber Wentzel, unfair discrimination on the basis of a pregnant woman’s status is prohibited under South African law.
Despite the protections afforded to employees who are pregnant or who intend to become pregnant, as well as the many advances that South African labor legislation has made toward gender equality, provisions and practical application may be insufficient.
As a result of the interview questions that are asked of them, some women continue to face discrimination during the application and recruitment stage of the employment process on the grounds of pregnancy and/or family responsibility.
Women are frequently questioned regarding their marital status, the number of children they have, and whether or not they engage in “family planning.” It is possible to make the case that the questions in question are examples of forms of indirect discrimination based on the grounds of pregnancy and/or family responsibilities.
How much of a bearing does the way a woman answers questions of this nature have on whether or not she advances to the next stage of the recruitment process and whether or not she is ultimately hired? In a similar vein, do pregnant or planning-to-be-pregnant female employees still face stumbling blocks on the path to promotion in their place of employment?
It is common practice for women workers to frame their complaints of pregnancy-related discrimination in terms of gender or sex, rather than pregnancy or the responsibility of caring for a family. This is due to the fact that discrimination against a woman on the basis of a reason connected to pregnancy is, in most cases, also discrimination on the basis of gender and sex.
Since discrimination based on pregnancy and family responsibility is less developed in our legal system, women workers who couch the discrimination in this manner may have a better chance of succeeding in their claim. This is because of the nature of the discrimination. This strategy is not always applicable due to the fact that discrimination on the basis of pregnancy can exist independently from other forms of discrimination.
We propose that the factors that lead to discrimination should not be analyzed in a vacuum but rather as interconnected weaknesses.
This is consistent with the intersectionality approach, which has been sanctioned by our judicial system, most notably by the Constitutional Court in the recent judgment of Mahlangu and Others v. Minister of Labour and Others.
In that particular case, the Court came to the conclusion that, in light of South Africa’s historical past and current socioeconomic landscape, intersectionality is a relevant and necessary tool to use in deciding unfair discrimination cases and understanding the nuances of how discrimination can affect individuals in a variety of ways. This was the conclusion that the Court reached.
When a person is confronted with discrimination, it is important to understand that their experiences may differ from those of other people due to the multiple ways in which privilege, power, and vulnerability can interact with one another. An intersectional approach can help people accomplish this goal by allowing them to better comprehend this dynamic. The idea of intersectionality is being more and more applied to workplace issues by the legal system and the legislature.
It is necessary to recognize discrimination based solely on the fact that a woman is pregnant. There is no requirement for proof of gender or sex discrimination when an allegation of pregnancy discrimination is made, despite the fact that pregnant women may be subjected to discrimination on other grounds, including sex, gender, and possibly on the grounds of family responsibility.
Instead, employers should be aware that various grounds for discrimination intersect and add to the precarious position that pregnant women find themselves in.
Employers have a responsibility to take precautions to ensure that they do not engage in any form of discrimination against female employees, either directly or indirectly, on any of the grounds of discrimination that may intersect.
Policies and procedures need to take into account the various ways in which individuals in the workplace can be subjected to discrimination, as well as the ways in which different forms of discrimination can overlap with one another. It is not reasonable to expect that various forms of discrimination will be analyzed and addressed separately.