EEOC Seeks Enforcement of Pregnancy Discrimination Laws
When it comes to pregnancy discrimination, the law goes back more than half a century. The controlling federal legislation in this area is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which has been amended and updated by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) of 1978.
|
Key Facts on Pregnancy Discrimination Claims Pregnancy-related claims by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have fluctuated the past few years, but the problem certainly isn’t going away. According to statistics the EEOC has posted on its website, it has filed 44 lawsuits involving claims of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII, as amended by the PDA, since Fiscal Year 2011 (FY2011). The breakdown through FY2014 (the most recent year data is available) is as follows:
Since the start of FY 2011, the EEOC has recovered approximately $4.4 million — as well as important injunctive and other case-specific “make whole” relief — for victims of pregnancy discrimination through litigation. This relief includes jury verdicts, appellate court victories, court-entered consent decrees and other resolutions. |
The PDA says that discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth or a related medical condition is unlawful under Title VII. Generally, females affected by pregnancy-related conditions must be treated just like employees with similar circumstances regarding their ability to work. Other amended federal laws, including the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), may come into play. Here are some of the key provisions in the PDA, which often arise in the workplace:
Employment aspects. Simply put, an employer can’t refuse to hire a woman because of a pregnancy-related condition as long as she’s still able to perform the major functions of her job. Similarly, you can’t refuse to hire a pregnant job candidate because of the bias of coworkers, clients or customers. The PDA also prohibits discrimination based on pregnancy when it comes to any other employment issues — including pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits, firing and other terms or conditions of employment.
Medical leaves. Employees can’t be unfairly singled out for medical clearance procedures that aren’t mandatory for other employees in similar situations. An example is the requirement to provide a doctor’s statement that verifies a worker’s inability to work. Unless all employees must submit such statements before being granted leave or sick pay benefits, the employer can’t institute such a rule for pregnancy-related conditions.
Also, pregnant employees must be allowed to work if they can still perform their jobs reasonably well. Suppose an employee misses work as a result of a pregnancy-related condition. If she recovers, her employer can’t require her to remain out on leave until the baby’s birth. Nor can an employer prohibit a woman from returning to work for a predetermined length of time after she gives birth.
Under the PDA, an employer that allows temporarily disabled employees to take disability leave or leave without pay must allow an employee who’s temporarily disabled because of pregnancy to do the same. The job must be held open for the same length of time it would be held for employees on sick or temporary disability leave.
Furthermore, the FMLA says that a new parent — including foster and adopting parents — may be eligible for unpaid leave of up to 12 weeks (or a paid leave if the employee has earned or accrued the time). Generally, the employee must have worked for an employer with 50 or more employees for at least 12 months before taking the leave to qualify.
Temporary disabilities. If an employee is temporarily unable to perform her job because of pregnancy, the employer must treat her in the same way any other temporarily disabled employee would be treated. Typically, the employee can be offered light duty, modified tasks, alternative assignments, disability leave or leave without pay.
In addition, impairments resulting from pregnancy (for example, gestational diabetes) may be considered a “disability” under the ADA. In that case, the employer should provide a reasonable accommodation for a disability related to pregnancy, absent any undue hardship. For example, an employer may be required to provide modified duties for an employee with a 20-pound lifting restriction stemming from pregnancy-related sciatica.
Health insurance and other benefits. Health insurance provided by an employer must cover expenses for pregnancy-related conditions like other medical conditions. However, the PDA specifies that coverage isn’t required for abortion expenses that arise, except in a case where the life of the mother is endangered or medical complications develop from the abortion.
The amounts payable by the insurance provider for pregnancy-related expenses can be limited only to the same extent as costs for other conditions. In other words, an additional or higher deductible can’t be imposed. What’s more, employers must provide the same level of health benefits for spouses of male employees as they do for spouses of female employees.
Finally, if an employer provides any benefits to workers on medical leave, the employer must provide the same benefits for those on medical leave for pregnancy-related conditions. Employees with pregnancy-related disabilities must be treated the same as other temporarily disabled employees for purposes of seniority, vacation calculation, pay increases and temporary disability benefits.
Facts of the New Case
In the new case, a nationally known motel chain is alleged to have unlawfully placed an employee on leave solely after she told them she was pregnant. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed a lawsuit against the parent company of the motel chain.
According to an EEOC press release, a female employee who was working regular shifts at a New Orleans motel informed management that she was pregnant and that her pregnancy was “high-risk.” On March 1, 2015, the employee called her manager to let him know that she would be unable to work that day due to a pregnancy-related illness. The manager told her that he was modifying the work schedule to accommodate her illness. In fact, he was taking her off the schedule for the entire week, even though she had requested just the one day off.
After nearly a week had passed, the employee tried to contact the manager to find out when she would be put back on the schedule. Later that day, she received a text message in which he stated that she was being placed on a leave of absence until her pregnancy was over. However, the employee never asked for a leave of absence.
The EEOC is charging that the motel chain put the employee on forced leave of absence because of her pregnancy, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the subsequent PDA. The agency is also seeking:
- Injunctive relief prohibiting the motel chain from engaging in unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender in the future,
- Compensatory and punitive damages for the employee, and
- Any other relief the court finds to be proper.
“This lawsuit should remind everyone unmistakably that federal law protects pregnant workers from such treatment,” said Jim Sacher, regional attorney for the Houston District in the press release. “The fact that a manager would send a text explicitly suspending an employee because she is pregnant highlights the need for EEOC to continue its vigorous enforcement of pregnancy discrimination law — and that’s what we’ll do.”
It’s important for employers to strictly observe the rules under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the PDA as well as other relevant legislation. The EEOC provides a wealth of information on its website at www.eeoc.gov. If you have questions about your particular situation, rely on your professional advisors for guidance.