Search
The Employer Handbook Blog
Articles Posted in Pregnancy
5 HR Essentials from the #EEOC’s New Pregnancy Discrimination Guidance
On the heels of yesterday’s astounding blogging success, “What LeBron’s return teaches employers about accommodating the Mark of the Beast” — Pulitzer, please — I was planning on coming at you today with “Five Workplace Lessons from Dutch Soccer’s Third Place in the World Cup.” It was going to have this cute Orange is the New Black theme, but then, the Twitterz spoke.
@EEOCNews just issued updated #Pregnancy Guidance. Check it out now: http://t.co/4L7HB9TV7a #EEOC
— EEOC.gov (@EEOCNews) July 14, 2014
Court: Pregnancy discrimination can still occur four months after childbirth
Last night, having come across this wacky Family Show gif, I couldn’t decide whether to binge watch the first season of Amish Mafia. Again. For the third time.
(And, by third, I mean eighth).
Or dip my English toe into the Breaking Amish pool.
Teacher can’t return to work two weeks after maternity leave ends, but may have an ADA claim
Recently, I gave a webinar about the interplay between the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. One of the takeaways there was that, when an employee’s 12 weeks of FMLA leave expire, you need to be thinking about ADA implications rather than processing a pink slip at 12 weeks and a day. This is because additional leave may be a reasonable accommodation.
The same issues can arise if you have a pregnant employee. That is, you need to consider the interplay between the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the ADA.
A recent case shows how the ADA may apply to pregnant employees.
As of Sunday, Philadelphia businesses without this workplace poster are breaking the law
Back in February, I reported here about the new pregnancy-accommodation law that went into effect in Philadelphia.
The law requires local business to provide reasonable workplace accommodations for employees who have needs related to pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition.
The law also requires Philly employers to post notice of the new law in the workplace.
NJ now bans discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions
I blogged about it here back in October. My epic Lil’ Za Halloween costume. Both the NJ House and Senate had proposed legislation whereby a female employee affected by pregnancy could not be treated worse than other non-pregnant co-workers, but similar in their ability or inability to work.
Well, now, it’s the law, son! Under the new law, which Governor Chris Christie (R) signed on Tuesday, employers must provide reasonable accommodation to pregnant employees that will allow them to maintain a healthy pregnancy, or who need a reasonable accommodation while recovering from childbirth. Examples include bathroom breaks, breaks for increased water intake, periodic rest, assistance with manual labor, job restructuring or modified work schedules, and temporary transfers to less strenuous or hazardous work. An employer can avoid accommodation if it can establish that doing so would cause it undue hardship.
The new law takes effect immediately.
Pregnancy isn’t a workplace disability, but how about morning sickness?
An employee-plaintiff who claims that she was discriminated against under the Americans with Disabilities Act due to her pregnancy alone, will lose her ADA claim 10 times out of 10. This is because pregnancy is not a disability under the ADA.
But what if that same employee plaintiff with an ADA claim alleges that the discrimination relates not to her pregnancy, but rather to her morning sickness?
Hmmm….
The answer after the jump…
Philadelphia bill would require companies to accommodate pregnant employees
Last week, I brought you this news of a bill pending in New Jersey, requiring employers to make available reasonable accommodation for pregnancy-related needs when requested by the employee with the advice of her physician.
Yesterday, I read this article in The Legal Intelligencer about this potential amendment to Philadelphia’s Fair Practices Ordinance, which too would require employers to make reasonable workplace accommodations for employees who have needs related to pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition.
What, you may ask, do the bill’s sponsors have in mind for reasonable accommodation?
New NJ bill targets pregnancy and childbirth discrimination
New Jersey is the home of deep fried hot dogs and the Law Against Discrimination, one of the most employee-friendly anti-discrimination statutes in the country. Here, pregnant employees can order a ripper with relish at Rutt’s Hut, but, somehow, are not entitled to preferential leave treatment in the workplace.
However, a new bill pending in the NJ Senate would change all that.
Not the hot dogs, silly. They rule. You know what doesn’t rule? Leaving a quart of Rutt’s Hut relish in the backseat of your buddy’s car overnight during a high-90s Summer heat wave. Sorry, dude.
The most cockamamie excuse evah for firing a pregnant employee
When it comes to reasons for firing employees, I’ve heard some good ones in my day — and by good, I mean legitimate.
Conversely, the excuse I just read in the Seventh Circuit’s opinion in Hitchcock v. Angel Corps., Inc., a case involving a pregnancy discrimination claim, may be the worst. The worst one ever.
Angel Corps and its management staff feel that as a result of [the plaintiff’s] actions she compromised the health and safety of this client. According to policy and procedure this action will result in an immediate termination.