• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Affiliate Login
  • Join Our Network
  • Affiliate News
  • Lawyer Directory
  • Newsletters
  • Contact Us
  • Our Feeds

Employment Law Information Network

All Things Labor and Employment Law

Get Our Daily or Weekly Newsletter!
Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice
Daily Newsletter
Weekly Newsletter
California Newsletter
  • Federal Articles
  • State Articles
  • HR News
  • Trending
  • Human Resources
    • HR Guidebook
    • HR Policy Samples
    • Employment Contracts
  • Discussion Forums
  • About Us
Home > Federal Law Articles > Sex and Gender Discrimination > Pregnancy Discrimination

Articles Discussing Pregnancy Discrimination In The Workplace.

Accommodating Pregnant Employees in the Workplace

October 9, 2018 | Nexsen Pruet Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Two new lawsuits cast light on employers’ obligations to provide job accommodations to pregnant employees.

Discrimination Due To Breastfeeding: Jury Verdict Upheld in Favor of Police Officer

September 28, 2017 | Jackson Lewis Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Jackson Lewis

Affirming that breastfeeding is a medical condition related to pregnancy and that the police department’s conduct violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), a federal appeals court in Atlanta has upheld the jury’s verdict for a former Tuscaloosa, Alabama police officer. Hicks v. City of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, No. 16-13003 (11th Cir. Sept. 7, 2017). Stephanie Hicks was awarded $374,000 in damages against the police department for pregnancy discrimination due to breastfeeding.

Lactation = Medical Condition under Federal Law

September 26, 2017 | Goldberg Segalla Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

There are several federal laws with protections for pregnant employees and those employees experiencing complications from birth. Depending on the circumstances, FMLA, ADA and/or the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (“PDA”) may be triggered. In Hicks v. Tuscaloosa, the Eleventh Circuit ruled on a case involving an employee’s post-pregnancy lactation and need to nurse her newborn.

Failure to Promote Employee on Maternity Leave Results in Litigation

October 20, 2015 | Ford Harrison Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Executive Summary: When the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) was enacted in 1978, employers were clearly put on notice that they are forbidden from discriminating on the basis of pregnancy. Unfortunately, charges of pregnancy discrimination are still being litigated, often with expensive consequences for employers. In August 2015, the EEOC announced that it had filed suit under the PDA against Dimensions Healthcare System claiming the Laurel, Maryland employer denied a promotion to a woman because she had taken maternity leave and, instead, promoted a less-qualified male employee. The EEOC is seeking lost wages, compensatory and punitive damages, and injunctive relief in the lawsuit.

News for Employers: The Pregnancy Discrimination Act

April 15, 2015 | Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Is it unlawful for an employer to offer light duty to persons who are injured on the job, but not to pregnant workers? In a March, 2015 decision interpreting the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the U.S. Supreme Court has answered this question “maybe.” The case, Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., involved a driver for United Parcel Service (UPS) whose job required her to lift packages weighing up to 70 pounds. To learn about the details of the employee’s claims, the outcome of this case, and the implications this case has on employers, check out the full copy of our alert by clicking on this link.

Supreme Court’s Decision in Discrimination Case Creates New Standard, Prompts Review of Employers’ Pregnancy Accommodation Policies

April 9, 2015 | Nexsen Pruet Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

The U.S. Supreme Court has revived a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit brought by a part-time employee who had been placed on unpaid leave while she was expecting a baby – a decision that puts employers on notice that they should review their policies for accommodating pregnant employees. Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 12–1226, __ U.S. ___ (2015).

The Heavy Burden of Light Duty: Young v. UPS

April 1, 2015 | Littler Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Littler

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Young v. UPS, which employer and employee groups alike hoped would clarify whether employers must provide light duty and other workplace accommodations to pregnant employees in the same manner they provide accommodations to employees who are injured on the job. While the majority opinion did not answer this question directly, the Supreme Court provided a framework for pregnant employees challenging workplace accommodation policies and practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VII”), as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (“PDA”).

Supreme Court Overturns the Fourth Circuit’s Decision in Young v. UPS: Remands for Further Consideration

March 27, 2015 | Littler Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Littler

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court in Young v. UPS held that a pregnant employee who seeks to show disparate treatment through indirect evidence may do so through the application of the well-established McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework. More specifically, the Court held that a pregnant worker can establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing: (1) she belongs to a protected class; (2) she sought an accommodation; (3) the employer did not accommodate her; and (4) the employer accommodated others “similar in their ability or inability to work.” If these criteria are established, an employer has the burden of production to proffer a “legitimate, nondiscriminatory” reason for denying the accommodation. The Court noted, however, that this reason generally cannot consist simply of a claim that it is more expensive or less convenient to add pregnant women to the category of those whom the employer accommodates. Once the employer proffers a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason, the employee has the burden of persuasion that the reason is pretextual.

Supreme Court Delivers New Life to Pregnancy Discrimination Claim

March 27, 2015 | Ford Harrison Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Executive Summary: On March 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that redefines the standard for disparate treatment claims under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). In Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., the Court applied the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting standard to the plaintiff’s PDA claim, but held that even where an employer offers an apparently legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its actions, plaintiffs can, nevertheless, overcome this reason and establish pretext by providing sufficient evidence that the employer’s policies impose a “significant burden on pregnant workers,” and that the employer’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason is “not sufficiently strong to justify the burden.” The Justices split 6-3 with the lead opinion authored by Justice Breyer.

EEOC Updates Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination

July 28, 2014 | Goldberg Segalla Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently issued enforcement guidance on pregnancy discrimination and related issues, marking the first comprehensive update of the EEOC’s guidance on the subject in over 30 years. This guidance has been issued after several states and cities including New Jersey, New York City, and Philadelphia have passed laws regarding accommodations for pregnant employees. Importantly, the guidance incorporates significant developments in the law that have transpired over the past three decades and also sets forth suggestions for best practices for employers to adopt with the goal of reducing the chance of pregnancy-related violations of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 (PDA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination Adds ADA Duties of Reasonable Accommodation

July 17, 2014 | Littler Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Littler

On July 14, 2014, the EEOC issued its long-anticipated Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues (the Guidance), which, according to Commissioner Lipnic, “adopts new and dramatic substantive changes to the law” regarding workplace treatment of pregnancy. Employers must become aware of the Guidance, as it not only explains the EEOC’s understanding of the law and how it will seek to enforce it, but also attempts to expand the law to provide greatly enhanced protections to pregnant employees.

New EEOC Guidance Expands Protection for Pregnant Employees

July 16, 2014 | Ford Harrison Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Executive Summary: The EEOC has issued new guidance on the reach of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (“PDA”), and, not surprisingly, taken a very expansive view of the protections to be afforded pregnant employees.

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Appeal in Young v. UPS

July 7, 2014 | Littler Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Littler

On July 1, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review Young v. UPS, a decision that will determine whether and to what extent an employer must provide pregnant employees with work accommodations, such as light duty, under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA).

Healthcare Industry Alert: Pregnancy-Blind Light Duty Policy Not Enough to Obtain Summary Judgment on Pregnancy Discrimination Claim in New Sixth Circuit Case

January 16, 2014 | Ford Harrison Filed Under: Pregnancy Discrimination

Executive Summary: The Sixth Circuit recently held that a certified nursing assistant (CNA) should be permitted to take her Pregnancy Discrimination Act claim to trial even though the employer terminated her based on its facially neutral policy that provided light duty work only for employees who were injured on the job. The court held that a jury should determine whether the policy, when considered in conjunction with discriminatory remarks made by managers, was pretext for discrimination. See Latowski v. Northwoods Nursing Ctr. (6th Cir. December 23, 2013).

Primary Sidebar

Sex and Gender Discrimination

  • Equal Pay (62)
  • General (Sex Discrimination) (18)
  • Pregnancy Discrimination (14)
  • Sexual Orientation And Gender Identity (105)
  • Title IX (28)
C-Screen

Site Search

Connect With Us!

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Phone
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Article Calander

April 2021
SMTWTFS
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 
« Mar    

Trending Content

  • Workplace Privacy and Confidentiality
  • Employee Discipline Policy
  • Employee Locker Policy
  • Confidential Information Policy
  • Attendance Policy
  • Sample Employee Handbook Disclaimer
  • Employment At-Will Policy
  • Confidential Information, Non-Disclosure Provision
  • Job Vacancy Announcement
  • Business Ethics And Conduct Policy

Footer

Social Profiles

RSSTwitterFacebookLinkedin

Tags

ABC News (8) Above The Law (7) BBC (7) Benefits Pro (9) Bloomberg (140) Brookings (7) CBS (8) CNBC (19) CNN (39) EEOC (91) Entrepreneur (27) Evil HR Lady (184) Fast Company (45) Forbes (212) Fortune (8) Fox News (7) Goldberg Segala (7) GovExec (15) Harvard Business Review (197) Inc. (15) Jackson Lewis (29) Law.com (33) Littler (43) Los Angeles Times (8) NBC (44) New York City (13) New York Magaine (9) New York Post (13) New York Times (260) NPR (53) Politico (16) Reuters (20) Richmond Times Dispatch (11) San Francisco (8) Seattle Times (7) SHRM (25) Slate (8) TechRepublic (7) The Atlantic (7) The Cut (9) USA Today (24) US News (25) Wall Street Journal (126) Washington Post (53) Yahoo News (7)

Navigation

  • Federal Articles
  • State Articles
  • HR News
  • Trending
  • Human Resources
    • HR Guidebook
    • HR Policy Samples
    • Employment Contracts
  • Discussion Forums
  • About Us
Log In

Privacy Policy, Disclaimers & Copyright
elinfonet.com, LLC • P.O. Box 45, Chinchilla, PA 18410 • 570-301-6277 • info@elinfonet.com