Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Pregnancy discrimination complaints down nationwide

By: DOLAN MEDIA NEWSWIRES//September 30, 2014//

Pregnancy discrimination complaints down nationwide

By: DOLAN MEDIA NEWSWIRES//September 30, 2014//

Listen to this article

By Lauren Kirkwood
Dolan Media Newswires

The number of pregnancy discrimination charges filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission declined nationally between 2010 and 2013.

Wisconsin’s numbers from that time do not reflect a consistent trend, however.

Nationally, 3,541 complaints were filed with the EEOC in 2013, a 12.1 percent decrease from the 4,029 complaints filed in 2010. In Wisconsin, 38 complaints were filed in 2013, up from 33 in 2010 but down from 42 in 2012.

The national trend, at least in part, could be explained by the surge of discrimination charges during the recession, said Margaret Johnson, director of the University of Baltimore School of Law’s family law clinic and co-director of the school’s Center on Applied Feminism. When the economy suffers, people have fewer options for employment and may be more likely to dispute a termination.

According to the EEOC, the most common reasons for the charges have remained relatively similar over the past decade. Allegations from employees claiming they were fired over their pregnancy top the list, along with claims of harsher discipline, suspension and forced leave for pregnant employees.

The issue of pregnancy discrimination will make its way to the national spotlight later this year, as the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments in Young v. U.P.S., a case involving a UPS package-delivery driver in Maryland who was denied light-duty work during her pregnancy. The court is scheduled to hear arguments in December.

This summer, the EEOC released a detailed set of guidelines for the federal law, the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, with examples of reasonable accommodations. For example, a pregnant employee whose doctor has restricted the amount of weight she can lift might be assigned the same light duty the employer would offer an employee with a back condition.

The new guidelines do not change laws already in place but rather are intended to help employers comply with the law by detailing examples of specific situations pregnant workers may encounter and stating what qualifies as a discriminatory act.

Because the guidelines spell out examples of situations in which employers must offer accommodations, Johnson said she doesn’t expect the release of the guidelines to result in a rash of new lawsuits.

“Employers are used to doing reasonable accommodations,” whether they’re for employees with religious restrictions or disabilities, Johnson said. “It’s just being offered to a new type of employee — a pregnant woman. I would hope that compliance would be high.”

The guidelines include a list of best practices for employers, such as focusing on cumulative work experience rather than uninterrupted work experience when comparing two people for hiring or promotion purposes, and reviewing the necessity of policies such as mandatory overtime or fixed hours that limit employee flexibility.

With the new guidelines to refer to, Johnson said, employees who feel like they’re being discriminated against will have an easier time of judging whether their claim is actionable, and employers have a readily available resource to make sure they’re not violating the law.

“The whole idea of guidelines is to help correct the workplace before litigation,” Johnson said. “It should make employers realize what they need to do to protect against discrimination in the workplace.”

Wisconsin Law Journal staff writer Eric Heisig also contributed to this report.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests