Skip to content

Category: pregnancy

Megan Markle is Pregnant. Let’s Discuss Family Leave in the US.

Photo by King’s Church International on Unsplash

In case you have not heard, the most popular woman in the world is officially pregnant! With a royal baby on the way, it’s a great time to discuss protections for pregnant women, and what is and is not required of their employers.

First, a quick reminder. You cannot refuse to hire or fire a woman because she is pregnant. That’s a form of illegal discrimination.

What Laws Cover Leave Related to Pregnancy

There are three federal laws that protect pregnant women: The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act.

Pregnancy Discrimination Act

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) prohibits employers from discriminating based on pregnancy, childbirth, and any related conditions. It applies to employers with 15 or more employees. The act requires employers to “treat women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions in the same manner as … employees who are similar in their ability or inability to work.”

So, what does this mean for employees once they have given birth. The EEOC explains:

While an employer may not compel an employee to take leave because she is pregnant as long as she is able to perform her job, it must allow women with physical limitations resulting from pregnancy to take leave on the same terms and conditions (e.g., provide them with the same amount of leave) as others who are similar in their ability or inability to work.

Unfortunately, some employers still do not understand that they have to treat pregnant woman the same as similar employees. For example, this police department in Illinois allegedly forced a pregnant officer to take unpaid leave because it would not allow her to transfer to a “desk job” when she was no longer able to patrol.  The officer also claims that the police department denied her a bullet proof vest that fit. Under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the police department should have offered her the same options to go into light duty work (desk work and interviewing witnesses rather than patrolling) that other officers were offered.

An employer in this situation should have offered the employee the accommodation that she requested if it was reasonable. This would have been the same kind of work that was offered to other employees that were on light duty.

Americans with Disabilities Act

Pregnancy, by itself, is not a disability. It may be a disability if it “causes a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.” For example, gestational diabetes would be a disability under the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) because it is a physical impairment that affects a major life activity: eating. If an employee becomes disabled because of their pregnancy or as a result of childbirth, then maternity leave may be a reasonable accommodation. The employer would have to go through the interactive process to determine how to accommodate the employee with a disability.

Most women that give birth or are pregnant will not qualify for protection under the ADA. Regardless, if a female employee mentions that they are experiencing a problem because they are pregnant, then companies should assess whether the ADA applies by determining if the employee has a disability and if there are any reasonable accommodations available. You can learn more about this process in one of my earlier posts.

Family and Medical Leave Act

Pregnant employees may be entitled to leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The Department of Labor explains what an employee must do to be eligible:

  • Be employed by a covered employer and work at a worksite within 75 miles of which that employer employs at least 50 people;

  • Have worked at least 12 months (which do not have to be consecutive) for the employer; and

  • Have worked at least 1,250 hours during the 12 months immediately before the date FMLA leave is to begin.

Under the FMLA, employees are allowed to take up to 12 workweeks of leave for the birth and care of their child within 1 year of the child’s birth. The employee does not necessarily need to take the leave right away. Employees are also entitled to leave to treat their own serious condition that makes them unable to do their job. For example, if an employee is put on bed rest and being physically at work was an essential function of their position, then the employee could take FMLA leave because they cannot do their job because of their serious health condition.

What is the Future of Family Leave?

There is more political pressure to give some form of paid leave. Various politicians have expressed their support for paid family leave. Ivanka Trump and The White House have discussed their support for family leave. Marco Rubio introduced a plan to allow new parents to delay taking their Social Security benefits in exchange for two months of paid parental benefits. The Democratic Party Platform also called for paid family leave.

One poll showed that 54% of Americans think the government should require all employers to provide 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave. Only 29% of the respondents disagreed and 17% were undecided. With as much support as there is for paid family leave, it seems certain that Congress and the President will eventually enact a paid family leave law.

The information provided in this blog is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, then you should speak with a lawyer about your specific issues. Every legal issue is unique. A lawyer can help you with your situation. Reading the blog, contacting me through the site, emailing me or commenting on a post does not create an attorney-client relationship between any reader and me.

The information provided is my own and does not reflect the opinion of my firm or anyone else.

Pitfalls in Hiring Employees

Photo by rawpixel on Unsplash

One of the most difficult tasks that managers, HR, and business owners face is hiring new employees. According to a survey by the Society for Human Resource Management, the average cost of hiring a new employee is $4,129 and the average time to fill a position is 42 days. This is not a process that you want to do more than you have to (at least for the same position). In addition, employers often hire their problems by not taking the hiring process seriously. Oftentimes companies will hire haphazardly for an ill-defined position. Companies can save themselves a lot of trouble in the future by carefully planning their hiring.

Before Hiring New Employees Assess Your Needs

The first step in hiring a new employee, even if it is to replace a current employee, is to determine what need you are trying to fill. If you do not know what the employee will be expected to do, then neither will the applicant. Moreover, you will not know what the requirements are for the position.

By outlining the duties of the position, a company understands what is expected of any applicant. A good job description includes duties that the employee will perform that are essential but may not be performed on a day to day to basis. This could include climbing a ladder or carrying a certain amount of weight. If you leave this information off, then it may indicate that these are not essential functions of the position. For example, one nurse did not have an ADA claim that could be pursued when she was unable to perform one of the essential functions of her position: lifting up to 100 pounds on occasion. She needed to be able to lift patients on occasion but was restricted from lifting more than 50 pounds for 6 weeks after returning from 12 weeks of FMLA leave. Her employer escaped an ADA claim because she could not fulfill one of the essential functions of her position: being able to lift patients.

Another mistake that managers and others make is that they believe that they know all the job duties and the requirements of the position. They do not talk to any other employees that may have more information. Employees that are already in the same position or anyone that works closely with the position are good resources. They may have guidance on what is actually required for the position, what the new hire will do, and any job requirements that you may not have considered. Companies benefit by involving these employees in the hiring process.

Finally, if you are determining whether you need to hire someone for a new position, then you need to spend even more time carefully considering what you are looking for in the position. Review where employees (or you) are spending your time. Are you doing work outside of your regular duties? For example, if you are a dentist and are spending a lot of time answering the phone, calendaring appointments, and completing office paperwork, then it may be time to get an office manager. If you are hiring your first employee, then it is often a good idea to track your time to figure out how much time you are spending in activities that someone else (a new hire) could do.

Legal Oh-No-No’s

Some quick reminders of what is absolutely illegal in an interview (and elsewhere in the process) and yet still appears every year in news articles, announcements from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and Jon Hyman’s annual worst employer of the year nominations.

This is some publicity that you want to avoid:

Refusing to Hire an Applicant Because She is Pregnant

Inc. has a great article on a woman that was fired one week after she started her job because the boss found out she was pregnant. Chris Matyszczyk also posed a great question in the article. “How much training does it take to tell a manager that they can’t fire a woman because she’s pregnant?” Training is an important step to reduce the likelihood of discrimination. The EEOC even offers guidance on training employees and managers.

However, training alone is likely not enough to combat discrimination in the workplace. Culture is often one of the key differences in having an effective team and minimizing harassment and discrimination. David Minze lists five steps on how to improve culture and reduce discrimination at work. He recommends that companies 1) develop values, 2) create a culture of feedback, 3) lead with courage (i.e. do not protect high performers just because they are valuable to the company), 4) build connections (treat employees as humans, which means that you or their manager should ask them how they are doing and genuinely be interested in their well-being), and 5) provide guidance to managers. These are simple steps that all companies can take.

Asking an Applicant Whether She Has Children

The EEOC does not look kindly on this question. Employers that ask this and similar questions get sued because the employer may be (is probably) discriminating based on the applicant’s sex.

Asking Questions About a Candidate’s Race, Religion, Sex or Any Other Protected Characteristic

Don’t refuse to hire people based on these characteristics. That’s just illegal. Well, it is usually illegal. Someone’s religion or sex may be a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) in certain jobs. For example, a Christian church may require that the pastor it hires be Christian. Another example is hiring only women for jobs that require close contact (e.g. strip searches) with female prisoners. The BFOQ defense is very narrow and many companies have been sued for potentially violating the policy (especially restaurants like Hooters and Twin Peaks).

Conclusion

Hiring is one of the most important issues that companies undertake. Employers that have a plan in the hiring process, seek help from their staff, and avoid major legal issues are generally more successful than those that hire employees without any plan.

The information provided in this blog is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, then you should speak with a lawyer about your specific issues. Every legal issue is unique. A lawyer can help you with your situation. Reading the blog, contacting me through the site, emailing me or commenting on a post does not create an attorney-client relationship between any reader and me.

The information provided is my own and does not reflect the opinion of my firm or anyone else.

Brett Holubeck (of Houston, Texas) is the attorney responsible for this site.