So, you remember February 2009, right?
We were all aflutter over Liam Neeson in Taken (ok, I still haven’t seen it). And we were listening to “My Life Would Suck Without You” by Kelly Clarkson (still a good song.)
And I had a Blackberry Bold and loved it. (I know; even lawyers can plead temporary
Last week, my colleagues Peter Murphy and Harrison Smith, offered to write about the latest developments in the law regarding pregnancy. The post was scheduled to come out today, when, much to our surprise, the EEOC yesterday afternoon released long-awaited guidance on the subject.
So much for that post!
After a quick rewrite last night, here’s the very latest that includes both my comments and additional sourcing from Peter & Harrison….
Just a few short weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that next term it will once again tackle an issue that raises strong feelings in many women (and men)–how pregnant women are treated in the workplace in comparison to non-pregnant employees.
As anyone interested in employment law knows, both Congress and the EEOC have focused extensively in recent years on getting employers to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled employees. Although what constitutes a reasonable accommodation remains a difficult determination in certain circumstances, the need to engage in an interactive dialogue with disabled employees over accommodations now is well established.
What to do with pregnant employees under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, however, has been less clear. The EEOC yesterday chimed in with new guidance on the subject.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First, the background.
The Federal Courts of Appeals are split on whether, and in what situations, an employer that provides work accommodations to non-pregnant, disabled employees with work limitations must also provide work accommodations to pregnant employees who are “similar in their ability or inability to work” as the non-pregnant employees.
In the case coming to the Supreme Court, Young v. United Parcel Service, the trial court and the Fourth Circuit held that the PDA does not require employers to provide accommodations to pregnant employees.
The Fifth, Seventh and Eighth Circuits agree with the Fourth Circuit, while other courts, such as the Tenth Circuit and the Sixth Circuit, hold otherwise.
Since 2012, the EEOC has been kicking around the subject of revising its guidelines on the subject. By a 3-2 vote, the EEOC decided that it could not wait until the Supreme Court gave birth to a clarifying decision, and so yesterday the EEOC issued its final pregnancy discrimination guidelines.
Continue Reading EEOC Declines a “Pregnant” Pause; New Guidance Awaits Supreme Court Decision
Here’s an interesting question: Does the Pregnancy Discrimination Act protect an employee who is no longer pregnant?
A federal court decision in Connecticut yesterday says, yes. The case, Canales v. Schick Manufacturing, Inc. can be downloaded here.
The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) is part
When does the workday begin? When does it end?
These were among the questions that the Second Circuit addressed and resolved in an important wage & hour decision last week. The case, Kuebel v. Black & Decker, can be downloaded here.
The court held that an "employee’s commuting time is not compensable as part of
UPDATED 5/19/09
The U.S. Supreme Court has been very busy this morning.
First, in a 7-2 decision, the Court held that an employer (in.jpg)
this case AT&T) did not violate the Pregnancy Discrimination Act when it gave less retirement credit for pregnancy leaves that occurred prior to the passage of the act.
In addition, the
I love my Blackberry Bold. And I know many others that praise the virtues of an iPhone or other PDA device.
But recently
, questions have been raised about the use of these devices by non-exempt employees — in other words, those employees who are eligible to receive overtime. If these employees are reviewing their messages