“The gender wage gap can be measured in dollars and cents, millions upon millions of them over the course of woman’s working life. It cannot be explained away by rhetoric about women’s ‘choices’ to take lower paying jobs or leave the workforce. The law prohibits pay discrimination. It has for a long time,” she wrote.

In concert with a high-power coalition of women’s groups, Equal Rights Advocates has sent letters to all 50 governors today, the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act, calling for their help in closing a pay gap that disproportionately punishes women of color and low wage-earners. For more on the Equal Pay Today! campaign, click here.

In one case, ERA helped tradeswoman Jeanine Dubois, who works as an electrician for the City & County of San Francisco, receive compensation and other relief for her claims of sex discrimination in pay and promotions. At ERA, we know that tradeswomen are historically discriminated against at work in male-dominated industries.

ERA attorneys also have successfully negotiated a string of settlements on behalf of pregnant women who were denied modest accommodations at work or fired when they requested them. One woman, who worked as a machine operator at a mailing and marketing services company and spoke only Spanish, was retaliated against and fired after taking her pregnancy leave. As part of the settlement, that company will improve its leave notices and translate them into other languages. A second woman, an East African immigrant who works in health care, was fired after requesting pregnancy leave. In addition to the monetary settlement, the company agreed to seal her dismissal records and she was able to get a job with a different employer.

“ERA takes a truly holistic approach to advocating for the rights of women and girls,” said ERA Legal Director Jennifer Reisch.  “Coupled with our work on broader impact litigation, like Dukes v. Wal-Mart, and our legislative advocacy on issues such as equal pay and fair treatment of working families, we believe that the direct service element of our work is an essential part of our overall strategy to ensure gender justice,” Reisch added.  “It is also extremely effective in bringing about necessary and timely changes in schools and workplaces.”

ERA will continue to negotiate and litigate on behalf of women workers who face barriers to equal employment opportunity and fair pay. For more information on our advocacy on behalf of women workers, click here. You can also support the rights of women and working families by joining our national and California campaigns to strengthen protections for caregivers and pregnant women at work here.

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. As we near the 35th anniversary of the PDA, district courts are still missing the point.

The case, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Houston Funding II, Limited; Houston Funding Corporation, involved Donnicia Venters, a female account representative who was terminated after informing her supervisor that she would need to use a breast pump when she returned to work after giving birth. He told her that her position had been filled and she received a termination letter shortly thereafter, stating “job abandonment” as the cause for termination.

The district court dismissed the case, granting summary judgment in favor of Houston. It held that lactation is not a pregnancy-related condition and thus, “firing someone because of lactation or breast-pumping is not sex discrimination.” The Fifth Circuit disagreed and reversed, stating that lactation is a pregnancy-related medical condition under the PDA and that Houston’s actions were a cognizable sex discrimination claim under Title VII. Thus, it said, the dismissal of the claim was inappropriate.

That cases such as this are still arising in America is distressing, but let us celebrate this movement towards true justice.

For information about California’s pregnancy accommodation law, which requires employers to provide accommodation to pregnant employees or employees who have recently given birth, click here.

Support the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which would require employers to provide employees with reasonable accommodations for conditions related to pregnancy and childbirth.

This post was written by ERA law clerk Brandy DeOrnellas.

On May 29, the California State Senate passed SB 404, a bill authored by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Dist. 19) and co-sponsored by Equal Rights Advocates (ERA), the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA) and the Center for Worklife Law at UC Hastings. The bill will prohibit employers from discriminating against an employee based on his or her family responsibilities by adding “familial status” to the list of characteristics that are prohibited bases of discrimination under the employment provisions of the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.

As the law stands now, employees must draw on a patchwork of laws to show that an employer discriminated against the employee for being a primary caregiver by trying to prove that caregiving is a type of sex discrimination.  Many employers base adverse employment decisions on preconceived notions about family responsibilities. For example, employers may reduce an employee’s hours without the employee’s consent or pass over these employees for promotions.  This bill clarifies the law protecting caregivers giving guidance to both employees and employers about the rights of workers with family responsibilities.

“Today more and more workers are juggling both work and family care obligations, and the demands for elder care are projected to increase dramatically in the near future,” says Jamie Dolkas, Staff Attorney at ERA. “SB 404 provides much-needed protection to ensure that workers will not be treated unfairly because they care for their family members.”

Domestic Workers’ Bill of Rights and Bills Protecting Immigrant Workers From Retaliation Move Forward in California Legislature

Also on May 29, the Assembly passed “The Domestic Workers’ Bill of Rights,” (AB 241) introduced by Tom Ammiano (D-Dist. 17).  This bill would protect domestic workers, including nannies and those who provide in-home care, by regulating wages, providing for rest time, and protecting other working conditions.

While it exempts certain employers such as licensed health facilities or people who receive domestic care from the State of California or In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS), AB 241 defines employers of domestic workers as those who employ or exercise control over the wages, hours or working conditions of a domestic work employee, including those who obtain the services from third parties.

The same day, the California Senate passed SB 666, a bill authored by Senator Darrell Steinberg (D- Dist. 6 and President pro Tem), that would prohibit employers from threatening to report undocumented workers or their families when they exercise their labor and employment rights.  Employers may also risk losing their business licenses for retaliating against these employees.

Attorneys who use immigration status to threaten and intimidate witnesses would also face discipline, and whistle blowing protections would be extended to employees who testify before a legislature or other public body about anything related to a government investigation of the employer

AB 263, another bill protective of immigrant workers’ rights and, introduced by Roger Hernández (D-Dist. 48), passed through the Assembly. This bill would prevent employers from engaging in unfair immigration-related practices toward employees who assert their labor and employment rights. Unfair immigration-related practices would include threats of improperly using the Federal E-Verify system, requests of extraneous documents showing an employees’ eligibility to work, and threats of filing reports or contacting immigration authorities in response to an employee’s exercise of his or her rights.

“Equal Rights Advocates applauds the advancement of these three bills in the state legislature,” said Monali Sheth, Staff Attorney at ERA. “ AB 241, the Domestic Workers’ Bill of Rights, provides domestic workers the right to work for a living wage, decent working conditions, and with dignity, while SB 666 and AB 263 further protect the immigrant women we represent who are afraid of coming forward to complain when they have been overworked, underpaid, abused, and unlawfully harassed on the job.”

This post was written by Sonia Jacob, an ERA summer law clerk.

That number is up nearly 30 percent since 1960, showing a growing trend of women spending more time in the workplace.

About three-quarters of American adults say the increase in the number of working women has made it harder to raise children, according to Pew. Two-thirds of the households with breadwinning moms are also single parent households, which indicates that more women are shouldering the responsibilities of both parenting and working at the same time.

It’s more important than ever to support working parents. At Equal Rights Advocates, we’ve made the needs of working families a top priority, and have led a groundbreaking effort to end workplace discrimination against parents and caregivers. ERA is proud to co-sponsor California Senate Bill 404, which will add familial status to a list of protected characteristics under state employment and housing laws.

“The Pew study spotlights why ERA’s gender justice work is so critical for families. Equity in pay, fair opportunity for hire and advancement … these aren’t luxuries. We are talking about everyday survival,” said ERA Executive Director Noreen Farrell.

To support the growing group of women who are earning AND nurturing, click here and tell your state representative that you support SB 404. The families that rely on women breadwinners are also depending on their getting paid equally for equal work.  To find out how to join ERA’s Close the Gap campaign to fight pay discrimination, click here.

For more on the Pew study, including more information on increasing numbers of households run by single low-wage earners, click here.

But it’s hard to celebrate the holiday fully knowing what we do about discrimination against pregnant women and caretakers in the workplace. This year’s Mother’s Day marks one year since ERA released its groundbreaking report on pregnancy discrimination: Expecting a Baby, Not a Layoff.

Three-quarters of working women will be pregnant at some point during their careers. ERA regularly hears from women who are discriminated against because of their pregnancy.

It came as a surprise to Hannah, a day laborer at a large manufacturing plant in Ohio, when her employer denied her a temporary ‘light duty’ assignment after she became pregnant. Hannah had noticed that many male workers had been given such assignments in the past, but her manager told her that she only provided light duty assignments for those employees injured on the job, and that if she brought a doctor’s note requesting accommodation she would be forced to go on medical leave.  She was also told that she was not eligible for job-protected leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act.

This was wrong. Her employer could have found a temporary light duty assignment for Hannah, as it did for many employees who were injured on the job or to those who had “disabilities” under the Americans with Disabilities Act. But Hannah was left with the decision of continuing to work in an un-accommodated position, thus jeopardizing the health of her pregnancy, or losing her job and the financial stability and health care benefits that came with it.   Hannah lost her job during her second trimester.  Single and without financial support, she had to depend on the government to keep food on the table.

Stories like Hannah’s are all too common among many pregnant women across the country.  Take Angie, a train conductor in Mississippi who was forced on unpaid leave due to a minor lifting restriction that could have easily been accommodated by her employer, who readily provided such accommodation to (mostly male) employees injured on the job. Or Peggy, a pregnant postal worker in Maryland who was similarly denied the temporary light duty potion that the employer readily provided to those injured on the job.

Although the text of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act declares that employers must treat pregnant employees at least as well as they treat other employees “similar in their ability or inability to work,” courts have found employers may do otherwise.  Although the Americans with Disabilities Act requires employers to provide reasonable accommodation to qualified employees with a disability, courts have found that such protections only extend to pregnant women with certain conditions.

America needs the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act to ensure that our pregnant workers are not denied the simple and temporary workplace accommodations that would keep our women and families healthy and financially independent, and that would keep our new generations secure.  That is why Senators Bob Casey and Jeanne Shaheen and Representative Jerry Nadler will reintroduce the bill on May 14, 2013, with support from a wide array of health organizations, women’s organizations, and disability rights organizations.

Would you like to share your story about a workplace pregnancy accommodation, or denial of a request for such an accommodation?  Contact Mia Munro at mmunro@equalrights.org or post a comment on this page.  And check out our PWFA action page for more information on you can help pass this important bill into law.

Last week, Jamie appeared as a keynote speaker at the American Association of University Women-Wisconsin‘s annual conference. Next week, she’s off to Rome, Italy to speak at the midyear-meeting of the American Bar Association’s International Labor & Employment Law Committee. There, Jamie will speak a panel that will discuss caregiver discrimination in the workplace and how this issue is being addressed in the United States, Europe, and Canada.

While in Wisconsin, Jamie spoke on the importance of one of ERA’s biggest cases — Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, a class action lawsuit against the retail giant alleging that company executives systematically discriminated against women in pay and promotion, all in the name of saving money. A case like Dukes, Jamie argued in her remarks, is the exact reason for national equal pay reforms. (If you’d like to support ERA’s efforts to close the gender wage gap, you can learn more here.)

While in Italy, Jamie and her other panel members will address the growing barriers faced by mothers (and fathers) in the American workplace. From caregiver discrimination to a lack of access to affordable daycare and an absence of access to paid leave laws, America is becoming an increasingly hostile place to work and raise a family at the same time. For more information on the ABA conference, click here.

The luncheon, which attracts more than 800 lawyers and community leaders, is anticipated all year. This year, we’re thrilled to welcome equality activist Lilly Ledbetter, our keynote speaker, as well as a group of gender justice activists we’ll be honoring for their continued work.  Sponsor or purchase a table/ticket now!

Ledbetter, who sparked national legislative change after she sued her employer Goodyear Tire & Rubber for gender discrimination in 1998, will appear as a keynote speaker. ERA is proud to support the continuing efforts of activists like Ledbetter to close the wage gap.  More information about the luncheon and Lilly here:  http://events.equalrights.org/

Derek Tisinger, a California fire chief, testified before the state legislature about the discrimination he faced at work when he became the sole caregiver of his young sons. Derek’s supervisors repeatedly questioned whether he could perform his childcare duties and work at the same time, despite his long history as a good employee. Read his testimony here.

Convinced? Tell your state legislator to support working families and pass SB 404. A sample letter of support can be found here. You can find contact information for your local legislator here.

Discrimination against pregnant women is a very real economic problem. Read ERA’s report ”Expecting a Baby, Not a Lay-off: Why Federal Law Should Require the Reasonable Accommodation of Pregnant Workers” and ERA’s accounting of  the effects of pregnancy discrimination on real women.

Other stakeholders from across the country have also come out in support of the PWFA. You can read a letter from the president-elect of The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or one from Hawai’i Civil Rights Commission. Or you can check out this letter to Congress, signed by dozens of organizations advocating for the passage of the bill. The PWFA is already supported by over 100 members of Congress. In the below video, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) discusses why.

A sample letter of support you can send to your member of Congress can be downloaded here. You can find contact information for your local congresswoman or congressman here and here.