The settlement provides monetary and non-monetary relief for Amira to resolve claims that ERA filed on her behalf last year with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, alleging that Amira’s employer, a national operator of residential facilities and communities for seniors, had subjected Amira to harassment, other forms of discrimination, and ultimately terminated her because she was pregnant and sought to exercise her right to take pregnancy-related leave. Amira also alleged that the company discriminated against her and other caregivers based on their race and national origin.

Amira’s case is unfortunately not unusual.  ERA has seen a sharp rise in pregnancy discrimination and accommodation complaints in recent years, a trend mirrored at the federal level. (Click here to see ERA’s May 2012 report, Expecting a Baby, Not A Lay-off:  Why Federal Law Should Require the Reasonable Accommodation of Pregnant Workers, noting a 54% rise in pregnancy discrimination claims filed with the EEOC between 1997 and 2010.)  ERA Staff Attorney Mia Munro is proud to have represented Amira and observes that, “It takes real courage and determination for women like Amira to come forward and complain about these injustices.  We are very pleased that the matter has been resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.”

ERA Legal Director Jennifer Reisch further added that, “This case shows how discrimination against pregnant workers and the failure to provide reasonable accommodations that would enable women to keep working during pregnancy are particularly acute problems, and have especially devastating economic consequences, for women in low-wage jobs and industries.”

ERA fights for women like Amira because we believe that providing pregnant employees with reasonable accommodations on the job is essential to fulfilling the promise of equal opportunity in employment.  This is also why ERA is a strong supporter of the federal Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), a bill which would require employers to provide pregnant workers with reasonable accommodations.  Learn more about this important issue and take action to support the PWFA.

*Not her real name

Confirming California’s role as a leader in protecting the rights of working pregnant women, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission’s (FEHC) revised pregnancy regulations were approved on November 30th.

When these regulations become effective on December 30, 2012, they will clarify the legal requirement that employers provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant women, such as chairs, frequent bathroom breaks, and assistance with heavy lifting. While a 1999 amendment to the Fair Employment and Housing Act required employers to provide these accommodations, updated regulations were needed to conform to these statutory changes.  In 2011, the law was amended again to compel employers to continue workers’ health insurance during pregnancy disability leave.

The new regulations provide helpful guidance to employers and employees about safeguards for pregnant women in the workplace.  Providing these accommodations is the responsibility of employers and can be critical to the well-being of workers. For example, Laura worked as a program counselor at a facility for people with disabilities. During her pregnancy, on her doctor’s advice, she asked to be relieved from bending and twisting when securing wheelchairs to a bus. Her employer refused, forcing her onto unpaid leave and threatening to fire her if she did not return in four months. The four-month deadline coincided with her due date. Once a legal advocate informed Laura’s employer of their obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation under the law, Laura was reinstated, paid back wages, and given the modification she needed.

But many pregnant workers do not realize they are entitled to these accommodations and do not seek legal help. The revised regulations will make it clearer to employers and employees alike that pregnant workers are fully protected in the workplace.  In addition to explaining an employer’s duty to provide reasonable pregnancy accommodations and to continue health benefits during pregnancy leave, the final FEHC regulations also

• clarify that it is unlawful for an employer to require a pregnant woman to take a leave of absence when she has not requested leave;
• explain that employers must provide lactation accommodations to nursing mothers;
• list examples of conditions that entitle a woman to take up to four months of job-protected pregnancy disability leave, including gestational diabetes, loss or end of pregnancy, and post-partum depression; and
• describe an employer’s obligation to grant extended leave beyond 4 months if an employee has a qualifying disability under the FEHA.

A coalition of women’s and civil rights organizations* provided essential comments and testimony on the proposed regulations during a two and a half year period, and helped ensure that the final regulations provide the protection to pregnant workers that the Fair Employment and Housing Act mandates. The coalition applauds the approval of the regulations, and looks forward to seeingimproved employer compliance with the Act.

Noah Lebowitz, Board Member of coalition member California Employment Lawyers’ Association said:  “This is a great day for all Californians.  The clarity provided by these regulations will empower working pregnant women to know and exercise their rights and will simultaneously provide an easy-to-understand guide for employers to comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.  The result will surely be an increase in employment and a reduction of litigation.”

According to Sharon Terman, Senior Staff Attorney at the Legal Aid Society–Employment Law Center, “California has long been a leader in providing broad protections for working pregnant women. We are thrilled that the final regulations reflect the intent of the law and confirm these basic rights.”

Jennifer Reisch, Legal Director at Equal Rights Advocates, noted that, “Allowing valuable employees to continue working throughout their pregnancies whenever they can makes sense for families andbusinesses.  We are very pleased that these regulations uphold the letter and spirit of California’s pregnancy accommodation law.”

The following organizations gave input and helped shape the revised pregnancy regulations:

• American Association of University Women–California
• California Commission on the Status of Women
• California Employment Lawyers Association
• California Women’s Law Center
• California Work and Family Coalition
• Center for WorkLife Law, UC Hastings
• Equal Rights Advocates
• Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center
• Women’s Employment Rights Clinic of Golden Gate University Law School

On May 8, 2012, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) was introduced by U.S. Representatives Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Jackie Speier (D-CA), Susan Davis (D-CA), and other legislators. HR 5467 would require employers to provide pregnant workers with reasonable accommodations to enable them to continue working during a financially crucial time in their lives.

“Working families need and want to keep working. ERA strongly supports the Pregnant Worker Fairness Act because similar protections under California law make the case for federal change,” said Noreen Farrell, ERA’s Executive Director. “Pregnant women are working with accommodations. Businesses are benefiting from happy and productive long-term employees. It is a win-win.”

The Report first examines why current federal law has not consistently ensured the minor accommodation of employees who are able to work during their pregnancies. It then tracks the development of state laws that require accommodations for pregnant workers, with a particular focus on the sweeping success of California’s pregnancy accommodation law, as support for change at the federal level.

The California data considered in ERA’s Report – ERA’s Hotline and experience with clients, cases based on state pregnancy accommodation laws, and statistical data about complaints filed with California’s state administrative agency – provide important insight into how California employees and business have fared since California’s pregnancy accommodation law went into effect in 2000.

Key findings of include:

• The number of court and administrative decisions involving California’s pregnancy accommodation law is very low, suggesting that the law has not prompted a flood of litigation.
• The accommodations sought are generally modest, reasonable, and easily met by employers
•  Accommodation laws are particularly important for protecting low-wage hourly workers.
•  Pregnancy accommodations often involve practices helpful to all employees and can benefit the employer’s bottom line.
•  California’s pregnancy accommodation law has not prompted more pregnancy discrimination.  In contrast to federal law discrimination charges, which have risen by 54 percent since 1997, the number of pregnancy discrimination charges filed with California’s state agency has decreased since 1997.

The Report contains a number of case studies that show the need for the new federal law. The story of Maria is a case in point. Maria handles security duties for a California employer. When Maria discovered that she was pregnant, she requested a stool to sit on and more frequent duty rotation so she could move more throughout the day. Her employer refused to accommodate her pregnancy limitations and placed her on involuntary early leave. ERA intervened on Maria’s behalf and informed the employer about the requirements of California’s pregnancy accommodation law. After a productive brainstorming session exploring possible solutions, the matter was quickly resolved without undue stress to Maria and without litigation. Rather than sit home without pay, Maria continued to be a productive employee for months. She preserved her Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave for when she needed it most.

Women in other states who are profiled in the report were not so lucky. Angie, a train conductor in Mississippi, was forced to take three extra months of unpaid leave instead of allowing her to work with the occasional assistance of willing co-workers. The stress and financial strain was immense for Angie, who was already anxious about becoming the sole support for her new family. Equal Rights Advocates was limited by federal and Mississippi law in its ability to assist Angie.

Celebrate Mother’s Day by supporting the PWFA at www.equalrights.org

NYU Law Reproductive Justice and Women’s Rights Fellow Mia Munro has made great progress in leading the charge to protect the rights of pregnant women in the workplace as part of ERA’s Marginalized Workers and Work & Family campaigns.

Since joining the organization in August, Mia and a fellow at the Employment Law Center have taken the lead in drafting a much-needed FAQ section on pregnancy disability and family care leave for the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) website. Mia has also spearheaded an educational outreach program to inform pregnant women about their rights through their medical providers.

Over the past several months, Mia has provided direct services to the many women seeking information and assistance with pregnancy-related issues at work via our Advice and Counseling hotline. Most recently, she received a call from a California woman distressed about an employer’s policy to discontinue health insurance benefits for employees that take more than a month of pregnancy disability leave. Mia advised the caller about the new amendment to the California Pregnancy Disability Leave Law, co-sponsored by ERA, which requires employers to continue providing health care benefits to women for the entire duration of their job-protected pregnancy disability leave, up to four months. Mia prepared a letter describing the new law for the caller to provide to her employer.