Maternity Issues

cjacobs · March 2003

I work in a call center environment and we have several employees that are pregnant but are not eligible for FMLA (not employed long enough)and they do not qualify for vacation time. These employees are calling in sick (morning sickness) and because of company guidelines they are receiving occurrences for these absences. If an employee receives 3 occurrences it will equal a written warning...

Are there any suggestions on how or if these employees should be treated any different based upon their illness?

Thank You

PAhr · March 2003

You should discipline these ees as you would any other ees. So long as you are treating them as you would any other ee who is not pregnant, you are not violating any laws. In California, a state notorious for employee rights, a woman brought suit against her employer because their attendance policy had a disparate impact on pregnant women. She lost on summary judgement.

Balloonman · April 2003

PA gives great advice. Preganancy is a condition, not an illness or disability. If you treat them different from other employees it will just cause you grief. Oh by the way, by treating them the same, it will cause you grief too. x:D
My $0.02 worth.
DJ The Balloonman

cjacobs · April 2003

Thanks for the feedback!

Gillian · April 2003

Just a comment regarding PAhr's comment about the case in California. Even though that is where I live and work I am not aware of the referenced case. The fact that one case was thrown out on summary judgement does not mean that we have a guidline we can follow. This is one case and one judge - other judges in similar circumstances could rule differently. In addition, sometimes summary judgement motions are overturned on appeal.

PAhr · April 2003

Sorry Gillian, I miss spoke. The case I was thinking of was Wilma Nicole Stout vs. Baxter Healthcare Corp. in the fifth circuit which deals with whether the company's attendance policy toward probationary employees had a disparate impact on pregnant women. There is also another case, Carine Armindo vs. Padlocker, INC. in the eleventh circuit (which happens to be where cjacobs is located) that also touches on this issue. Neither claimants in the two mentioned cases were eligible for FMLA and as such were subject to their employer's attendance policies. The courts found for the defendants in both cases citing that the Pregnancy Discrimination Act only calls for the same treatment as other employees would receive.

Maternity Issues

Comments