DOJ ANNOUNCES SETTLEMENT OF 2ND PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT AGAINST A FLORIDA FIRE DEPARTMENT

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Justice Department Settles Second Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Against the Davie, Florida, Fire Department

The Justice Department today announced that it has reached a consent decree with the town of Davie, Florida, to resolve allegations that the Davie Fire Department discriminated against firefighter/paramedic Lori Davis because of her pregnancy and retaliated against firefighter/paramedic Monica Santana because she complained about gender discrimination.  Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin and religion.

According to the Justice Department, the consent decree resolves allegations of disparate treatment based on pregnancy that resulted from light duty policies implemented by the Davie Fire Department.  In 2012, the Department of Justice challenged those discriminatory light duty policies in a related pattern or a practice Title VII case resulting in the filing of a complaint and consent decree to resolve the case.  The consent decree entered by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida required that the fire department abandon its existing discriminatory light duty policies and adopt new, non-discriminatory policies.  This new complaint is the result of individual charges of discrimination referred to the Justice Department by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  

As alleged by the Justice Department in this complaint, Davis worked for the Davie Fire Department under its prior policies and was adversely affected by those policies which were implemented in violation of Title VII.  Under Title VII, discrimination based on sex includes discrimination due to pregnancy, and requires that women affected by pregnancy be treated the same as other employees who are similar in their ability or inability to work.  Under federal law, an employer may not retaliate against employees because they complain about discrimination based on sex.

As alleged in the complaint, Davis’s doctor wanted Davis on light duty during her pregnancy.  The fire department’s policy, however, would not allow her light duty during her first trimester.  Davis continued to work and eventually was required to fight a fire while pregnant.  She suffered a miscarriage after doing so.  The complaint also alleges that Santana complained about other policies and practices at the fire department that she reasonably believed discriminated against female firefighters.  After she complained about the discriminatory treatment, the fire department responded to her complaints by taking adverse actions against her designed to discourage similar complaints.                      

The consent decree, filed simultaneously with the complaint in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida must still be approved by the federal court.  Under the terms of the agreement, the fire department must review and adopt appropriate anti-retaliation policies to protect its employees from further violations of Title VII and conduct training of its personnel to ensure that they properly handle future complaints under Title VII.  The fire department must also pay monetary awards to compensate Davis, Santana, and two other similarly-situated, pregnant firefighters.  The total monetary awards to all four women will exceed $400,000.

“Every day, expectant mothers after consulting with their doctors make difficult decisions about how and, more importantly, when to restrict their work duties due to pregnancy,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division.  “The Civil Rights Division is firmly committed to vigorous enforcement of Title VII’s prohibitions against pregnancy discrimination and retaliation so that women can make decisions regarding their pregnancies and try to remedy discriminatory treatment without fear of unwarranted repercussions in the work place after doing so.”

“Firefighters are dedicated public servants who put their lives at risk every day to protect the citizens of our community,” said U.S. Attorney Wilfredo A. Ferrer of the Southern District of Florida.  “We are committed to enforcing the federal laws that protect expectant mothers against discrimination so that they will not be forced to choose between their job and their decision to have a family.”

U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT ARTICLE ON PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION

FROM:  U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT 
Take Three: Pregnancy Discrimination

Women now make up nearly half of the U.S. labor force. Three out of every four women entering the workforce will experience at least one pregnancy while employed. Every year, thousands of women file charges of pregnancy discrimination. Latifa Lyles, director of the Women's Bureau, answers three questions on pregnancy discrimination and what it means for the workforce.
What is pregnancy discrimination? Pregnancy discrimination occurs when an employer treats a job applicant or an employee unfavorably due to her pregnancy, childbirth or a related medical condition. It could involve refusing to hire or promote a qualified individual because she is pregnant, firing a woman because she missed a few days of work to give birth, or forcing a pregnant employee to take leave. Pregnancy discrimination is illegal, as is pregnancy-related harassment that creates a hostile or offensive work environment. Pregnancy discrimination negatively affects not just pregnant women and their families, but also employers, who may be cheating themselves by driving away skilled, qualified workers.

What resources do pregnant workers have? At the federal level, women are protected by laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. Also, many states have enacted laws that provide women with additional protections against pregnancy discrimination.

Why are these protections necessary? Today, most women work during pregnancy, often into their third trimester. Laws prohibiting pregnancy discrimination are necessary because they ensure that women who want to work during pregnancy do so under the same conditions as non-pregnant employees. They also ensure that women who are not able to work due to a pregnancy-related disability are treated the same as non-pregnant workers who are similar in their inability to work. In turn, these laws ensure that the U.S. workforce is operating under the best possible conditions — those in which all workers have an equal opportunity to contribute their skills and experience.

DOJ FILES PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT AGAINST CHICAGO BOARD OF EDUCATION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Justice Department Files Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Against the Chicago Board of Education

The Justice Department today announced the filing of a lawsuit against the Chicago Board of Education, alleging that the board discriminated against pregnant teachers at Scammon Elementary School by subjecting them to adverse personnel actions, including termination in some instances, after they announced their pregnancies.  According to the complaint, these adverse personnel actions were in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Title VII is a federal statute that prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin and religion.  The statute explicitly prohibits employers from discriminating against female employees due to pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleges that, starting in 2009, the principal at Scammon subjected female teachers to lower performance evaluations, discipline, threatened termination and/or termination because of their pregnancies.  The complaint further alleges that the board approved the firing of six recently pregnant teachers employed at Scammon and forced two other recently pregnant teachers to leave Scammon.  The department’s complaint seeks a court order that would require the board to develop and implement policies that would prevent its employees from being subjected to discrimination due to their pregnancies.  The relief sought also includes monetary damages as compensation for those teachers who were harmed by the alleged discrimination.

Two teachers who had been pregnant while working at Scammon filed charges of sex discrimination with the Chicago District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  The EEOC investigated the charges and determined that there was reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred against the two charging parties as well as against other pregnant teachers.  The EEOC was unsuccessful in its attempts to conciliate the matter before referring it to the Department of Justice.

“No woman should have to make a choice between her job and having a family,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta for the Civil Rights Division.  “Federal law requires employers to maintain a workplace free of discrimination on the basis of sex.”

“Despite much progress, we continue to see the persistence of overt pregnancy discrimination, as well as the emergence of more subtle discriminatory practices in the workplace,” said EEOC Chair Jenny R. Yang.

“The EEOC will continue to vigorously enforce Title VII’s prohibition of discrimination against pregnant employees,” said John P. Rowe, former District Director of the EEOC’s Chicago District Office.  Rowe led the EEOC’s administrative investigation of the charges filed by the two teachers.

This lawsuit is brought by the Department of Justice as a result of a joint effort to enhance collaboration between the EEOC and the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division for vigorous enforcement of Title VII.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FILES PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Friday, May 18, 2012
Justice Department Files Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Against the Nevada Division of Forestry
The Department of Justice today announced the filing of a lawsuit against the Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) alleging that NDF discriminated against Ms. Tawnya Meyer, a former employee, when they fired her soon after she announced her pregnancy.   According to the complaint, Ms. Meyer’s termination was in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.   Title VII is a federal statute which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, including pregnancy.

The suit, filed in the Reno Division of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, alleges that Ms. Meyer, a former dispatcher with the NDF, was successfully performing her job and that there were no complaints about her work until she announced her pregnancy.    The complaint further alleges that NDF did not document any work related problems with Ms. Meyer’s performance, nor did it follow its own policies regarding terminations.   Finally, according to the complaint, Ms. Meyer’s pregnancy was discussed as a reason for her termination by NDF managers.    The United States’ complaint seeks a court order that would require NDF to develop and implement policies that would prevent its employees from being subjected to discrimination based upon sex.   The relief sought would also include monetary relief for Ms. Meyer as compensation for damages that she sustained as a result of the alleged discrimination.

Ms. Meyer initially filed a charge of sex discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) whose San Francisco office investigated the matter, determined that there was reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred and referred the matter to the Department of Justice.
                                                                     
“No woman should have to make a choice between having a job and having a family,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.   “Federal law requires employers to maintain a workplace free of such discrimination.”

EEOC San Francisco District Director Michael Baldonado said, “Due to our agency’s ongoing partnership with the DOJ, this lawsuit has been filed to hold NDF accountable for pregnancy discrimination.   Having a new child should be a joyous event, not one that leads to unemployment.”

The EEOC held a public meeting in Washington concerning pregnancy and caregiver discrimination. Material from this commission meeting can be found atwww.eeoc.gov/eeoc/meetings/2-15-12/index.cfm .