|3.||Title VII is violated by an employment policy which results in the firing of a temporarily disabled employee, if the policy allows insufficient leave or no leave, if that policy has a disparate impact on employees of one gender, if it is not justified by business necessity.|
PDA-78 does not require an employer to treat pregnant employees differently from other employees in hiring, promoting, or establishing new medical leave or benefit programs where none existed before. A specific amount of maternity leave time is not required. The law establishes the practice that women experiencing pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions must be treated similarly for their ability or inability to work for all employment-related purposes as any employee not affected. This includes the receipt of benefits under fringe benefits programs.
After 1978, pregnant workers were recognized for benefits in a variety of ways, including fair employment or labor codes, state temporary disability insurance laws, and regulations and court decisions regarding employment discrimination based on gender.
PDA-78 led to reinterpretation of Gilbert by the Supreme Court. In Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Co. v. EEOC, 462 U.S. 669 ( 1983), the Court found that PDA-78 applied to spouses of employees. The employer's program allowed benefits for pregnant employees only, not their spouses who may become pregnant. Under the broader civil rights standard of sex discrimination, the case concluded spouses were eligible. Male employees of Newport News Shipbuilding could be paid health insurance benefits for their pregnant spouses, since a male spouse would benefit were the employee a female who became eligible for employer-paid pregnancy benefits. The Court reversed Gilbert and also rejected the reasoning that sex discrimination required proof of intent.
In California Savings and Loan Association v. Guerra, 479 U.S. 272 ( 1987), the court upheld a California statute requiring employers to give leave, although without pay, to pregnant female employees. The employer argued that the statute violated the "equal treatment" provision in PDA-78 since similar leave was not given to males. The required leave was a "floor" guarantee that women would be treated the same as men with respect to disability, since employers could give equal leave to males.
In UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 111 S.Ct. 1196 ( 1991), the Court interpreted PDA-78 to prohibit substitution of an employer's judgment for that of a female employee of childbearing age with regard for the health of future children as a result of a job in which there is exposure to lead. The Court found that the decision was for the female employee, not the employer, to make. The case is a rejection of the paternalistic view of women in employment enshrined in Muller v. Oregon, 208 US 412 ( 1908).
A more uniform, basic approach to leave is provided in the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA-93). It requires covered employers to grant eligible employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave during any 12-month period for the birth and first-year care of a child; adoption or foster placement of a child in the employee's home; the care of a spouse, child, or parent with serious health condition; or the serious health condition of the employee.
COLE BLEASE GRAHAM, JR.
Guy, M. E., 1992. Women and Men of the States: Public Administrators at the State Level. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, Inc.
Levit, K. R., G. L. Olin and S. W. Letsch, 1992. "Americans' Health Insurance Coverage, 1980-91". Health Care Financing Review (Fall) 31-57.
Maschke, K. J., 1989. Litigation, Courts, and Women Workers. New York: Praeger.
DISCRIMINATION, RACIAL. Political, social, or employment practices, whether intentional or unintentional, that result in limited employment and individual advancement opportunities because of one's race.
In the United States, racial and ethnic discriminations has historical origins in legalized systems of slavery in the Southern states. Many early state constitutions and the 1789 U.S. Constitution did little to address slavery and equity for native populations. Slavery was formally abolished in 1870 by the Fifteenth Amendment. It was not until 1964 in the Civil Rights Act that Congress acted forcefully to ensure the civil liberties of African Americans and other racial/ethnic minority groups.
Delays and difficulties in meaningful legislation against racial discrimination illustrate the political intensity underlying equal employment opportunity (EEO) and affirmative action (AA) programs in a democratic society. Equal employment opportunity aims to prevent racial discrimination in the future and affirmative action serves as a remedy for discrimination from the past.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (CRA-64) makes it illegal for a private sector employer to treat an employee or prospective employee differently because of race. Title VII covers all aspects of employment practice from recruitment through promotion, discipline, wages and benefits, and discharge.
Under Executive Order 11246, issued by President Lyndon Johnson on September 24, 1965, to support implementation of CRA-64, businesses with government contracts had to have an affirmative action program. Executive Order 11246 also applied to state and local government employees receiving federal funds. As a result, virtually all government contractors and subcontractors with 50 or more employees who receive more than $50,000 of federal government money per year, and all state and local