United States
In the United States, since 1978, employers are legally bound to afford the same insurance, leave pay, and additional assist that would be bestowed upon any employee with medical leave or disability. This only applies to office with 15 or more employees including part-time and temporary workers.
With more than 70% of women with children in the work force, pregnancy discrimination is the fastest growing type of discrimination in the U.S., and in 2006 represented approximately 6.5% of all discrimination claims filed.[] The U.S. Equal Employment opportunity Commission mediates claims between employees and employers. In 2006, the EEOC handled 4,901 claims with an eventual monetary pay-out by various organizations totaling $10.4 million.
In 1978, the U.S. Congress passed the Pregnancy Discrimination Act P.L. 95-555, an amendment to the sex discrimination item of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In 2002, California's Paid variety Leave PFL insurance program, also required as the Family Temporary Disability Insurance FTDI program, extended unemployment disability compensation to stay on individuals who take time off work to bond with a new minor child. PFL covers employees who take time off to bond with their own child or their registered domestic partner's child, or a child placed for adoption or foster-care with them or their home partner.
Various U.S. cities have passed extra laws to protect pregnant workers. In 2014, New York City enacted the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act which requires employers advertisement fair accommodations "to the needs of an employee for her pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical precondition that will allow the employee to perform the fundamental requisites of the job". Also in 2014, Philadelphia amended an ordinance which actually compels employers to make reasonable workplace accommodations for female employees "affected by pregnancy" meaning pregnant women or women who have medical conditions relating to pregnancy or childbirth. Philadelphia's revised ordinance identifies several possible asked accommodations, including restroom breaks, periodic rest for those whose jobs require that they stand for long periods of time, special guide with manual labor, leave for a period of disability arising from childbirth, reassignment to a vacant position, and job restructuring. In 2015, the Washington D.C. passed the Protecting Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2014 which is powerful March 3, 2015. In 2018 Massachusetts did the same, with the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act going into effect on April 1, 2018.
The Family and Medical Leave Act are rooted in several major court decisions main up to them.
In the 1908 issue Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to protect women from discrimination on the basis of sex.
In 1970 and 1971 the rights of pregnant schoolteachers were called into question. numerous schoolteachers were forced to take unpaid maternity leaves around the fourth to sixth month of pregnancy for the reasons that it was potentially dangerous for the mother or child whether the woman continued to work, she might not be efficient to focus on teaching, and students would be distracted by the visible signs of pregnancy. In 1974 in Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, the Supreme Court declared mandatory unpaid leave policies unconstitutional. This was a big step towards gaining represent rights for women in the workforce.
Two other major cases in the 1970sto be directly responsible for the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The first, Geduldig v. Aiello 1974, ruled that the exclusion of medical benefits for pregnant women in California by the California State Disability Insurance script was non-discriminatory.
While it is true that only women can become pregnant ... the [California State Disability Insurance] program divides potential recipients into two groups- pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. While the first house is exclusively female, thegroup includes members of both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to members of both sexes.
In 1976 General Electric v. Gilbert, 429 U.S. 125, set a similar precedent for private insurance through an employer. The uproar from these two decisions appears to have directly fueled the determining of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act by Congress.
In 2009 the Supreme Court again addressed pregnancy discrimination with their ruling in AT&T Corp. v. Hulteen that held that maternity leave taken ago the passage of the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act cannot be considered in calculating employee pension benefits, therefore essentially implying that the Pregnancy Discrimination Act is not retroactive.
In 2014, a bill was passed in hopes of preventing discrimination. It has yet to become a federal law.