The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) is gaining attention with the first settlement and multiple lawsuits filed under the law, highlighting its importance and compliance requirements for employers. The PWFA was enacted on June 27, 2023, and builds on existing protections for pregnant workers such as Title VII, the ADA, and the PUMP Act. It marks a significant shift in the protection of pregnant and postpartum workers in the U.S. workplace. The law mandates that employers with 15 or more employees provide reasonable accommodations for workers experiencing limitations due to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, similar to accommodations provided under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
EEOC Settlement of PWFA Complaint
On Sept. 11, 2024, ABC Pest Control, Inc., based in Florida, settled a complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) after terminating a pregnant employee who requested accommodations for medical appointments. The EEOC characterized this action as a violation of the PWFA.
This was the first public settlement under the PWFA, pursuant to which ABC Pest Control agreed to pay $47,480 for wrongful termination related to pregnancy accommodations. In addition, ABC Pest Control agreed to revise its policies, appoint an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) coordinator, and train employees on pregnancy discrimination, reflecting a commitment to prevent future violations. The settlement underscores the necessity for employers to comply with the PWFA.
Subsequent Legal Actions
As discussed previously, in an article by Christian M. Gunneson, the EEOC ramps up enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The EEOC has filed multiple lawsuits against other employers for similar PWFA violations, indicating a plan for robust agency enforcement of the law. Cases against Wabash National Corporation, Polaris Industries, and a medical practice in Oklahoma exemplify the ongoing challenges facing employers regarding pregnancy accommodations.
The first lawsuit involves a worker at Wabash National Corporation, who requested light duty during her pregnancy due to concerns about physical strain. Despite similar accommodations being available for non-pregnant employees with temporary disabilities, the employer allegedly only offered unpaid leave. This refusal to provide alternative work or modify job duties, led the employee to resign, which was seen as a violation of the PWFA’s requirement to engage in an “interactive process” to determine reasonable accommodations.
The second lawsuit has been filed against Polaris Industries, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. Polaris allegedly failed to accommodate an employee’s pregnancy-related medical restrictions, including excusing absences for prenatal care, and limiting mandatory overtime. The company imposed attendance penalties and threatened termination if further points were accumulated. Facing this pressure, the employee ultimately resigned to safeguard her pregnancy, leading to the EEOC’s legal action against the company.
The third lawsuit filed by the EEOC is against Urologic Specialists of Oklahoma, Inc., a local medical practice, alleging violations of the PWFA based on the medical practice denying an expectant medical assistant accommodations including excusing absences for prenatal care, limiting mandatory overtime, and allowing the affected employee the ability to sit, take breaks, or work part-time. Instead, the company placed the medical assistant on unpaid leave and later terminated her when she refused to return without guaranteed breaks for expressing breast milk.
PWFA Compliance for Companies
The PWFA requires employers to engage in an “interactive process” with employees to identify reasonable accommodations, which could range from allowing additional break time to providing seating or water, offering flexible working hours, and even granting time off to recover from childbirth. Importantly, the law prohibits employers from placing pregnant workers on leave if other accommodations can be provided, and it prevents retaliation against workers seeking or utilizing accommodations.
Employers must now proactively adapt their accommodation policies to reflect the PWFA’s broader requirements. This includes engaging in the interactive process with employees, understanding that temporary conditions related to pregnancy may still require accommodations, and avoiding decisions that force workers into unpaid leave if other reasonable options exist. Compliance measures include revising HR policies, training management on accommodation processes, and ensuring that state-specific laws are also adhered to.
In summary, these new protections and related enforcement activities signal an increased focus on supporting the health and well-being of pregnant and postpartum workers. Employers are encouraged to review and update their workplace policies, particularly regarding reasonable accommodations, to ensure compliance with the new federal standards. Additionally, in states with existing pregnancy-related accommodations laws, the PWFA complements but does not override local requirements, meaning employers must also remain attentive to state-specific regulations.
This article originally appeared on Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP. www.fmglaw.com
About the Authors:
Sunshine R. Fellows is a partner at Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP. sunshine.fellows@fmglaw.com
Thomas R. Starks is an attorney at Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP. thomas.starks@fmglaw.com