NEW YORK (AP) — Workers are entitled to time off and other job accommodations for abortions — along with pregnancy-related medical conditions like miscarriage, stillbirth and lactation — under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, according to finalized federal regulations published Monday.
The language means that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure.
Major business groups also supported the law, citing the need for clarity about the accommodations that employers are required to give pregnant workers.
The new rules include extensive details on the types of accommodations that pregnant workers can request, from temporary exemption from jobs duties like heavy lifting to considerations for morning sickness.
Women’s right advocates had campaigned for years for the law, arguing that the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act offered inadequate protection for pregnant workers.
But in order to receive workplace accommodations, pregnant women had to demonstrate that co-workers had received similar benefits for comparable needs, since the act stated only that pregnant workers must be treated similarly to other employees, not that they deserved special consideration.
The new law makes clear that that pregnant workers are entitled to accommodations to keep doing their jobs, mirroring the process for workers with disabilities.
In a prepared statement, A Better Balance Co-President Dina Bakst applauded the EEOC “for issuing robust final regulations that appropriately recognize the broad scope of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.” ____
NEW YORK (AP) — Under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, workers are entitled to time off and other job accommodations for abortions, as well as for pregnancy-related medical conditions like lactation, stillbirth, and miscarriage. These rights were finalized federal regulations that were published on Monday.
Although the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s draft rules last year included references to abortion, the law passed in December 2022 with strong bipartisan support in Congress sparked controversy. The regulations offer guidance to employers and employees on how to carry out the law. According to the language, employees are entitled to request time off in order to get an abortion and recover from the procedure.
Despite criticism from some conservatives, the EEOC claims that keeping the abortion provisions in its final rules is consistent with both court decisions and its own long-standing interpretation of Title VII. According to the federal agency, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is likely to be used to grant time off for medical appointments or recovery, which is not remunerated for abortions. It also states that employers or employer-sponsored health plans are not required by the new law to pay for abortion-related expenses.
Under the act, most employers with 15 or more workers must make “reasonable accommodations” for a worker’s known limitations relating to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, including, in certain cases, fertility and infertility treatments, unless doing so would put an undue burden on the employer. Effective on June 18, the EEOC’s regulations will be implemented.
The new law was hailed by labor advocates as being especially important for women of color, who are more likely to work in physically demanding, low-wage jobs and who frequently face discrimination in the workplace, including being denied time off for medical appointments and the freedom to sit or stand. Prominent business associations backed the legislation as well, pointing out the need for clarification regarding the accommodations that employers must provide to expectant employees.
EEOC Chair Charlotte A. said, “No one should have to risk their job for their health just because they are pregnant, recovering from childbirth, or dealing with a related medical condition.”. Burrows on Monday.
However, following the agency’s initial August release of its proposed rule for a month-long public comment period, Republican lawmakers and anti-abortion activists criticized the EEOC for including abortion. Proponents of abortion rights, on the other hand, praised the clause as crucial during a period when abortion rights have been restricted in numerous states after the U. S. the Roe v. Supreme Court ruling in 2022. Wade. Three Democrats and two Republicans make up the EEOC’s commissioner corps.
Mr. Leading Republican advocate of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Law, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, charged on Monday that the Biden administration was using the legislative process in a “shocking and illegal” way to further its political goals. According to the conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, the Biden administration is attempting to “smuggle an abortion mandate” into the legislation.
The American Civil Liberties Union, however, praised the EEOC in comments filed with the organization for “recognizing that abortion has for decades been approved under the law as a’related medical condition’ to pregnancy that entitles workers to reasonable accommodations, including time off to obtain abortion care.”. “.
The EEOC reported that while 54,000 comments urged the commission to leave abortion out of its definition of a medical condition related to pregnancy, it also received 40,000 comments in favor of the inclusion of abortion. The commission listed multiple federal cases to support its view that abortion is a pregnancy-related condition worthy of protection, even though it acknowledged that both parties were expressing “sincere, deeply held convictions.”.
The new regulations go into great depth about the kinds of accommodations that expectant employees can ask for, ranging from a brief release from labor-intensive tasks like heavy lifting to provisions for morning sickness.
Proponents of women’s rights had long pushed for the legislation, claiming that the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act did not provide sufficient protection for expectant employees. During a period when pregnant women were frequently denied employment or forced out of it, the 1978 law, which modified Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawed discrimination based on pregnancy and signaled a significant change for gender equality.
However, the act only stipulated that pregnant workers must be treated similarly to other employees, not that they deserved special consideration. Therefore, in order to receive workplace accommodations, pregnant women had to show that coworkers had received similar benefits for comparable needs. As per A Better Balance, who is among the most vocal advocates for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, many women were forced to quit their jobs or work in unsafe conditions because they couldn’t meet the burden of proof.
According to the new law, pregnant employees have the same right to accommodations so they can continue working, just like employees with disabilities. In the event that employers reject requests for modifications, they are required to provide evidence of “undue hardship.”.
Annually, the EEOC handles between 2,000 and 4,000 charges of pregnancy discrimination, many of which involve denial of accommodations at work. Two-thirds of pregnancy discrimination cases that followed the 2015 Supreme Court ruling had courts find that employers were permitted to refuse accommodations under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, according to a Better Balance study.
The EEOC “has issued robust final regulations that appropriately recognize the broad scope of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act,” said Dina Bakst, co-president of A Better Balance, in a prepared statement.
. “.
