The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), a bipartisan bill aimed at protecting pregnant women from workplace discrimination, has sparked a legal challenge from a coalition of GOP state attorneys general. The crux of the dispute lies in the interpretation of the act’s provisions related to abortion as a related medical condition.
The legal challenge against PWFA
Attorneys general from 19 states argue that the Biden administration’s inclusion of abortion accommodations in the PWFA oversteps federal authority, especially in states where abortion is illegal. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has classified abortion as a medical condition that warrants reasonable accommodations from employers, such as time off for appointments or recovery. This has led to concerns among these states that business owners could face federal lawsuits for not accommodating abortions, even if they conflict with state laws.
What does the PWFA entail?
The PWFA requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations for limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. This includes fertility and infertility treatments but comes with restrictions if accommodations cause undue hardship to the employer. Despite the pushback, the EEOC maintains its stance, referencing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the subsequent 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act amendment that prohibits discrimination based on pregnancy.
The impact on women in the workplace
The PWFA represents a significant step in gender equality, particularly for pregnant women who have historically faced job denial or termination due to their condition. Advocates for the law highlight the importance of protecting women, especially those in low-wage and physically demanding roles, who are often denied basic accommodations. The story of Natasha Jackson, who lost her job due to pregnancy-related limitations, underscores the personal and financial hardships that can result from a lack of protection.
Support and opposition
While labor advocates and business groups support the PWFA for providing clarity on employer accommodations, the controversy continues with the legal challenge. Proponents like U.S. Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) argue that the EEOC cannot mandate abortion leave or require employers to provide abortions in violation of state law. EEOC Chair Charlotte A. Burrows emphasizes the importance of the act, stating that no one should have to choose between their job and their health during pregnancy.
The PWFA is set to take effect on June 18, with its implications for pregnant workers and employers still a subject of national debate.
