Pregnancy Discrimination
Part of the Title VII of the Civil  Rights Act is the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). The focus of a PDA  claim is whether an employer’s policy treats pregnant workers less  favorably than it treats non-pregnant workers who are similar in their  ability or inability to work; or whether an employer subjects a pregnant  worker to a materially adverse employment action, including a hostile  work environment, because of pregnancy.  
PROMPT
Analyze and discuss the attached Case  Study according to federal discrimination law.  In your main post  include the answers to the following:
   Cite with hyperlink (so as to  share for everyone) at least one federal court case of similar facts  that is no older than 2018 and use in your discussion. (Similar facts  means adverse employment action, such as being demoted or reassigned  with lower pay, or terminated from employment, because of pregnancy.)   Suggested search databases:  Google Scholar, Findlaw, Justia
2.    What is meant by “pretext for discrimination?”
3.    What do you see as possible evidence of discrimination by the employer in the Case Study?
4.     Based on this Case Study, explain at least one recommendation that  is a take-away lesson for management in employment practice
ANSWER
1. Federal Court Case with Similar Facts:
One notable case is “Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.” (2015). In this case, the plaintiff, Peggy Young, claimed that UPS violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) by not providing her with light-duty work when she became pregnant. The Supreme Court’s decision in favor of Young clarified that a policy or practice that imposes a significant burden on pregnant employees and is not sufficiently justified can be considered pregnancy discrimination.
2. “Pretext for Discrimination:”
“Pretext for discrimination” refers to a situation where an employer provides an explanation or reason for an adverse employment action (e.g., demotion, reassignment, termination) that, upon investigation, appears to be a false or misleading justification for discriminatory behavior. In pregnancy discrimination cases, pretext may occur when the employer claims a legitimate reason for the adverse action but, upon scrutiny, it is evident that the action was taken because of the employee’s pregnancy.
3. Possible Evidence of Discrimination:
Evidence of discrimination in pregnancy-related cases can include:
Differential treatment: Treating pregnant employees less favorably than non-pregnant employees in similar situations.
Hostile work environment: Creating a work atmosphere that is hostile, unwelcoming, or offensive to pregnant employees.
Disparate impact: When a seemingly neutral policy disproportionately affects pregnant employees and lacks a legitimate, non-discriminatory justification.
Possible evidence may include documentation of adverse actions taken against the pregnant employee, inconsistent application of company policies, and statements or comments indicating bias against pregnant individuals.
4. Take-Away Lesson for Management:
Based on cases like “Young v. UPS” and the broader context of pregnancy discrimination, a critical lesson for management is to ensure that policies and practices are applied consistently and fairly. Managers should:
Understand the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and its requirements.
Ensure that pregnant employees are treated equally and provided with reasonable accommodations if necessary.
Train HR and supervisory staff to recognize and prevent pregnancy discrimination.
Implement clear and non-discriminatory policies related to pregnancy, maternity leave, and accommodations.
Document all employment actions and decisions thoroughly to demonstrate non-discrimination.
By doing so, employers can mitigate the risk of legal action and create a more inclusive and equitable workplace for pregnant employees.