Laws Lawyers Find Laws Legal Forms State Laws Bills
Home » Legal News » Texas Lactation Case Sets Stage for Breastfeeding Battle

Texas Lactation Case Sets Stage for Breastfeeding Battle

December 04, 2012 08:23pm  
Do women have the right to bring a breast pump to work in order to feed an infant at home?That's the question being posed to a court of appeals in Texas this month after a woman was fired from her job because she told her boss that she planned to pump breast milk at work after returning from pregnancy leave. The case, EEOC v. Houston Funding II, Ltd., involves a debt collection firm where Donnicia Ventners was employed.Ventners had worked for Houston Funding for two years when she gave birth to her daughter in December of 2008.She had a caesarean section delivery and informed her workplace that her doctor would not allow her to return to work until an infection of her incision had healed. When Ventners called about returning to the office following her pregnancy leave, she asked upper managers at the company whether she could pump breast milk in a private back office space.According to management at the company, however, they had already assumed that Ventners had abandoned her job and would not be returning.She was informed of this only at the time when she asked about pumping breast milk, not before. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the company under two different anti-discrimination statutes.The first, Title VII, is the typical statute used to protect women from sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace.The second is the Pregnancy Discrimination Act or PDA, which guarantees women the right not to be discriminated against in the workplace due to pregnancy or childbirth. The case hit a significant roadblock at the district court level, where a judge decided that lactation discrimination was not prohibited by either Title VII or the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.According to the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions are all covered, but the judge ruled that after the day when Ventners gave birth, “she was no longer pregnant and her pregnancy related conditions ended.” This ruling struck many attorneys in the area of women's rights as being very likely to be overturned on appeal.The case was dubbed “The Great Texas Lactation Case” by a number of court watchers, and on appeal the judge so far has rejected arguments that breastfeeding is not in fact a pregnancy related condition.Instead of arguing that lactation discrimination itself is acceptable, the attorneys for the debt collection firm are now arguing that discrimination due to a breast pump is not the same as discrimination due to breastfeeding or lactation itself. Ventners's case has still not been decided on the appellate level.The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has maintained throughout court proceedings that breastfeeding is clearly a pregnancy related condition, and that regular expression of breast milk with a breast pump can be necessary to prevent discomfort and significant illnesses in breastfeeding mothers.The EEOC's position is that lactation discrimination is still illegal against employers nationwide under the provisions of the PDA and Title VII. Sources: eeoc.gov, uscourts.gov
Loading...
  • Play
  • Pause
  • Volume:
  • Mute
  • Half
  • Max
  • Texas Lactation Case Sets Stage for Breastfeeding Battle

     

    Do women have the right to bring a breast pump to work in order to feed an infant at home?  That's the question being posed to a court of appeals in Texas this month after a woman was fired from her job because she told her boss that she planned to pump breast milk at work after returning from pregnancy leave.

    The case, EEOC v. Houston Funding II, Ltd., involves a debt collection firm where Donnicia Ventners was employed.  Ventners had worked for Houston Funding for two years when she gave birth to her daughter in December of 2008.  She had a caesarean section delivery and informed her workplace that her doctor would not allow her to return to work until an infection of her incision had healed.

    When Ventners called about returning to the office following her pregnancy leave, she asked upper managers at the company whether she could pump breast milk in a private back office space.  According to management at the company, however, they had already assumed that Ventners had abandoned her job and would not be returning.  She was informed of this only at the time when she asked about pumping breast milk, not before.

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the company under two different anti-discrimination statutes.  The first, Title VII, is the typical statute used to protect women from sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace.  The second is the Pregnancy Discrimination Act or PDA, which guarantees women the right not to be discriminated against in the workplace due to pregnancy or childbirth.

    The case hit a significant roadblock at the district court level, where a judge decided that lactation discrimination was not prohibited by either Title VII or the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.  According to the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions are all covered, but the judge ruled that after the day when Ventners gave birth, “she was no longer pregnant and her pregnancy related conditions ended.”

    This ruling struck many attorneys in the area of women's rights as being very likely to be overturned on appeal.  The case was dubbed “The Great Texas Lactation Case” by a number of court watchers, and on appeal the judge so far has rejected arguments that breastfeeding is not in fact a pregnancy related condition.  Instead of arguing that lactation discrimination itself is acceptable, the attorneys for the debt collection firm are now arguing that discrimination due to a breast pump is not the same as discrimination due to breastfeeding or lactation itself.

    Ventners's case has still not been decided on the appellate level.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has maintained throughout court proceedings that breastfeeding is clearly a pregnancy related condition, and that regular expression of breast milk with a breast pump can be necessary to prevent discomfort and significant illnesses in breastfeeding mothers.  The EEOC's position is that lactation discrimination is still illegal against employers nationwide under the provisions of the PDA and Title VII.

    Sources: eeoc.gov, uscourts.gov

    Comments

    Must Read

    Affirmative Action Explained Affirmative Action Explained
    People who are interested in the question of “What is affirmative action?” should refer specifically to the legislative history of the United States, in which affirmative action was first conceived and implemented as a means of reversing the effects of systemic discrimination in the educational and employment arenas with respect to members of groups deemed to be underprivileged.
    Civil Law Civil Law
    Civil law refers to the general category for legal systems derived or descended from the framework of laws through which the Roman Empire was administered.
    Direct Discrimination vs. Indirect Discrimination Direct Discrimination vs. Indirect Discrimination
    The concept of discrimination as an offense and a meaningful ground for legal action and remedy is understood in the legal system of the United Kingdom as being split into two specific subjects: direct discrimination and indirect discrimination.
    What are Civil Rights? What are Civil Rights?
    Civil rights are a basic category of human rights afforded to and held by all people according to the modern legal and political theory of the last few hundred years.
    Tips