EEOC Finds American Airlines Policy towards Pregnant Women Violates Federal Discrimination Laws

American Airlines worker forced to take unpaid leave while pregnant

New York (February 8, 2010) -

The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has issued a Determination that Angie Welfare was discriminated against based on sex when American Airlines sent her home in her eighth week of pregnancy in 2006, rather than allow her to fulfill her work responsibilities in a less strenuous job.  Ms. Welfare, a working mother and 15 year employee of American Airlines (“AA”), is employed at JFK as a fleet services clerk in AA’s Cargo Division.  The ruling has the potential to impact American Airlines workers across the nation. 

 

American Airlines has a “light-duty” program for employees who are injured on the job. AA, however does not allow pregnant women at JFK to use that benefit. EEOC determined that AA’s policy discriminates on the basis of sex, because it “treats women with pregnancy-related restrictions differently from employees with non-pregnancy-related job restrictions.”

 

“Women should not have to decide between keeping their job or taking care of their health and the health of their baby, but that’s exactly what American Airlines forced Ms. Welfare to do,” says Irasema Garza, president of Legal Momentum, the women’s legal defense and education fund, which co-represents Ms. Welfare with Deborah Karpatkin, a New York City employment rights attorney.

 

During her pregnancy, Angie Welfare’s doctor restricted her to lifting no more than ten pounds, but said that she was able to continue to work with small adjustments to her prior job responsibilities.  Ms. Welfare asked AA for an assignment to “light duty” consistent with her doctor’s instructions.  Instead, AA told Ms. Welfare that she had to punch out and go home.    Ms. Welfare told management repeatedly that she was “very healthy and especially fit,” but AA nevertheless sent her home without pay, and refused to assign Ms. Welfare to available jobs that required little lifting.   

 

“Over the past few years, we have seen an increase in employers who refuse to apply their “light-duty” policies to pregnant women,” states Michelle Caiola, Senior Staff Attorney at Legal Momentum, co-counsel for Ms. Welfare.  “First and foremost, this is a blatant violation of Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, because it treats pregnant workers worse than other workers,” she says.  Caiola continues, “In addition to being illegal, it is also unjust.  It denies capable female workers a paycheck just when they need financial security the most – before the birth of a child.” 

           

“This Determination has the potential to impact many more people than Angie   Welfare and her family,” said Deborah Karpatkin, a New York City employment rights attorney, co-representing Welfare.  “Light Duty policies like this can discourage women from taking and keeping these higher paying physically demanding jobs in their child-bearing years. “  She adds: “A successful outcome could help other female AA employees, and their families, not just at JFK, but nationwide.“

 

After the birth of Ms. Welfare’s baby, American Airlines congratulated her by sending a fruit basket.  “I didn’t need a fruit basket,” says Ms. Welfare, “I needed a job.”

 

EEOC will now attempt to conciliate a resolution of the case with Ms. Welfare and AA.  If no resolution is reached, the case could go forward in federal court.

 

Legal Momentum, the women’s legal defense and education fund, advances the rights of women by using the power of the law and creating innovative public policy in three broad areas: economic justice, freedom from gender-based violence and equality under the law.