Pregnancy Termination and Language

What is the name of your state?Texas

My wife got terminated recently. They claim she was laid off. The company recently filed for bankruptcy protection. They are laying off a great deal of people. However, here is the difference with my wife's situation.

She is pregnant. The company has in the past agreed to let expecting mothers not perform x rays due to the radiation and the health of the baby. With that said, when they terminated her, they never gave her an explantion of why she was laid off. They asked her 2 questions before they let her go. They let her know that the one spot they had left was between her and another person that was being paid considerably less than her. The two questions were, "Will you perform xrays?" Her response was, "Not as long as I am pregnant. Just like they have granted other expectant mothers."
The second questions was, "Do you speak Spanish?" Her reply was "No"
Then she gets a call 20 minuets later that she is being terminated.
We feel that she was terminated for her pregnancy and also possibly that she did not know Spanish. Interesting in the fact that she has been with the company for 7 years and Spanish was never an issue before. Shouldn't they have given her an opportunity to learn? Is there any recourse we can take for wrongful termination?

Any advice would be appreciated!!!

She is not being laid off because she is pregnant. She is being laid off because of there is only one job opening and two people; the other person can perform x-rays and she can't.

What they've done in the past, before the bankrupcy, is irrelevant. They have no obligation to give her the only remaining job and then excuse her from one of the primary duties. They have no legal obligation to give her a chance to learn Spanish; that's not something she can pick up in two weeks. And for all you or she knows, they have a new job opening coming up for which Spanish is a pre-requisite and they wanted to know if she would be a fit for it. And there's nothing illegal about firing someone because they can't speak Spanish; speaking Spanish is not limited to any particular racial group. I know plenty of people who speak Spanish but are not Hispanic in origin.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing a wrongful term case.

Thanks

Thanks you for your advice. That clears it up for me. I was curious.

While I'm pretty sure that CBG is right, the EEOC guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination says:

"An employer may not single out pregnancy related conditions for special procedures to determine an employee's ability to work.

Click to expand...

I can see both sides of this; you may want to consult with an employment lawyer to make sure of your wife's rights here.

And what special procedures are you seeing here, Katy?

I am not seeing any special procedures, CBG, I am telling the poster that if he believes that his wife was termed because she couldn't take x-rays due to pregnancy than he may want to talk with some who can advise him, because I don't think it is fair or accurate to tell him that there is no chance that there was any discrimination involved with language like this in the law.

I don't recall saying there was no chance. I said that based on the facts he had posted, I didn't see any wrongful termination and I explained why.

If you don't think any special procedures apply, why did you post that quote?

I posted the quote because I am not sure whether it applies or not and I think it would be in the poster's best interest to check with an expert if he still feels that terming his pregnant wife because she couldn't take xrays could be was discriminatory.

Is there a form I had to fill out or something?

Huh?

I asked a question because I didn't understand what you were getting at. Why so antagonistic all of a sudden?

I didn't mean to be antagonistic, I thought you were barking at me. Anyway, what is your take on the meaning of the "special procedure" statement? I honestly don't know exactly what that means.

Are you 2 going to hot oil wrestle?

Sorry, HG, maybe someone else will hot oil wrestle for you.

Katy, it means that they can't ask a pregnant woman to follow a different standard than someone who is not pregnant when determining whether or not she is eligible to work; for example, if they don't ask someone with pneumonia or a broken leg to bring in a doctor's note after an absence of two days, they can't ask a pregnant woman to bring in a doctor's note after an absence of two days.

You're right, of course, but I think there is a chance it MAY also be stating that it would be unlawful to fire an employee by focusing on one job function that she cannot do while pregnant, like doing xrays, when that may be an incidental job function or easily handled by another employee. I don't know the importance of doing xrays to the poster's job, and I don't know if this is incidental or not. But, I don't have experience with preganancy cases and I would have to spend more time researching this than I have during midterms so I mentioned checking with someone who is able to give personal legal advice on this. I'm still not sure it's a bad idea.

edited to add: HG you goon, in your dreams.

Katy, I don't mean this as a put down, okay? It's just an observation.

You are somewhat prone to make assumptions of things not in the posts. The law as regards job functions and pregnancy are extremely complicated when it comes to job functions that would be dangerous to pregnancy. But in this case, with the information we've been provided, it's fairly straightforward. There is one job. There are two candidates. One can do the job and one can't. It's hardly discrimination to retain the one who can. And what of the other candidate? What's fair to her? I can see her making a post later; I got laid off in favor of a co-worker who isn't even able to do all the job functions, when I can, but they kept her on instead of me because she's pregnant. What would you be saying to her with regards to fairness?

With all due respect, while I'm not an EEOC investigator I've been doing this for a living for 25 years. Of course the poster is welcome to talk to an attorney any time he likes; I've never told a poster not to speak to legal counsel. But I'm hardly inexperienced at this and I wish you'd remember that. I'm not doing research on an unfamiliar subject while simultaneously studying for midterms - this is what I do for living.

We can only answer the questions based on the information we have; not on what we assume might be behind the question. You know what assumptions do.

"If an employee is temporarily unable to perform her job due to pregnancy, the employer must treat her the same as any other temporarily disabled employee; for example, by providing modified tasks, alternative assignments, disability leave or leave without pay."

CBG, it's entirely appropriate to question whether or not the decsion to terminate was based on the employee's temporary and pregnancy-related inability to perform one job function. I am not comfortable with answering the poster and not mentioning this.

rreed, if the decision was made because your wife doesn't speak Spanish it is completely legal. If the decision was made because your wife is pregnant or is temporarily unable to take xrays it may or may not be legal. There are too many other issues that could factor in here for me, anyway, to advise you that this action was a wrongful termination or not.