Maternity Leave Policy - Discrimination?

[brandej2]

My Firm has two policies - one for attorneys and one for everyone else. Attorneys get 8 weeks paid and can use their PTO but don't have to. Everyone else has to use their PTO and then pay into short term disability if they want to.

I find this to be disgusting and appalling and clearly it sends a poor message but is it discrimination? Can you discriminate against certain job roles?

 

[Zigner]

First - what US state?

Second - what is so "disgusting"? If you want a job with better perquisite, then go find one.

 

[brandej2]

Ohio.

First, It's disgusting that a company thinks it's acceptable to grant one type of leave to their predetermined "higher worth" individuals than to another.

Second, had I not been lied to upon joining the organization I would have known of this discrepancy and chosen not to join the company in the first place.

 

[Zigner]

First, It's disgusting that a company thinks it's acceptable to grant one type of leave to their predetermined "higher worth" individuals than to another.

Why? Truly, your position in this respect is baffling to me.

Second, had I not been lied to upon joining the organization I would have known of this discrepancy and chosen not to join the company in the first place.

Again, if you would like better perqs, then you are free to seek employment elsewhere.

EDIT: Perhaps you can become an attorney and get those coveted paid days off...

 

[brandej2]

I asked a simple question: is it discrimination or not. I didn't come here to be belittled.

How is my pregnancy less important or valued than any other woman's pregnancy? What does pregnancy have anything to do with a role within an organization?

And thank you for the advice. I am working on it but none of that was part of my original question.

 

[Zigner]

Your employer's policy sounds perfectly legal. Again, if you want the time off to be paid, and if you want to continue working at that firm, just become an attorney and, voila, your problem is solved.

 

[eerelations]

While your employer's policy is indeed discriminatory, it isn't illegally so. For a policy of this type to be illegal it would have to be based specifically and directly on protected classes such as race, gender, disability, age and/or religion. Nothing in your posts indicates that this policy is based on protected classes like these. In law, "attorneys" and "the rest of us" are not protected classes.

 

[not2cleverRed]

I asked a simple question: is it discrimination or not. I didn't come here to be belittled.

How is my pregnancy less important or valued than any other woman's pregnancy? What does pregnancy have anything to do with a role within an organization?

And thank you for the advice. I am working on it but none of that was part of my original question.

It is not your pregnancy that is "less important of valued". Rather, it is your skill set, put bluntly, that is less valued.

Your employer deems that your skill set is more easily replaceable with a new hire than what an attorney has to offer. That may be a correct or foolish estimation on their part.

 

[cbg]

Legally, it IS acceptable.

This is NOT illegal discrimination. If your understanding is that all employees must be offered exactly the same benefits, you are mistaken. It is common and it is legal for benefits to be determined by job position. You are free to consider it "disgusting" if you like, but nothing in your employer's policy violates any laws or rights that are protected under the law.

 

[Taxing Matters]

My Firm has two policies - one for attorneys and one for everyone else. Attorneys get 8 weeks paid and can use their PTO but don't have to. Everyone else has to use their PTO and then pay into short term disability if they want to.

I find this to be disgusting and appalling and clearly it sends a poor message but is it discrimination? Can you discriminate against certain job roles?

It is certainly discrimination. Any distinction made between two people or groups of people is discrimination. For example, a company preferring to hire candidates who have a college degree over those who do not is discrimination in favor of college graduates. But preferring college graduates is not illegal discrimination. Nor, in most cases, is treating employees differently based on their job position illegal discrimination either. For example, it is pretty common in large corporations for the company CEO and other senior officers to get vastly better pay and benefits than, say, the telemarketing agents or custodial staff. There is nothing illegal about that.

Similarly, it is not illegal for a law firm to give its attorneys better perks and benefits than the support staff or for a medical practice to give the doctors better perks and benefits than nurses or office support staff.

What it comes down to is that those with the more specialized or in demand skills have more bargaining power and employers have to provide them better pay and benefits than other employees if they want to get those highly skilled people to work for them. You'll find this sort of thing is very common. If you want to get the better pay and benefits then you want to get yourself into a career where you are in demand enough that employers will give you the higher pay and benefits.

 

[NeilTheCop]

Ohio.

First, It's disgusting that a company thinks it's acceptable to grant one type of leave to their predetermined "higher worth" individuals than to another.

Second, had I not been lied to upon joining the organization I would have known of this discrepancy and chosen not to join the company in the first place.

But I take it you read, agreed with and signed the contract. Now; having found out that others have a better contract, you are complaining that it's not fair.
If you had later found that your contract was far better than others in the firm, would you still cry "discrimination"; or keep very quiet?

 

[justalayman]

I asked a simple question: is it discrimination or not. I didn't come here to be belittled.

How is my pregnancy less important or valued than any other woman's pregnancy? What does pregnancy have anything to do with a role within an organization?

And thank you for the advice. I am working on it but none of that was part of my original question.

Do you believe that every employee at every level in every company must receive the same benefits? It is common for management to receive very different benefits than the Tom dick or Harry that slogs through the day to day laboring they do. It is common for the highest levels of administration to receive different benefit packages than management or the common employee. Your situation is no different. A company is allowed to provide different pay and benefit packages than other employee groups.

 

[Zigner]

But I take it you read, agreed with and signed the contract. Now; having found out that others have a better contract, you are complaining that it's not fair.
If you had later found that your contract was far better than others in the firm, would you still cry "discrimination"; or keep very quiet?

What contract?

 

[eerelations]

What I want to know is what lies the organization told the OP when she was thinking about accepting their job offer? Did they actually say to her "oh yes, we offer the exact same maternity benefits to all our employees, no matter what level they're at"? (Not that this would make any difference, what her employer is doing is still legal, even if they lied about it - but really, is that what they said to her?)

 

[cbg]

All I can say is, if the OP ends up quitting over this "disgusting" practice, she's going to be in for a rude shock when she gets out into the real world and finds out how common it is.