Pregnancy Discrimination?

[rrwatson04]

Good afternoon, I am posting on this board hoping to get some clarification before seeking legal advice. I am currently employed at a behavioral health clinic as a behavioral health tech. I am currently 34 weeks pregnant. I was working 1-2 days a week for 12 hour days for 40+ hours weekly and when I asked for shorter shifts/sessions my HR rep requested a doctors note be submitted. I gave my supervisor and the HR rep the doctors note which recommends no longer than an 8 hour work day or 45lbs be lifted. My HR rep has now taken away all of my clients and reduced my hours to 15 hours weekly. The HR rep states that the reduction is due to minimum requirements needed to do the job ( lift 45 lbs) as well as a safety issue with one of the kids (3-7) potentially hitting my stomach which is a safety concern. When I asked if I could do admin or mod duty the HR rep said those duties are only for individuals who were hurt on the job; if what the HR rep is saying is accurate than fine, I'll press on but something just does not sound right. The HR rep also gave me a weird metaphor about meeting the minimum requirements being the same as if I were blind which did not make sense to me. Any response would be greatly appreciated. thank you for your time.

 

[cbg]

Sounds right to me. Technically, you are not entitled to any accommodation at all since pregnancy is not considered a disability under the ADA, but it sounds as if they're accepting it as a disability and holding you to the same requirements as any other disabled employee. While not a law, it is quite common, and quite legal for light desk duty to be limited to those who have workers comp claims.

I'm not seeing any discrimination here. You wanted an accommodation; they gave you one even though they didn't have to. They're not treating you differently - they're expecting you to follow the same requirements as anyone else with an accommodation. Nothing in the ADA or any other law says you have to get the accommodation you want or even the one the doctor recommends; only one that works. What did you think the law was going to expect them to do?

 

[Zigner]

What US state?

 

[HRZ]

State matters

Cbg knows far more than I on topic ....but I'm not sure what you mean about hours .. I read your post to say you ordinarily worked 40+ hours a week , sometimes 1-2 days of up to 12 hours...but clearly full time .....and you were cut to 15 hours?

And I'm not following the 45 lb point..what is the general lifting requirement if any in the job description of health tech. I read it as your doctor wants a 45 lb limit and 45 is required on the job ...but I doubt that is what you mean.

( If pregnant women were at risk with little tikes , perhaps they should not be allowed to be teachers in preK-6 ...don't laugh..such mentality existed 50 years ago )

 

[Zigner]

( If pregnant women were at risk with little tikes , perhaps they should not be allowed to be teachers in preK-6 ...don't laugh..such mentality existed 50 years ago )

You obviously have no idea of what being a behavioral health technician at a behavioral health clinic for troubled children entails...if you did, then you'd understand that your analogy is so far off base that it's not even in the same ballpark.

 

[HRZ]

Well...perhaps ..but try a special ed class in Elementary level . ...some of the kids are one on one with full time aids ...most of which are female .

 

[Zigner]

Well...perhaps ..but try a special ed class in Elementary level . ...some of the kids are one on one with full time aids ...most of which are female .

That is much different than a standard Pre-K thru 6 elementary classroom. Additionally, if the kids are at a behavioral health center, their troubles are likely as bad as, if not worse than, what you'll experience even in most special ed classes.

(Just so you know, I have a great deal of first-hand knowledge about this matter.)

 

[HRZ]

We have not ruled out the application of Pregnancy Discrimination Act or any state laws which might address pregnancy nor has OP responded as to state or actual hours worked and how the weight requirement actually applies to her and others.

Were I in OPs shoes I'd be wanting more legal input.

I'm looking at what seems to be a massive pay cut equivalent to constructive dismissal just because she asked for mediical accommodations as to no long shifts and not more than 45 lb lifting ...but perhaps I'm not reading it right.

 

[HRZ]

My experience with special ed classes is a bit limited ...and because we could not lock doors , ones ability to anticipate a child's moves or being able to run faster than child who was intent on " escape " was perhaps more important than ones ability to take a punch . ..but my mother who worked with behavior problem young adults would often come home with bruises and bite marks

 

[Zigner]

My experience with special ed classes is a bit limited ...and because we could not lock doors , ones ability to anticipate a child's moves or being able to run faster than child who was intent on " escape " was perhaps more important than ones ability to take a punch . ..but my mother who worked with behavior problem young adults would often come home with bruises and bite marks

To be frank - we lived that every day. Additionally, my wife was an aid for SED kids for several years.

 

[cbg]

The OP wanted an accommodation; she got an accommodation.

At the OP's employer, accommodations come with safety restrictions. The safety restrictions were put into place for her, just the same as they would for any other employee who asked for an accommodation.

She got treated exactly the same as any other employee in the same circumstances - which is exactly what the Pregnancy Discrimination laws say is supposed to happen. She's being held to the same line as any other employee in her situation.

Tell me how that becomes illegal discrimination.

 

[rrwatson04]

I live in CO. the accommodations are being made for workers who are hurt on the job but not being applied to me who is pregnant? how is that not pregnancy discrimination. The company is literally saying " you get hurt on the job you can maintain your hours via admin"..."you get pregnant? we cut your outs or you can take unpaid leave and were not offering you the same hours as workers hurt on the job" cbg how am i being treated the same in this situation?.... the 45 lb rule is something the company sets as a minimum standard while working on the floor. I understand them taking me off of seeing clients but not being offered to work admin duty at the same hours, which they offer employees who hurt them selves on the job, is what is bothering me... cbg for you to say pregnancy discrimination isnt covered under ADA is false...i did 5 minutes of google searches and found that many pregnancy related issues are covered under ADA, ... thanks to all who have replied and tried to be productive and help me! i look forward to reading more responses. I've also contacted a lawyer just so I can have it explained to me better and will post back here once i know more. thanks again!

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

There is a difference wit those employees injured on the job. You need to compare yourself with people injured NOT on the job.

 

[Zigner]

They have to offer you a reasonable accommodation, but they don't have to displace another worker in order to do so, as that would not be reasonable.

 

[HRZ]

Provided she got treated the same way ..then that's all PDA requires ....but a massive cut in hours ? Apparently she meets the 45 lb allowable weight lifting ?

I'm in full understanding that light duty for work related injuries need not be extended to other personnel issues....but it best be consistent ! .

I get it that pregnant persons might pose special risks with disruptive behavior clients ...but the only person I personally know severly injured by a disruptive client is a 6'2 male nurse who was tackled from behind ..and his brains are rather permanently scrambled after hitting concrete floor....some of this becomes darned if you do ..darned if you don't.