UPS was forced to change its thinking on pregnant workers. The new female Postmaster General is likely to agree
By Don Cheney
United Parcel Service has reversed its discriminatory policy on pregnant workers effective January 1st, 2015. They will treat pregnant workers like workers with an on-the-job injury. When will the Postal Service change their policy? Will it be after they pay out millions of more $$$? I see a potential EEO class action for pregnant USPS employees similar to the Glover/Albrecht v. Potter and Pittman v. Donahoe cases.
In the Department of Justice’s brief on behalf of the EEOC, it said:
The Department of Justice, on behalf of the United States Postal Service, has previously taken the position that pregnant employees with work limitations are not similarly situated to employees with similar limitations caused by on-the-job injuries. See, e.g., Ensley-Gaines v. Runyon, 100 F.3d 1220, 1222 (6th Cir. 1996). That is no longer the position of the United States. The United States Postal Service continues to offer different treatment to employees with on-the-job injuries than to employees with pregnancy-related limitations and employees with disabilities more generally. In light of the EEOC’s new guidance, the enactment of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 100-325, 122 Stat. 3553, and the pendency of this case, the Postal Service is considering its options with respect to those policies.
As a retired person that helps disabled postal workers, I am struck by the many postal managers who are unaware of the changes since Ensley-Gaines v. Runyon in 1996. The Department of Justice mentioned them in their brief. The USPS failure to adapt to changes in the Rehabilitation Act/ADA law was cited by the EEOC judge in the Pittman v. Donahoe EEO class action case settled earlier this year. The
USPS Handbook EL-307 – Reasonable Accommodation, An Interactive Process PDF | HTM has not been updated since 2008.
Pregnancy alone is not considered an illness or injury, unless there are medical complications. That’s why there is a separate box to checkmark on the back of PS Form 3971, Leave Request. Articles 2 and 13 of the collective bargaining agreements should be updated to include the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.
Don Cheney
Auburn WA
What if they got pregnant at work while on the clock?
You will play hell getting the USPS to change anything that is beneficial to the workers….damn the cost. They actually budget money (and lots of it) each year to pay out grievance settlements for things they willingly violate then want to blame the Union and employees for costing the company millions. I would like to see the actual numbers on how much it would save for them to just follow the rules THEY agreed to!
If you have an “ax wound”, the postal service will provide light duty work. If you don’t have the ax wound, you get to go home on sick leave. That is the usps policy in a nut-shell…
The Postal Service will not make the change, until they shell out tons of money.
Only then, will they consider making a change.
It’s Obamas fault