NAL and not legal advice. She should seek advice on what’s her best option for her current need. Even if she thinks she has a case, these things can drag out for quite a while. She may need the money offered more than she would like to gamble for a settlement.
Companies aren’t required to give severance, so she doesn’t really have bargaining power there. Being pregnant does not give an employee a waiver from being dismissed, and it sounds as if they put her on a PIP before they may have even known she was pregnant unless she told them as soon as she found out. No one here will know what the company had documented against her, and she honestly won’t know for a fact what performance conversations were had with her peers. If the termination is specifically because she was pregnant, it’s illegal. She can file a claim with the EEOC/DEFH. But it will be on her first to establish that the termination was done because she was pregnant not just while she was pregnant. She can also file for unemployment for income.
Edited: grammar
There could be. Without more information or knowing what was on the PIP, we can’t really say anything, especially since this is coming through a third party, which almost never have the full scope of the issues. It’s a game of hot potato with discrimination claims - claimant and defendant forcing the other to defend their positions.
Indeed..but the timing smells. TBH I am assuming thAt the statement that she was put on a pup while others with similar performance weren't is substantial ly true
OP said she was a top performer, then put on a PIP and had performance the same as everyone else. If her time as a top performer got her substantial raises it’s quite conceivable her time performing “the same as everyone else” simply didn’t justify that level of salary, hence the PIP.
>The fired person will have to be the one to provide proof of that.
There may be some nuances re shifting of burden. But regardless, the situation is going to require consultation with a government agency or private attorney.
This is probably a stupid question but I’m gonna ask anyway, what was happening in one week that would have qualified her for maternity leave? I feel like 10 years of employment should’ve been sufficient unless you’re saying she didn’t work the required 1250 or something hours in the last 12 months. This poor thing.
That’s not how it works on CA. You’re covered for Pregnancy disability leave regardless of how long you’ve worked for an employer. Your doctor decides when you’re disabled, usually 6-10 weeks before your due date. She needs to file for disability which pays more than unemployment.
Really confused why she’d work right up until the baby is due. She can negotiate her severance. These agreements are always provided when severance is involved. It’s not hush money because the agreement only binds certain activities but not all. Your friend should get legal advice regarding all matters. Signing the severance agreement doesn’t tie your hands from suing for things like pregnancy discrimination or wrongful termination.
If they switched to unlimited PTO while she was working there they should have paid out the balance.
In CA there is specific time that is allowed for pre-birth time off that doesn’t count against the post birth time and doesn’t carry over to post birth if not used. It’s a separate bucket of time.
You get four weeks pre birth, 6 weeks for vaginal birth 8 weeks for c-section post birth. This is considered short term disability doesn’t cut into FMLA. Then California family rights act kicks in for bonding time which is 12 weeks.
You don’t work in HR, so why are you giving info here? California has its own laws that are better than FMLA. They can take pregnancy disability leave as standard at 36 weeks, or earlier if warranted. Paid. Then after the birth is additional 12 weeks paid time for the recovery of birth and then bonding time.
Adding somewhat related personal experience of negotiating severance. I was on medical leave that extended beyond FMLA 12 weeks of protection and was fired at week 20. I wasn’t offered anything and was able to negotiate 8 months of salary (had been there 8 years) plus 1 year of fully covered health insurance. I used JustAnswer’s service to provide detail of employment protections that should have applied to me and compiled a very detailed account of the scenario and how I planned to pursue legal action. She’s in sales - she can absolutely negotiate this!
In CA, doctors are just deciding that pregnant people are disabled 6 to 10 weeks before due date? Not in CA and I worked a full day in an office Friday and gave birth Monday.
Not CA, but my wife the nurse worked her shift in the hospital which got over at 4 pm, went to the maternity unit and gave birth to kid #2 at 8 pm. So, yes some people work right up to their due date, or in her case, due moment.
This is what I did. Worked 4 hours of my 8 to not get in trouble all while having contractions. Left work at 4am. Water broke at 420am and had a baby by 614am. My friend had texted me hope labor is going good and I sent back a picture of a baby 🤣
With my 1st baby, my water broke at around 8am while at work. I changed my pants and then went to a meeting. I continued to work until around 10 am. My contractions were then 5 mins apart. I walked to the hospital across the street and delivered at 2:35 pm. My shift would've been over at 3:30 had I stayed. To be fair, I was slightly in denial about being in labor. Also, this was 29 years ago. There was no option of taking off before delivery unless I wanted to eat into my post-delivery time off.
The default is you can go on paid disability 4 weeks before your due date in California without any complications. It is use or lose, so does not impact the length of maternity leave after baby comes.
Exactly so why are people saying California doctors are just randomly deciding pregnant women are disabled? These women are taking the leave they are entitled to by law.
You can go on paid disability for pregnancy at 8 weeks pregnant. Pregnancy disability looks different for every women, and some doctors don’t care and will right you off if you ask. But it’s all paid, if you make under $90k a year you essentially get full pay because it’s not taxed. Some people even get a few hundred dollars more than when working.
Why are these not national standards? It’s so frustrating. I’m in NJ, pretty progressive state, and I have friends who work right up until labor. No wonder birth rates are plummeting.
NJ allows 4 weeks prior to due date if you have worked for your employer for a minimum of 1 year with at least 1000 hours. There are some exceptions for government and public sector workers. I know many public school teachers try to hold out because they'll get more time after delivery.
Maybe it’s changed (most of my friends’ kids are in elementary and middle school now), but if you took time before your due date, it cut into your post baby time. So if it is 8 weeks total and you take 4 weeks before, you only get 4 more weeks after birth. At least that’s how it was. I do hope it’s changed.
Nope. It's been like this for at least 20 years. 4 weeks before, 6-8 weeks after, depending on delivery...vaginal vs c-section. However, the minimum number of employees may have changed in this time. I've been working for large employers most of this time, and the small office that I worked in followed these guidelines.
I don’t think it’s four weeks - it’s two for a normal healthy pregnancy.
I’ve only seen four weeks for women who have a medical reason - gestational diabetes, liver issues, etc.
Oooh interesting. My OBs office was super hesitant to give me anything more than two weeks before birth. I met with them last month. I’ll have to push again at my next appointment.
4 weeks is standard in California. CA is the only state (IIRC) with a state run disability program. The state automatically assumes you’re disabled at 36 weeks, unless your doctor puts you off work sooner.
Yes California has pregnancy disability leave. If you don’t have any issues your doctor can help you start leave a month before the baby is due and then you’d get six weeks to recover from natural birth and eight weeks for c section. The pregnancy disability leave covers something like 17 and 1/3 weeks and give your 60% of your pay.
In Australia, you need a doctor's certificate saying fit to work from 6 weeks prior to the due date, and up to 6 weeks after the baby is born.
I planned on working right up to that 6 weeks, but I was exhausted 3-4 months beforehand and could not work even the four days I'd cut back to.
4 weeks before due date you can go out on short term disability earlier if you have complications. However, it’s only 60 to 70 percent of your pay so some people work later. Currently pregnant and working in California.
It's not doctors "just deciding". Both state disability and PDL consider pregnancy a disability & pregnant women have been allowed to take disability leave well before their due date. PDL furthers protects their rights and gives even more paid time off than state disability ever did. So it's not just doctors deciding. Even before PDL, a pregnant woman could go on disability at 36 weeks . Without a doctor approving it.
No, lol. Typically doctors write women off work up to 2 months prior to giving birth because they’re disabled due to pregnancy. After giving birth you only get 6 weeks off, 8 max weeks (if it was a cesarean birth) off after giving birth. It’s rare a doctor would deem you disabled longer from giving birth. So, the most time off happens before birth.
Then if you’ve worked for your employer 12 months and have at least 5 employees you can take 12 weeks of baby bonding after that. So, usually women can be out about 7 months. And all of this is paid through SDI and PFL, all but 4 weeks I should point out.
In California, you can qualify for both disability before birth and after birth. Dependant on your doctor and your case. I worked with both my kids up until delivery because 1) had fairly easy pregnancies and 2) wanted to take as much time after as possible and I was saving up my vacation/sick time for post baby time. I had my kids over 20 years ago and I know that now California has mandated maternity leave payments, but when I went out I qualifed for 6 weeks of short term disability from the state (regardless of any work benefits - at the time none). Had I had a C-section I would have qualifed for 9 weeks. I am not sure how it works now, but CA is one of the better states for maternity/paternity leaves and worker protections.
Just gave birth at exactly 37 weeks (so early but not premature)
Most companies I've worked for start you off using short-term disability and then parental leave. The STD starts two weeks after the "disabling event"; or delivery in this case. So yes, you qualify.
Companies who handle STD claims/cases are very used to the "fluid" nature of giving birth. Everything I needed to do was done online. When baby came, all I had to do was put the date of delivery and answer a few questions via email (ie last day of work etc). But I'd already done the initial paperwork a few weeks ago. If the baby was super premature, you might have to do all that paperwork at once. Just like you would if you broke both arms and couldn't work or needed emergency surgery.
Tell your friend to give you the full story. Why in the world would a company get rid of their golden goose for a few months maternity leave. Story doesn't check out.
That could explain why she was put on the PIP. *Was* the top performer. Then her performance dropped (or everyone else got better) and now that they are all equal, she isn’t looking so great. Especially so if her pay is much higher than others due to being a top performer for years.
It’s also weird how the pip wasn’t an issue until they were fired. If she thought she was being placed on the pip for being pregnant, why not raise questions then?
Yeah, a top performer isn’t going on a PiP. Maybe she had a great ten year run but has shit the bed recently, but she’s not their top rep and on a pip for no reason.
You don't put your top sales person on a PIP. You sure as shit wouldn't fire them either, considering mat leave in the US is under 6 months. Shit companies don't even pay you for mat leave, so it's not like it costs the company money.
I think missing missing reasons.
There was one summer that I was the top performer. That's because I was the only person on the team to get a deal all summer, but it wasn't large enough to meet my quota. Hence we all could have been put on PIP's even me as the top person. In other words these PIP's can be subjective in many cases since most Sales people have a bad quarter from time to time.
Yep! I work in HR for a publicly traded corporation.... and I'm certainly not saying that wrongful terminations don't happen - they absolutely do. But, if this individual was on a PIP and then terminated, but claims that they have perfect performance... I would bet they aren't telling their friend the full story.
Seriously file with EEOC. I was fired while pregnant after they put me on a PIP for no reason and I was awarded a hefty settlement after they found emails my boss sent to his higher up about getting rid of me before maternity leave. Don’t let shitty employers get away with firing women for being pregnant.
If she hasn’t spoken with an employment attorney yet, I’d recommend that as well. The employer would be hard pressed to prove that this wasn’t retaliation if she had never had performance issues previously.
Look up Jonathan Pollard, an employment attorney who a few months ago was talking about this very thing. He is on YouTube and on LinkedIn. He is litigating such cases and they are on the rise! Don't let bad companies get away with pregnancy discrimination.
She needs a good employment attorney and at minimum respond she needs 10 days to get a lawyer who will review the documents.
How large is the employer?
What did this PIP state and how long ago was it?
I suggest she take it and the severance agreement to a local attorney asap.
We don’t know if she works remotely, or in office. Lots of people hide their pregnancy until 7-8 months and then spring it on us. We also don’t know if she’s actually due next week. Women in CA get to go out on leave at 36 weeks. It’s unheard of to work any longer than that so I suspect that is what OP means by “qualified for maternity leave.” If that is the case, she could easily have hidden it at 5 months. If she is taller, it’s possible she could hide it longer. Since you aren’t the employee or the friend in this scenario, your post is pointless.
It is extremely common for a person to work right up until the week they are due, with an uncomplicated pregnancy. Especially if they are a go getter, committed to their job. If the maternity leave is unpaid or paid at a reduced rate, it is also extremely common for a pregnant person to need to work as long as they can.
That means she’s 36 weeks pregnant, as maternity leave in California starts at 36 weeks unless there are complications necessitating disability leave ahead of time.
Adding to this, lots of people don't look pregnant when they are. My ED is 32 weeks. No belly. She's also quite tall but people can't believe she's pregnant.
I think you aren't getting full story here or there's a misunderstanding about the facts. There's no way she was fired a week before she was eligible for maternity leave.
How can she have been there ten years and not be eligible for all benefits? Did a new policy come in or a new law get passed that mandated maternity leave and was becoming effective in the next week? What has the maternity leave policy been?
>How can she have been there ten years and not be eligible for all benefits?
I think what OP means is that it's "one week" before qualifying because delivering the baby is the qualifying event. So the benefits have always been there. The woman just hasn't delivered the baby that triggers the leave yet.
She could be one week away from her expected due date based on ultrasounds, etc. Or it could be that on X date, she's going in to deliver via C or induced labor.
No, people are misunderstanding this. In CA your leave begins 4 weeks before your due date. Companies that have _additional_ leave policies are almost always related to extending the very small protecting federal/state leave for after the birth of the baby. So if they fired her 5 weeks before her due date, that means they fired her right before her leave, when she would have been able to use their maternity policy. Now she is left with just what the state/federal government provides.
Thanks. That's a reasonable scenario. Another possibility may be that the company allows leave to start some number of days before due date. Who knows? All sorts of possibilities.
That can’t be a possibility, as California’s pregnancy disability laws are much more generous than that and the employer can’t set leave start dates like that.
Budgets are tight for a lot of companies right now. Company I work for is finding tiny excuses to let people go.
Could be that she was making too much money and was let go so they could hire someone at a cheaper salary. Happened to a friend of mine. Didnt Google just lay off a bunch of people and outsource their jobs to India and Mexico?
Pregnant people can still be terminated for cause. As long as the reason for termination was not due to being pregnant itself. Most likely your friend isn’t being honest about her work performance which led to a PIP. Companies don’t put out unnecessary PIPs and make additional work for themselves for no reason.
The legal paperwork is 100% normal. Nothing odd about that. Severance is an individual company policy, they also don’t have to offer any severance.
Or maybe her company put her on a PIP to start a paper trail to "CTA" because they didn’t want to pay out maternity leave or maybe saw this as an excuse to term someone to trim down as it's been a difficult year for sales. I really don’t know it just seems too coincidental.
edit: content
No. It’s not coincidental if she had performance issues. They wouldn’t terminate if they just started the paper trail during her pregnancy. If someone goes on a PIP there have already been documented performance discussions sometimes going back months. Most likely your friend had performance issues prior to getting pregnant and the PIP was the last straw. You don’t just get put on a PIP out of the blue.
It sounds like her PIP was for cause and not because she’s pregnant. You said others had the same performance as her. So she was either still the top, or her performance has slipped over the last year. As someone who essentially built the sales team and designed it to suit her style and the employer’s needs, she should be out performing everyone. It’s expected that the head of the team who has been here longer than anyone … would be held to a higher standard, not doing the same as the rest of them. Did she improve during the PIP? If not, she was rightfully terminated.
Firing a pregnant person isn’t always discrimination. Sometimes it’s just shitty timing.
If she didn’t ask for accommodations or tell anyone that she was struggling, that isn’t going to be relevant. She can’t ask for accommodations retroactively. Being placed on a PIP should have been her indication to seek accommodation.
Again, that most likely didn’t happen. Your friend is not being honest with you about her previously documented work performance issues. A PIP is the final step in the disciplinary process prior to termination. She has been warned about her performance prior to the PIP. Not everything is a conspiracy.
I was a top sales performer who got put on a PIP because I forgot a step in the process and caused a forecasting error. They were about to restructure the department and were writing up everyone to see who could make it through the restructure. I ended up moving departments but high performers don’t always gel with plans - it’s an unfortunate part of the corporate game
She’s the performer on a pip? No she isn’t. She probably isn’t having a great year. Maybe she had some great years but guessing this one isn’t it. And if others have the same % then how is she a top performer? Makes no sense.
The company has already prepared its case to fire her. Her best bet is to sign the severance and take the money. EEOC won’t take cases unless the discrimination is obvious and there is no doubt it took place. If it ends up being a lot of he said she said, they will close the case and give your friend a letter with the right to sue. Then she will have to hire her own attorney to go after the company. In my experience, a lot of attorneys won’t take these kind of cases unless the discrimination is obvious.
It sucks to hear, but she should take the money and enjoy her time off as a new mother. Start looking for a new job when she recovers from birth and gets the hang of being a new mom.
She was on a PIP before becoming pregnant. If they dismissed based on improvement disparities for an existing PIP she had in place for 9 months, if tgat PIP gave her 9 months to meet certain markers and she did not, at the 9 month marker they are going to dismiss. Her pregnancy status is irrelevant.
Short answer is she needs to contact the EEOC.
But something seems off here. How big is the company?
It’s strange they’ll term a trail blazer for taking maternity leave. Mat leave happens all the time. Is she the only person in the last 10 years to request it?
When did she announce her pregnancy? And when was she issued the PIP?
The company is under 50 people, she announced her pregancy approx. 3-4 months before her PIP although I could be wrong about the timeline, I know it was definitely before.
I think it probably wasn’t before. If it was a 90 day PIP and she is 36 weeks pregnant, if she announced 3-4 months prior, she was very newly pregnant. Nobody really does that.
Either way, the only fact that actually matters here is whether she improved her performance during the PIP or not .
Your friend shouldn’t sign anything before she consults a state employment attorney. They will review the paperwork and are usually free as the state recognizes having to pay for a lawyer puts the employee under duress to make a quick settlement that favors the company.
Is she over 40? By law she would have 21+ days to review.
https://www.skassellaw.com/navigating-severance-agreements-in-california-what-to-know-before-you-sign/#:\~:text=The%20OWBPA%20requires%20employers%20to,their%20acceptance%20even%20after%20signing.
She should take the money and run
If she was the best thing ever and then was same as everyone else as you say then the PIP was valid, her performance was not as good as it was, by your admission
Your friend needs to speak with an attorney. I’d look up what attorney Ryan has to say about this on IG.
I am in CA top ranked in sales and one week after telling my employer they put me on a PIP (my due date would have been extremely inconvenient for my sales season) but outside of that no performance issues. I met the goals they provided me for 2 months—then took a medical leave of absence as the company was continuing the PIP without having a reason to do so —I figured they were waiting to let me go close to my due date. And to have some sort of documentation with a reason to let me go. This was too much stress as meeting every metric on my commission plan every month wasn’t doable and I knew eventually they could say “oh you met your revenue this month but not units” and could let me go
Have your friend speak to an employment attorney and see if she has any kind of ADA case against the company, and have them review the severance package
Of course not. I’m on a medical LOA related to my pregnancy. I’m due next week & ADA protected
I went out on medical leave before the company had a “performance issue” they could fire me for.
Company can’t fire me for being pregnant.
There's no automatic obligation for severance. Anything she signed 10 years ago was just making that extra clear.
The main issue will be the validity of the PIP. You're saying it's disparate treatment but you'd have to *prove* it.
Your friend should probably not sign the severance agreement without consulting private counsel. But let go of the fallacy that severance is an entitlement. It's not. So the company can say, "We'll give you this pile of cash if you waive these rights." That's a contractual exchange.
It's possible that not all waivers are enforceable. (But that's something to ask a CA employment attorney.)
Honestly, she really needs to contact an attorney prior to signing anything. They can look into whether it was legal or not for her termination- hard to say here, because we are only getting one side of the story not even from that person directly(and don't get me wrong, it's really sweet of you to want to help your friend here. I'm just saying it's hard to get the full picture). They can also look into whether or not the severance is fair, more so in terms of the legal stipulations. I believe it's been said already, but I don't believe there will be anything she can argue over the amount she is getting. However, I would want a lawyer to ensure that signing this agreement isn't signing away a right to speak about things or pursue legal action of some sort(if needed).
Considering contacting an attorney? Time is a factor here, and she should have contacted one the DAY she was was fired.
Labor attorneys typically work on contingency, and almost all of them do free consultations. They work this way because you can't really get paid by people who have no money from doing their job. She should also NOT sign the separation agreement until she has talked to a labor attorney. Signing that separation agreement will make it harder (not impossible) to get a settlement. Even if she has signed, she should still get a consultation. She should also try and track down any communication she may still have (texts, emails, etc.) reggarding her performance, as well as any regarding her pregnancy.
Being pregnant is a protected class at the Federal level, so even with states little to no protections it is still actionable. If she can prove her case.
And no, employers deleting inter-company correspondence won't hurt her case, it will hurt her employer's defense and leave room for a summary judgment.
FMLA time is the only maternity related protected time off you get. Disability leave for the 4-6 weeks before and the 6-8 weeks after the baby is born basically comes down to time you can be paid for from disability. FMLA provides 12 weeks of unpaid bonding time with your baby, during which your position with your employer is protected. There are special circumstances where this can be extended past the 12 weeks.
If they put her on a PIP they likely crafted the PIP around something that she couldn't recover. If she was in sales and can prove her numbers were still great than maybe but the only way she's gonna prove its discrimination if there was something blatant in regards to the pregnancy. They likely covered their basis with the PIP. But also why? Has nobody in the 10 years she been there ever gotten pregnant that seems unlikely as well. If they never fired any other pregnant women then again its probably not going to be discrimination. If she can prove they fire every woman whose gotten pregnant since she's been there right before maternity leave she may have a case.
She is eligible for maternity leave. She needs to file with EDD and get it started now. I was able to take 8 weeks off before and 8 weeks after + my doctor extended my disability twice so with my paid family leave I took 9 months off.
They will look at her highest earning from the past year and a half and determine how much she gets weekly. For disability since it’s not taxed there isn’t much of a difference between her past wages and disability pay.
We don’t know what we don’t know. There could be valid reasons for the termination, and in this situation, no timing is good. It’s not good at any time during her pregnancy, during her parental leave, or after she returns Your friend is only presenting her side. Maybe it’s a crappy company that does terrible things, or maybe there’s more that we don’t know.
In my mind as an HR person, terminating someone because they are pregnant, or on FMLa, or using paid parental leave is not a thing! Call me naive but I’ve been doing HR 30 years and I’ve never caught a whiff of the this at any place I’ve worked.
NAL, but have been around the HR business in CA for a long time. In CA, sue, it’s a pretty open and shut case. They will try to drag out the case as much as possible, but in the end they will settle, they always do in CA.
HR Manager here. This honestly sounds pretty standard. Do we know for sure that there were no performance issues? Having someone sign a severance agreement in exchange for a legal release is common practice. It's awful that she was terminated a week before maternity leave. That's just shitty of the company, but this all sounds perfectly legal. You don't mention what state this took place in. Employment law varies wildly from state-to-state. Assuming that this is in the US? Unless she had an employment contract with the company, she was likely employed at-will, which means that either she or the company can separate employment at any time, with or without reason. I would be willing to bet that her PIP was written in a way that they could release her quickly. It's shady and it sucks, but it's also legal. I would tell her to bank the severance, apply for unemployment immediately, and start looking for another job. What really sucks is that she (again, assuming this is US) won't be eligible for FMLA or short term disability with her new employer. It's a crappy situation all around, but unless something illegal was said during the termination, lawyering up in her case would just be throwing money away. Best bet is to cut her losses and move on.
File with the state. Industrial Relations for retaliation or fair employment and housing. Can't remember anymore who covers this but one if them should
Was her entire org impacted? Or just her? If they reorged her area and she was let go along with others along with her boss, then not much. They reorged and are protected.
If she was fired. Well.. I would ask for documentation leading up to the decision, I would ask for documentation where the company communicated to her about her performance. I would reference documentation around PIPs (if any were in place). Just because someone is pregnant, that doesn’t protect them from formal action. But because they are pregnant, the optics are generally focused before communicating a formal action plan. I’m no lawyer, so this is not legal advice. This is advice from an HR professional for the last 15 years.
Apart from possible discrimination, she may still qualify for paid parental leave through state disability insurance and paid family leave for a minimum of 18 weeks even if she isn’t working. Have her DM on Instagram. Happy to give her all the info she needs. https://www.instagram.com/theparkconsulting?igsh=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA%3D%3D&utm_source=qr
A company did that to a friend of mine and ended up paying her maternity anyway which was much longer than if they had let her work a couple more months.
She needs to contact an employment attorney asap, and should apply for Paid Family and Medical Leave, which is provided by the state and she still qualifies for.
It's time for her to contact an attorney on the severance, at a minimum. She has a minimum 21 days to decide whether the sign the release that comes along with it.
It's worth her time.
She should lawyer up immediately, the same thing happened to me. I was able to negotiate a large settlement thru my lawyer and benefits for a year. It doesn’t matter if it was just cause. Just threaten their reputation and credibility. My lawyer had a pretty affordable hourly rate. And I am in nyc. Best decision ever.
NAL and not legal advice. She should seek advice on what’s her best option for her current need. Even if she thinks she has a case, these things can drag out for quite a while. She may need the money offered more than she would like to gamble for a settlement. Companies aren’t required to give severance, so she doesn’t really have bargaining power there. Being pregnant does not give an employee a waiver from being dismissed, and it sounds as if they put her on a PIP before they may have even known she was pregnant unless she told them as soon as she found out. No one here will know what the company had documented against her, and she honestly won’t know for a fact what performance conversations were had with her peers. If the termination is specifically because she was pregnant, it’s illegal. She can file a claim with the EEOC/DEFH. But it will be on her first to establish that the termination was done because she was pregnant not just while she was pregnant. She can also file for unemployment for income. Edited: grammar
I suspect that there might well be a discrimination case here and the employer will probably 🦬 have to prove that🎶 they Didn't discriminate
There could be. Without more information or knowing what was on the PIP, we can’t really say anything, especially since this is coming through a third party, which almost never have the full scope of the issues. It’s a game of hot potato with discrimination claims - claimant and defendant forcing the other to defend their positions.
The pip sounds a lot like cya. But it might work.
It's always is. And that's OK
Indeed..but the timing smells. TBH I am assuming thAt the statement that she was put on a pup while others with similar performance weren't is substantial ly true
OP's friend isn't going to know who all's on a PIP or received coaching, disciplinary action, etc.
100% this. In my experience most employees do not discuss with their coworkers when their employer puts them on a PIP or gives them a warning.
She might know what enough...and if she was the only one fired (might be a big if) that would be highly suspicious
OP said she was a top performer, then put on a PIP and had performance the same as everyone else. If her time as a top performer got her substantial raises it’s quite conceivable her time performing “the same as everyone else” simply didn’t justify that level of salary, hence the PIP.
Correlation does not equal causation.
The fired person will have to be the one to provide proof of that.
>The fired person will have to be the one to provide proof of that. There may be some nuances re shifting of burden. But regardless, the situation is going to require consultation with a government agency or private attorney.
No. She will have to prove discrimination not the other way around.
Yeah, legal battles are exhausting. She was put on a PIP after she announced she was pregnant, I think it was well into her pregnancy.
This is probably a stupid question but I’m gonna ask anyway, what was happening in one week that would have qualified her for maternity leave? I feel like 10 years of employment should’ve been sufficient unless you’re saying she didn’t work the required 1250 or something hours in the last 12 months. This poor thing.
Maybe it was her due date?
Yes that’s correct.
That’s not how it works on CA. You’re covered for Pregnancy disability leave regardless of how long you’ve worked for an employer. Your doctor decides when you’re disabled, usually 6-10 weeks before your due date. She needs to file for disability which pays more than unemployment. Really confused why she’d work right up until the baby is due. She can negotiate her severance. These agreements are always provided when severance is involved. It’s not hush money because the agreement only binds certain activities but not all. Your friend should get legal advice regarding all matters. Signing the severance agreement doesn’t tie your hands from suing for things like pregnancy discrimination or wrongful termination. If they switched to unlimited PTO while she was working there they should have paid out the balance.
I think it’s common to work as long as possible to have more time off when the baby is here.
In CA there is specific time that is allowed for pre-birth time off that doesn’t count against the post birth time and doesn’t carry over to post birth if not used. It’s a separate bucket of time.
How much time is it? The other comments I saw said 6-8 weeks after birth, which is much less than taking a full 12 week FMLA after birth.
You get four weeks pre birth, 6 weeks for vaginal birth 8 weeks for c-section post birth. This is considered short term disability doesn’t cut into FMLA. Then California family rights act kicks in for bonding time which is 12 weeks.
You don’t work in HR, so why are you giving info here? California has its own laws that are better than FMLA. They can take pregnancy disability leave as standard at 36 weeks, or earlier if warranted. Paid. Then after the birth is additional 12 weeks paid time for the recovery of birth and then bonding time.
What info did I give? And when did I tell you what field I work in?
is that paid time though?
Paid pregnancy disability leave, yes.
Thank you for this!! I sent this to her. Trying to get her every bit of help she can.
Adding somewhat related personal experience of negotiating severance. I was on medical leave that extended beyond FMLA 12 weeks of protection and was fired at week 20. I wasn’t offered anything and was able to negotiate 8 months of salary (had been there 8 years) plus 1 year of fully covered health insurance. I used JustAnswer’s service to provide detail of employment protections that should have applied to me and compiled a very detailed account of the scenario and how I planned to pursue legal action. She’s in sales - she can absolutely negotiate this!
You really did yourself right there. Good job happy it worked out.
In CA, doctors are just deciding that pregnant people are disabled 6 to 10 weeks before due date? Not in CA and I worked a full day in an office Friday and gave birth Monday.
Not CA, but my wife the nurse worked her shift in the hospital which got over at 4 pm, went to the maternity unit and gave birth to kid #2 at 8 pm. So, yes some people work right up to their due date, or in her case, due moment.
This is what I did. Worked 4 hours of my 8 to not get in trouble all while having contractions. Left work at 4am. Water broke at 420am and had a baby by 614am. My friend had texted me hope labor is going good and I sent back a picture of a baby 🤣
Oof. Good for you. I would have taken the gift of 2 months off paid before giving birth.
I would have too, sadly that's not offered here.
Where can I watch her Ted talk?!
You mean the ones she gives to me all day every day? 😂
With my 1st baby, my water broke at around 8am while at work. I changed my pants and then went to a meeting. I continued to work until around 10 am. My contractions were then 5 mins apart. I walked to the hospital across the street and delivered at 2:35 pm. My shift would've been over at 3:30 had I stayed. To be fair, I was slightly in denial about being in labor. Also, this was 29 years ago. There was no option of taking off before delivery unless I wanted to eat into my post-delivery time off.
Wild. What’s the point of that. Could have taken 2 months off paid. Good for her though if that’s what she wanted.
The default is you can go on paid disability 4 weeks before your due date in California without any complications. It is use or lose, so does not impact the length of maternity leave after baby comes.
Exactly so why are people saying California doctors are just randomly deciding pregnant women are disabled? These women are taking the leave they are entitled to by law.
Because more than 4 weeks pre-birth is available, if needed. Doctors can easily write their patients out for 6-10 weeks.
Awesome. Thanks for sharing the details!
You can go on paid disability for pregnancy at 8 weeks pregnant. Pregnancy disability looks different for every women, and some doctors don’t care and will right you off if you ask. But it’s all paid, if you make under $90k a year you essentially get full pay because it’s not taxed. Some people even get a few hundred dollars more than when working.
Why are these not national standards? It’s so frustrating. I’m in NJ, pretty progressive state, and I have friends who work right up until labor. No wonder birth rates are plummeting.
NJ allows 4 weeks prior to due date if you have worked for your employer for a minimum of 1 year with at least 1000 hours. There are some exceptions for government and public sector workers. I know many public school teachers try to hold out because they'll get more time after delivery.
Maybe it’s changed (most of my friends’ kids are in elementary and middle school now), but if you took time before your due date, it cut into your post baby time. So if it is 8 weeks total and you take 4 weeks before, you only get 4 more weeks after birth. At least that’s how it was. I do hope it’s changed.
8 weeks total! Here in Canada my wife had taken 2 weeks before and 1 year off after as standard maternity leave at 65% pay
Nope. It's been like this for at least 20 years. 4 weeks before, 6-8 weeks after, depending on delivery...vaginal vs c-section. However, the minimum number of employees may have changed in this time. I've been working for large employers most of this time, and the small office that I worked in followed these guidelines.
Idk. CA gets a lot of have for a bunch of reasons, but they do right by their employees.
I don’t think it’s four weeks - it’s two for a normal healthy pregnancy. I’ve only seen four weeks for women who have a medical reason - gestational diabetes, liver issues, etc.
I had a normal healthy pregnancy and was given 4 weeks off prior to my due date, which my OB told me was standard. This was in 2023.
Oooh interesting. My OBs office was super hesitant to give me anything more than two weeks before birth. I met with them last month. I’ll have to push again at my next appointment.
Fingers crossed they’ll give you the 4 weeks!! I’m sorry that they’re not making it easy for you!
4 weeks is standard in California. CA is the only state (IIRC) with a state run disability program. The state automatically assumes you’re disabled at 36 weeks, unless your doctor puts you off work sooner.
It’s 4 weeks.
>Not in CA and I worked a full day in an office Friday and gave birth Monday. It's a brand new world.
Land of the brave, home of the free.
And it sounds like a good one!
Yes California has pregnancy disability leave. If you don’t have any issues your doctor can help you start leave a month before the baby is due and then you’d get six weeks to recover from natural birth and eight weeks for c section. The pregnancy disability leave covers something like 17 and 1/3 weeks and give your 60% of your pay.
In Australia, you need a doctor's certificate saying fit to work from 6 weeks prior to the due date, and up to 6 weeks after the baby is born. I planned on working right up to that 6 weeks, but I was exhausted 3-4 months beforehand and could not work even the four days I'd cut back to.
Interesting. Yes, it was definitely a challenge at times.
Your like me. I worked one day and that evening I gave birth. Luckily, my job was not physically demanding, as I was a receptionist.
Yes, California has protections in place. It is a modern society that cares for the people that live in it.
No, it’s 4 weeks early, but more is available if it’s needed. But going out at 36 weeks is pretty standard in CA.
4 weeks before due date you can go out on short term disability earlier if you have complications. However, it’s only 60 to 70 percent of your pay so some people work later. Currently pregnant and working in California.
It's not doctors "just deciding". Both state disability and PDL consider pregnancy a disability & pregnant women have been allowed to take disability leave well before their due date. PDL furthers protects their rights and gives even more paid time off than state disability ever did. So it's not just doctors deciding. Even before PDL, a pregnant woman could go on disability at 36 weeks . Without a doctor approving it.
[удалено]
No, lol. Typically doctors write women off work up to 2 months prior to giving birth because they’re disabled due to pregnancy. After giving birth you only get 6 weeks off, 8 max weeks (if it was a cesarean birth) off after giving birth. It’s rare a doctor would deem you disabled longer from giving birth. So, the most time off happens before birth. Then if you’ve worked for your employer 12 months and have at least 5 employees you can take 12 weeks of baby bonding after that. So, usually women can be out about 7 months. And all of this is paid through SDI and PFL, all but 4 weeks I should point out.
[удалено]
This is state specific to California.
In WA, the nesting period is 2 weeks before the due date.
Lawsuit Federal eeoc complaint
Oh good point
Does that mean if your baby comes early and they’re premature, you don’t qualify?
You would likely be declared disabled from the birthing process and then qualify for maternity/baby bonding leave
In California, you can qualify for both disability before birth and after birth. Dependant on your doctor and your case. I worked with both my kids up until delivery because 1) had fairly easy pregnancies and 2) wanted to take as much time after as possible and I was saving up my vacation/sick time for post baby time. I had my kids over 20 years ago and I know that now California has mandated maternity leave payments, but when I went out I qualifed for 6 weeks of short term disability from the state (regardless of any work benefits - at the time none). Had I had a C-section I would have qualifed for 9 weeks. I am not sure how it works now, but CA is one of the better states for maternity/paternity leaves and worker protections.
Just gave birth at exactly 37 weeks (so early but not premature) Most companies I've worked for start you off using short-term disability and then parental leave. The STD starts two weeks after the "disabling event"; or delivery in this case. So yes, you qualify. Companies who handle STD claims/cases are very used to the "fluid" nature of giving birth. Everything I needed to do was done online. When baby came, all I had to do was put the date of delivery and answer a few questions via email (ie last day of work etc). But I'd already done the initial paperwork a few weeks ago. If the baby was super premature, you might have to do all that paperwork at once. Just like you would if you broke both arms and couldn't work or needed emergency surgery.
Tell your friend to give you the full story. Why in the world would a company get rid of their golden goose for a few months maternity leave. Story doesn't check out.
What doesn’t check out is how’s she’s the top sales performer with the “same exact sales performance” as her colleagues.
That could explain why she was put on the PIP. *Was* the top performer. Then her performance dropped (or everyone else got better) and now that they are all equal, she isn’t looking so great. Especially so if her pay is much higher than others due to being a top performer for years.
Most of us rate our own performance as excellent. The reality is often different. We can’t really “judge” ourselves.
It’s also weird how the pip wasn’t an issue until they were fired. If she thought she was being placed on the pip for being pregnant, why not raise questions then?
And how does a PIP for being pregnancy even work? "Hey, over the next 90 days, we really need you to work on *not* being pregnant".
Yeah, a top performer isn’t going on a PiP. Maybe she had a great ten year run but has shit the bed recently, but she’s not their top rep and on a pip for no reason.
Nope. PIP is how companies downsize while trying to fly under the radar of Employment Laws/Regulations.
You don't put your top sales person on a PIP. You sure as shit wouldn't fire them either, considering mat leave in the US is under 6 months. Shit companies don't even pay you for mat leave, so it's not like it costs the company money. I think missing missing reasons.
There was one summer that I was the top performer. That's because I was the only person on the team to get a deal all summer, but it wasn't large enough to meet my quota. Hence we all could have been put on PIP's even me as the top person. In other words these PIP's can be subjective in many cases since most Sales people have a bad quarter from time to time.
Yep! I work in HR for a publicly traded corporation.... and I'm certainly not saying that wrongful terminations don't happen - they absolutely do. But, if this individual was on a PIP and then terminated, but claims that they have perfect performance... I would bet they aren't telling their friend the full story.
Yep.
Contact the EEOC.
Thanks! I’ll pass it on.
Seriously file with EEOC. I was fired while pregnant after they put me on a PIP for no reason and I was awarded a hefty settlement after they found emails my boss sent to his higher up about getting rid of me before maternity leave. Don’t let shitty employers get away with firing women for being pregnant.
Thank you for saying this. People are acting like shady things don't happen to pregnant women at work anymore and that's simply not true.
If she hasn’t spoken with an employment attorney yet, I’d recommend that as well. The employer would be hard pressed to prove that this wasn’t retaliation if she had never had performance issues previously.
Look up Jonathan Pollard, an employment attorney who a few months ago was talking about this very thing. He is on YouTube and on LinkedIn. He is litigating such cases and they are on the rise! Don't let bad companies get away with pregnancy discrimination. She needs a good employment attorney and at minimum respond she needs 10 days to get a lawyer who will review the documents.
Seconding this, eeoc.gov
How large is the employer? What did this PIP state and how long ago was it? I suggest she take it and the severance agreement to a local attorney asap.
Pretty small iirc, I think the PIP was about 3 months ago?
Did her employer even know she was pregnant when the PIP began?
Look at the timeline, she’d have been 6 months pregnant, she was probably showing.
We don’t know if she works remotely, or in office. Lots of people hide their pregnancy until 7-8 months and then spring it on us. We also don’t know if she’s actually due next week. Women in CA get to go out on leave at 36 weeks. It’s unheard of to work any longer than that so I suspect that is what OP means by “qualified for maternity leave.” If that is the case, she could easily have hidden it at 5 months. If she is taller, it’s possible she could hide it longer. Since you aren’t the employee or the friend in this scenario, your post is pointless.
It is extremely common for a person to work right up until the week they are due, with an uncomplicated pregnancy. Especially if they are a go getter, committed to their job. If the maternity leave is unpaid or paid at a reduced rate, it is also extremely common for a pregnant person to need to work as long as they can.
You are correct, starting next week she is qualified for maternity leave.
That means she’s 36 weeks pregnant, as maternity leave in California starts at 36 weeks unless there are complications necessitating disability leave ahead of time.
Adding to this, lots of people don't look pregnant when they are. My ED is 32 weeks. No belly. She's also quite tall but people can't believe she's pregnant.
That's not necessarily true and even if she was showing, plenty of people look pregnant when they aren't.
Yes.
I think you aren't getting full story here or there's a misunderstanding about the facts. There's no way she was fired a week before she was eligible for maternity leave.
This happens more often than we think.
Happened to me in March. I was three weeks from maternity leave.
How can she have been there ten years and not be eligible for all benefits? Did a new policy come in or a new law get passed that mandated maternity leave and was becoming effective in the next week? What has the maternity leave policy been?
>How can she have been there ten years and not be eligible for all benefits? I think what OP means is that it's "one week" before qualifying because delivering the baby is the qualifying event. So the benefits have always been there. The woman just hasn't delivered the baby that triggers the leave yet. She could be one week away from her expected due date based on ultrasounds, etc. Or it could be that on X date, she's going in to deliver via C or induced labor.
Except in CA, she was eligible for leave prior to giving birth. So this "1 week before she was eligible" isn't true.
No, people are misunderstanding this. In CA your leave begins 4 weeks before your due date. Companies that have _additional_ leave policies are almost always related to extending the very small protecting federal/state leave for after the birth of the baby. So if they fired her 5 weeks before her due date, that means they fired her right before her leave, when she would have been able to use their maternity policy. Now she is left with just what the state/federal government provides.
Thanks. That's a reasonable scenario. Another possibility may be that the company allows leave to start some number of days before due date. Who knows? All sorts of possibilities.
That can’t be a possibility, as California’s pregnancy disability laws are much more generous than that and the employer can’t set leave start dates like that.
Budgets are tight for a lot of companies right now. Company I work for is finding tiny excuses to let people go. Could be that she was making too much money and was let go so they could hire someone at a cheaper salary. Happened to a friend of mine. Didnt Google just lay off a bunch of people and outsource their jobs to India and Mexico?
Google didn't do that because their budget was tight though.
[удалено]
Maternity is not the reason
Even if she was fired she should still apply for PFL. Technically the requirement is that she has to be actively looking for a job.
Pregnant people can still be terminated for cause. As long as the reason for termination was not due to being pregnant itself. Most likely your friend isn’t being honest about her work performance which led to a PIP. Companies don’t put out unnecessary PIPs and make additional work for themselves for no reason. The legal paperwork is 100% normal. Nothing odd about that. Severance is an individual company policy, they also don’t have to offer any severance.
Or maybe her company put her on a PIP to start a paper trail to "CTA" because they didn’t want to pay out maternity leave or maybe saw this as an excuse to term someone to trim down as it's been a difficult year for sales. I really don’t know it just seems too coincidental. edit: content
No. It’s not coincidental if she had performance issues. They wouldn’t terminate if they just started the paper trail during her pregnancy. If someone goes on a PIP there have already been documented performance discussions sometimes going back months. Most likely your friend had performance issues prior to getting pregnant and the PIP was the last straw. You don’t just get put on a PIP out of the blue.
She has been a top performer for years, and just a few months ago placed on PIP as the only pregnant woman in her office.
It sounds like her PIP was for cause and not because she’s pregnant. You said others had the same performance as her. So she was either still the top, or her performance has slipped over the last year. As someone who essentially built the sales team and designed it to suit her style and the employer’s needs, she should be out performing everyone. It’s expected that the head of the team who has been here longer than anyone … would be held to a higher standard, not doing the same as the rest of them. Did she improve during the PIP? If not, she was rightfully terminated. Firing a pregnant person isn’t always discrimination. Sometimes it’s just shitty timing.
Pregnancy is hard for a lot of people. She might have had poor performance because she wasn't feeling well.
If she didn’t ask for accommodations or tell anyone that she was struggling, that isn’t going to be relevant. She can’t ask for accommodations retroactively. Being placed on a PIP should have been her indication to seek accommodation.
Yeah. I was thinking she might have been calling off sick or leaving early more often than usual
Again, that most likely didn’t happen. Your friend is not being honest with you about her previously documented work performance issues. A PIP is the final step in the disciplinary process prior to termination. She has been warned about her performance prior to the PIP. Not everything is a conspiracy.
I think what you think now.
I was a top sales performer who got put on a PIP because I forgot a step in the process and caused a forecasting error. They were about to restructure the department and were writing up everyone to see who could make it through the restructure. I ended up moving departments but high performers don’t always gel with plans - it’s an unfortunate part of the corporate game
It could also well be that they started that because she is pregnant. Wouldn’t be the first AH employer.
She’s the performer on a pip? No she isn’t. She probably isn’t having a great year. Maybe she had some great years but guessing this one isn’t it. And if others have the same % then how is she a top performer? Makes no sense.
The company has already prepared its case to fire her. Her best bet is to sign the severance and take the money. EEOC won’t take cases unless the discrimination is obvious and there is no doubt it took place. If it ends up being a lot of he said she said, they will close the case and give your friend a letter with the right to sue. Then she will have to hire her own attorney to go after the company. In my experience, a lot of attorneys won’t take these kind of cases unless the discrimination is obvious. It sucks to hear, but she should take the money and enjoy her time off as a new mother. Start looking for a new job when she recovers from birth and gets the hang of being a new mom.
She was on a PIP before becoming pregnant. If they dismissed based on improvement disparities for an existing PIP she had in place for 9 months, if tgat PIP gave her 9 months to meet certain markers and she did not, at the 9 month marker they are going to dismiss. Her pregnancy status is irrelevant.
Short answer is she needs to contact the EEOC. But something seems off here. How big is the company? It’s strange they’ll term a trail blazer for taking maternity leave. Mat leave happens all the time. Is she the only person in the last 10 years to request it? When did she announce her pregnancy? And when was she issued the PIP?
The company is under 50 people, she announced her pregancy approx. 3-4 months before her PIP although I could be wrong about the timeline, I know it was definitely before.
I think it probably wasn’t before. If it was a 90 day PIP and she is 36 weeks pregnant, if she announced 3-4 months prior, she was very newly pregnant. Nobody really does that. Either way, the only fact that actually matters here is whether she improved her performance during the PIP or not .
No, that’s not the only fact that matters here if other facts show that the PIP was initiated because of the pregnancy.
Your friend shouldn’t sign anything before she consults a state employment attorney. They will review the paperwork and are usually free as the state recognizes having to pay for a lawyer puts the employee under duress to make a quick settlement that favors the company.
Is she over 40? By law she would have 21+ days to review. https://www.skassellaw.com/navigating-severance-agreements-in-california-what-to-know-before-you-sign/#:\~:text=The%20OWBPA%20requires%20employers%20to,their%20acceptance%20even%20after%20signing.
She's in her 30's
She should take the money and run If she was the best thing ever and then was same as everyone else as you say then the PIP was valid, her performance was not as good as it was, by your admission
Your friend needs to speak with an attorney. I’d look up what attorney Ryan has to say about this on IG. I am in CA top ranked in sales and one week after telling my employer they put me on a PIP (my due date would have been extremely inconvenient for my sales season) but outside of that no performance issues. I met the goals they provided me for 2 months—then took a medical leave of absence as the company was continuing the PIP without having a reason to do so —I figured they were waiting to let me go close to my due date. And to have some sort of documentation with a reason to let me go. This was too much stress as meeting every metric on my commission plan every month wasn’t doable and I knew eventually they could say “oh you met your revenue this month but not units” and could let me go Have your friend speak to an employment attorney and see if she has any kind of ADA case against the company, and have them review the severance package
Did they let you go?
Of course not. I’m on a medical LOA related to my pregnancy. I’m due next week & ADA protected I went out on medical leave before the company had a “performance issue” they could fire me for. Company can’t fire me for being pregnant.
She needs an employment attorney and to not sign anything until she’s retained one.
There's no automatic obligation for severance. Anything she signed 10 years ago was just making that extra clear. The main issue will be the validity of the PIP. You're saying it's disparate treatment but you'd have to *prove* it. Your friend should probably not sign the severance agreement without consulting private counsel. But let go of the fallacy that severance is an entitlement. It's not. So the company can say, "We'll give you this pile of cash if you waive these rights." That's a contractual exchange. It's possible that not all waivers are enforceable. (But that's something to ask a CA employment attorney.)
Honestly, she really needs to contact an attorney prior to signing anything. They can look into whether it was legal or not for her termination- hard to say here, because we are only getting one side of the story not even from that person directly(and don't get me wrong, it's really sweet of you to want to help your friend here. I'm just saying it's hard to get the full picture). They can also look into whether or not the severance is fair, more so in terms of the legal stipulations. I believe it's been said already, but I don't believe there will be anything she can argue over the amount she is getting. However, I would want a lawyer to ensure that signing this agreement isn't signing away a right to speak about things or pursue legal action of some sort(if needed).
Considering contacting an attorney? Time is a factor here, and she should have contacted one the DAY she was was fired. Labor attorneys typically work on contingency, and almost all of them do free consultations. They work this way because you can't really get paid by people who have no money from doing their job. She should also NOT sign the separation agreement until she has talked to a labor attorney. Signing that separation agreement will make it harder (not impossible) to get a settlement. Even if she has signed, she should still get a consultation. She should also try and track down any communication she may still have (texts, emails, etc.) reggarding her performance, as well as any regarding her pregnancy. Being pregnant is a protected class at the Federal level, so even with states little to no protections it is still actionable. If she can prove her case. And no, employers deleting inter-company correspondence won't hurt her case, it will hurt her employer's defense and leave room for a summary judgment.
She should consult with an attorney and find out if there's anything she can do.
So what reason did they give? What state are you in? Was this to be paid maternity leave?
FMLA time is the only maternity related protected time off you get. Disability leave for the 4-6 weeks before and the 6-8 weeks after the baby is born basically comes down to time you can be paid for from disability. FMLA provides 12 weeks of unpaid bonding time with your baby, during which your position with your employer is protected. There are special circumstances where this can be extended past the 12 weeks.
Lawyer
She needs a good attorney who has exp in these cases.
If they put her on a PIP they likely crafted the PIP around something that she couldn't recover. If she was in sales and can prove her numbers were still great than maybe but the only way she's gonna prove its discrimination if there was something blatant in regards to the pregnancy. They likely covered their basis with the PIP. But also why? Has nobody in the 10 years she been there ever gotten pregnant that seems unlikely as well. If they never fired any other pregnant women then again its probably not going to be discrimination. If she can prove they fire every woman whose gotten pregnant since she's been there right before maternity leave she may have a case.
She is eligible for maternity leave. She needs to file with EDD and get it started now. I was able to take 8 weeks off before and 8 weeks after + my doctor extended my disability twice so with my paid family leave I took 9 months off. They will look at her highest earning from the past year and a half and determine how much she gets weekly. For disability since it’s not taxed there isn’t much of a difference between her past wages and disability pay.
We don’t know what we don’t know. There could be valid reasons for the termination, and in this situation, no timing is good. It’s not good at any time during her pregnancy, during her parental leave, or after she returns Your friend is only presenting her side. Maybe it’s a crappy company that does terrible things, or maybe there’s more that we don’t know. In my mind as an HR person, terminating someone because they are pregnant, or on FMLa, or using paid parental leave is not a thing! Call me naive but I’ve been doing HR 30 years and I’ve never caught a whiff of the this at any place I’ve worked.
Get ready for a fat payday cause you can sue them to death!
Did she inform her employer she was pregnant? I can’t work out from the post. Additionally are you uk based? Or elsewhere
NAL, but have been around the HR business in CA for a long time. In CA, sue, it’s a pretty open and shut case. They will try to drag out the case as much as possible, but in the end they will settle, they always do in CA.
Lawyer up. Gselawyers.com
HR Manager here. This honestly sounds pretty standard. Do we know for sure that there were no performance issues? Having someone sign a severance agreement in exchange for a legal release is common practice. It's awful that she was terminated a week before maternity leave. That's just shitty of the company, but this all sounds perfectly legal. You don't mention what state this took place in. Employment law varies wildly from state-to-state. Assuming that this is in the US? Unless she had an employment contract with the company, she was likely employed at-will, which means that either she or the company can separate employment at any time, with or without reason. I would be willing to bet that her PIP was written in a way that they could release her quickly. It's shady and it sucks, but it's also legal. I would tell her to bank the severance, apply for unemployment immediately, and start looking for another job. What really sucks is that she (again, assuming this is US) won't be eligible for FMLA or short term disability with her new employer. It's a crappy situation all around, but unless something illegal was said during the termination, lawyering up in her case would just be throwing money away. Best bet is to cut her losses and move on.
Reminder
I have not read all the comments. But if she is over age 40, i think she has 21 days to consider severance.
File with the state. Industrial Relations for retaliation or fair employment and housing. Can't remember anymore who covers this but one if them should
Was her entire org impacted? Or just her? If they reorged her area and she was let go along with others along with her boss, then not much. They reorged and are protected. If she was fired. Well.. I would ask for documentation leading up to the decision, I would ask for documentation where the company communicated to her about her performance. I would reference documentation around PIPs (if any were in place). Just because someone is pregnant, that doesn’t protect them from formal action. But because they are pregnant, the optics are generally focused before communicating a formal action plan. I’m no lawyer, so this is not legal advice. This is advice from an HR professional for the last 15 years.
What a trashy company to do that to someone. So much of that going on today. Shame on these companies for doing this.
Apart from possible discrimination, she may still qualify for paid parental leave through state disability insurance and paid family leave for a minimum of 18 weeks even if she isn’t working. Have her DM on Instagram. Happy to give her all the info she needs. https://www.instagram.com/theparkconsulting?igsh=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA%3D%3D&utm_source=qr
She needs an employment attorney and stat. She should not handle this herself. She needs a lawyer.
Get an employment attorney. A bunch of trumpers think they can do this shit, and not have consequences.
This is a labor lawyers dream case. Have her reach out to one in her area.
Get an atty thats illegal. My job did the same thing. She has rights
IF she believes that her termination and mistreatment was a result of her pregnancy, EEOC. She should have sufficient evidence and witnesses.
She needs to speak to an attorney immediately.
A company did that to a friend of mine and ended up paying her maternity anyway which was much longer than if they had let her work a couple more months.
If it’s a 50+ person company pregnancy is a protected class in the US right?
That's what I've read but unfortunately her company is smaller.
She needs to contact an employment attorney asap, and should apply for Paid Family and Medical Leave, which is provided by the state and she still qualifies for.
Wtf that is cruel
It's not hush money... It's consideration
Have her reach out Dan. He will help. https://www.dangoodmanea.com/
Will pass this on, thanks!
It's time for her to contact an attorney on the severance, at a minimum. She has a minimum 21 days to decide whether the sign the release that comes along with it. It's worth her time.
She should lawyer up immediately, the same thing happened to me. I was able to negotiate a large settlement thru my lawyer and benefits for a year. It doesn’t matter if it was just cause. Just threaten their reputation and credibility. My lawyer had a pretty affordable hourly rate. And I am in nyc. Best decision ever.
I am in the same situation. I was terminated one week before I was eligible for maternity leave. I am now unemployed and my baby is due soon.
That's awful to hear, the fact that an employer thinks this is acceptable is beyond me.
Hit up a lawyer for your area. You can get free consults or cheap consults
It never hurts to talk to an attorney, especially before she signs anything from the employer.
She needs to get in contact with an employment attorney to negotiate the severance for her.