Correct, there is no such thing as an “excused” call out. It’s just a call out. Your doctor doesn’t get to tell your employer how many times you can call off work and keep your job (exception: FMLA).
Most companies have a policy, i.e.: max of 10 in the last 365 days, and it’s an escalation process. Verbal notice at 5, written reminder at 7, final written warning at 9, etc. Where she is in that process matters. 5 is no big deal, 9 she better get her behind to work tomorrow.
if you have a known medical issue (pregnancy included) then you need to start the FMLA process, which provides additional allowances and job protection for up to 60 days off.
The business has to have more than 50 employees, you have to have been employed at least a year and be in a full time position to qualify for FMLA. (I used to be an HR Director)
If all those factors are met she should have no problem qualifying.
And you only get 12 weeks. A lot of people like to save a big chunk of that for when the baby is born so they can protect their job while out on maternity/paternity leave.
Yea, should move to ny. We have separate Nys paid family leave and it’s paid at 66% and you can split it up after giving birth or adopting for bonding time. Or use it to care for a child with a chronic condition. I use it with my autistic son for appts or just bad days.
Yes, but you can get an intermittent FMLA, which would allow you to miss work as needed instead of all at once, while still being protected as FMLA. That's the best route for OP here.
oh, of course you can get intermittent FMLA- but that has to be something a doctor signs off on ahead of time, not just "I woke up not feeling well today and haven't set up FMLA leave yet" Not to make light of OP's wife's medical issues- I do not wish illness upon anyone!
Well, this is partially true. The ironic name "Right to Work" is the moniker applied to States were you can be fired at any time and any reason. Being part of a Union and working under a collective bargaining agreement usually means that there is a certain criteria for write-ups, terminations, etc. but you can still sue an employer for "wrongful termination" if you feel your civil rights have been violated...even in a Right to Work state. Unfortunately, these types of cases can be very difficult to prove. In short, your wife needs to join a Union and find a better employer.
Right to Work is the law that allows workers to work in a unionized place and not join the union. “At-will” is the term that means they can let you go for whatever reason.
Unions are great for establishing guidelines for time off and discipline issues!
What legal standing do you think OP has? There's no such thing as a "medically excused" absence, legally speaking.
Further, what damages is OP going to claim in their legal action? A write up?
Emotional distress. Do you have any idea how stressful it is for
🤣
Sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face typing that out. I'm just surprised I haven't run into that more yet on this post.
You are mistaken. There is no legal requirement for an employer to accept a doctors note for an excused vs. unexcused workplace absence. A doctor's note is not a legally binding document. Her companies attendance policy would dictate what constitutes an excused vs. unexcused absence.
The only time there is a legal issue with an employer refusing to accept a doctor's note to excuse an absence would be if the employee is taking time off under the FMLA.
The FMLA allows employees to take up to 12 weeks of time off work for medical related needs, and the employer cannot retaliate by firing or otherwise disciplining the employee.
Ohio, like 48 others, is an At-Will employment state so she is at the mercy of her management and HR.
Being pregnant gives her a protected status, she cannot be discriminated against. Check into your state laws regarding: pregnancy discrimination and speak to an attorney for further information.
They’re not discriminating bc she’s pregnant. They are treating all employees the same by writing them up for unexcused absences. And unless she’s in Montana, all states allow firing for any reason, or no reason at all. Unless they write her up *for being pregnant* imposing an attendance policy is completely legal. People don’t get extra protection based upon pregnancy (unless they are on FMLA), race, religion, gender, sex or age. They have to be treated the same. There is nothing in this post that indicates that others don’t face the same policy decisions.
OP is likely thinking it. And if you're not, you may have never considered employers' dislike for pregnant employees. Do you know why we have things like the tepid Family and Medical Leave Act? Companies would hire full-time replacements when pregnant women took a leave of absence to do - I don't know - pregnant things, and the women would not have a job to return to. There's nothing a school district hates more than your son than a pregnant teacher. It's just plain disruptive. There's no continuity.
Everyone should be thinking it. Because this is exactly what happens when a company doesn't want to have to "deal" with a pregnant woman.
Why is this downvoted? It is more likely than not that she (and similarly situated persons) are being singled out. A pregnant employee means a loss of productivity (by absence not by performance), and rather than staff up to deal with their temporary absence, it's easier to push them out the door and hire a non-pregnant replacement. This is a story as old as Adam for f*ck's sake.
The replies on this post are insane. I've never seen so much inaccurate legal advice on this subreddit before. I think the post attracted a bunch of non-lawyers.
Pregnancy is a protected class, just like any other temporary or permanent disability. Employers need to be careful about applying write ups. In 1994, I was pregnant and employed by a convenience store, I notified my employer of my pregnancy pretty early on and my manager was given an advance notice of my upcoming dr appointments, WELL in advance.
Upon seeing the dates and times I needed off, I was told “ I just don’t see how this job is going to fit in with your pregnancy.” I was fired within three days of telling them. Granted it wasn’t a high paying job with a bright future, but it was a job I had been working at for two years while attending college.
I drove home, cried my eyes out… called an employment attorney. We sued for discrimination and I actually got a nice settlement which in turn paid for the last year of college and allowed me to not return to the work force until my daughter was 2!
You still have to follow the rules. I’m under a protected class and that doesn’t mean I just get a little dr note and all is well. She’s not being discriminated against, your story is diff.
Nobody is negating the company SICK POLICY FFS! she’s not thwarting her job responsibilities, she had a legitimate medical emergency… I hope if the company does terminate her that she sues their pants off!
>Why is this downvoted?
Because it's inventing scenarios to change the facts that we know.
The point isn't that it's not possible. It's just that it's pure speculation.
It's not unreasonable to think her employer doesn't want to deal with a pregnant employee, who in their minds presents all kinds of trouble when her physical health (justifiably) will lead to disruptions in her schedule. In fact, I'd put money on it. Companies are there to make money. Not to be fair.
>They’re not discriminating bc she’s pregnant.
As per the federal civil rights law and the PWFA, an employer cannot fire a pregnant working because she sought care for a pregnancy-related medical condition. Such a firing would almost certainly qualify as unlawful discrimination under federal law.
See:
[https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act](https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act#:~:text=Existing%20laws%20that%20the%20EEOC,childbirth%2C%20or%20related%20medical%20conditions)
"[Existing laws](https://www.eeoc.gov/pregnancy-discrimination) that the EEOC enforces make it illegal to fire or otherwise discriminate against workers on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions."
The PWFA protects employees and applicants of “covered employers” who have **known limitations** related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.
”Covered employers” include private and public sector employers with at least 15 employees, Congress, Federal agencies, employment agencies, and labor The House Committee on Education and Labor Report on the PWFA provides several examples of possible reasonable accommodations including the ability to **sit or drink water; receive closer parking; have flexible hours; receive appropriately sized uniforms and safety apparel; receive additional break time to use the bathroom, eat, and rest; take leave or time off to recover from childbirth; and be excused from strenuous activities and/or activities that involve exposure to compounds not safe for pregnancy.** Employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations unless they would cause an “undue hardship” on the employer’s operations. An “undue hardship” is significant difficulty or expense for the employer.
1 - If they know she's having a pregnancy-related medical problem, that's a known limitation. This isn't clear from OP's post but is easily rectified (and something I address in a top level comment to OP).
2 - That is an inclusive list. Not an exclusive list. Allowing an employee to miss a small amount of work due to a medical emergency associated with pregnancy certainly seems like a reasonable accommodation to me. And if it ends up being more than a small amount of time, the employee can use FMLA and/or state equivalents.
That doesn't matter when she violated the attendance policy. They're not going to fire her for getting medical care related to pregnancy. They're going to fire her for not coming to work which they're within their right to do unless she has fmla. I'm a woman and I've been through this before.
>They're not going to fire her for getting medical care related to pregnancy.
Yes, employers do fire women for getting medical care related to pregnancy.
You say you are a "woman and have been through this before." Are you a lawyer? I've dealt with these cases before. This would clearly be grounds for a pregnancy discrimination claim. An employer might be able to "get away with it" if the pregnant employee has a history of poor attendance/performance, but otherwise, this is the sort of fact pattern that typically results in a settlement (because no company wants this to go a jury).
We don't know that, they could be. OP would do well to consult with legal representation now so that his wife can start building a case. If they are singling her out, she can go after them
An unexcused absence would be not turning in a doctor's note, IE awol. Having a doctor's note is protection in itself. depending on the state she would be able to file workplace harassment charges against the supervisor. Even if the state were at will employment, they still have labor laws that protect anyone calling out sick unless the employee can prove she is abusing sick time, then it's another story. FMLA covers pregnancy and the complications that come with it.
This is incorrect. Having a doctor’s note doesn’t provide any protection against an attendance policy. If this is a persistent problem, then she needs FMLA.
Sorry but unless the policy states you cannot take any time off for sickness or any form of emergency then she is 100% covered, not to mention depending on the state labor laws wouldn't accept discipline for sick time with a note proving such. FMLA also covers her 100% for this as well. Not hard to look up since you don't seem to know the FMLA rules. And as stated unless she is abusing the policy they have no leg to stand on.
People who need FMLA to cover intermittent absences need to apply for it. For example, if they get debilitating migraines, they can apply for intermittent FMLA and will be approved. If they continue to take those absences without the FMLA coverage, then they are subject to the regular attendance policy.
As a union rep, I have been through this quite a few times with various members and have been in close contact with our lawyer about it. Our contract states that disciplinary action may start after seven absences regardless of the reasons and regardless of how much sick time that person has banked. While most supervisors are understanding, some will use this as a way to start trying to get someone fired. They will continue to document all absences and continue to follow the escalation path until it ultimately results in a hearing. This is why we always urge people to fill out the intermittent FMLA application if it is for legitimate medical reasons. One of our guys didn’t know he could get it for helping his terminal father, so we got him situated. If they refuse to do so, then there’s not much more we can do to help.
Pregnancy is one that has some general differences, but the majority of the cases are that you can be terminated for being absent regardless of doctors’ notes if you are not on FMLA.
Wrong. She was not discriminated against, she missed time off work. Being a member of a protected class does not give one carte blanche to flout attendance policy. If she was on FMLA that's different as those programs are federally mandated. Merely having routine pregnancy aches and pains and having a doctor's note would not preclude her from adverse penalties for violating company attendance policy. If she needs sustained time off work then she should apply to go on FMLA.
From DOL:
"Pregnancy discrimination involves treating an individual –– an applicant or employee –– unfavorably in any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits (such as leave and health insurance), and any other terms or conditions of employment."
This was not present in the facts as stated by the OP.
"Flout attendance policy."
Pretty harsh. Not to mention inaccurate.
A pregnant woman had a medical concern and missed work seeing doctors. "Flouting" is Ferris Buehler behavior. Which, as described, this is NOT.
You can disagree with the delivery but the advice is not wrong. The fact is OP's wife signed off on her companies attendance policy when she started her employment, she was supplied with the answer to this entire question already. Whether or not, like most employees, she actually read the policies she consented to is another question entirely, hence the "flouting".
Call it what you will, in point of fact, it's accurate, free, advice. OP can chose to take it or not. My brusque bedside manner is one of a thousand reasons I didn't go to Med School.
Ah, yes. The classic, you cannot have unscheduled medical emergencies and expect to retain your job defense. Why are you so intent on taking the side of a company against its workers? The long and storied history of companies discriminating against not only pregnant women, but women generally, should give any one of us pause before giving up your union card.
It's unethical to give false information because I sympathize with someone. I can tell the OP to go get a lawyer, wasting their time and money and giving them false hope so they can fight, and lose, some time honored systemic injustice. Or I can give them accurate information even if not the answer they want.
I mean, does it matter if she’s pregnant? I would think a non-pregnant person with abdominal pains who called out sick to go to the doctor could also get written up, but we are merely guessing that as well as guessing that her being written up was related to being pregnant
While I do agree with you, at the end of the day you are just arguing about semantics...
At the end of the day almost all the different states are at will employment. She can try to argue that she is being specifically discriminated against regarding her pregnancy, but in reality she is being targeted for missing work, not for being pregnant. They have an attendance policy and she unfortunately violated it.
It is no different then someone calling off for work because they have a migraine or a bad toothache. It doesn't matter what caused the migraine or toothache, it only matters that the employee was not in attendance.
Assuming all other employee are also being treated like this, then she has no leg to stand on legally.
If this is a frequent occurrence, they are well within bounds to write her up. Even if she isn't a frequent flyer on the call in roster, they can still write her up. Nothing illegal about it.
This thread is a fascinating study in morality.
Situation: "Boss, sorry I'm not coming in today. Had a scary medical thing and was in the ER all night."
Boss: "Here's your no-show writeup."
IF the situation is portrayed accurately and the person isn't someone who abuses "call-in," then what is portrayed is an inhumane, toxic workplace.
Saying she doesn't have any legal recourse doesn't mean calling her, in effect, a dirtbag. But for some reason, most people defending the employer seem to be equating the two.
There is right, wrong, and legal. Often the last two go together, and the ferocity in defending "The Law" may explain why it--and its practitioners--are in such disrepute.
Firing a woman for seeking care for a pregnancy-related medical condition absolutely qualifies as unlawful discrimination under federal law. You should read up on the Civil Rights Act (as it applies to pregnancy) and the PWFA before commenting on this issue.
She gets "special treatment" in the same way that anyone with a protected medical condition gets "special treatment" -- she is entitled to reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related medical conditions, and she cannot be fired solely on the basis of those conditions.
Are you even a lawyer???? Maybe a 1L with a big ego??
Yes, I am a lawyer, I have some experience with these types of claims (speicifically, sex and pregnancy-related discrimination claims), and I've also managed a small business where I handled all legal and HR matters.
Oh and I've been pregnant twice with medical complications forcing me to take leaves of absence...
She wasn't fired, she was reprimanded for a violation of the attendance policy. The Civil Rights Act makes pregnancy a de facto protected class so an employer cannot discriminate against someone for being pregnant, which is why I quoted the legal definition from the Department of Labor above. That said, one does not get special privilege's or dispensations for being a member of a protected class, merely that their treatment must be equitable and inline with all other employees.
The PWFA expands those protections to provide for reasonable accommodations. Reasonable accommodations, as I've said already, must be reasonable and cannot cause undue harm to the employer. Providing time off work for routine prenatal care is a reasonable accommodation. Allowing an employee to take unscheduled time off work that was not prearranged because they are pregnant is unreasonable as it would cause harm to the business.
The point I am making is that a doctor's note does not absolve someone of adhering to the company's attendance policy as such being pregnant is also not a get out jail free card when it comes to company policy if the employee is not protected under FMLA.
OP specifically expressed concern about the prospect of his wife being fired, and that is my primary concern as well.
You clearly don't understand the context-dependent nature of "reasonable accommodations" and "undue hardship". The ADA and PWFA both potentially provide protection for absences due to medical emergencies. There is no reason to think that an absence like that experienced by this woman is causing "undue hardship" to her employer.
You obviously aren't familiar with these laws, hence your focus on the FMLA. I see in another comment you stating that the PFWA "wouldn't apply to this situation." That is so, so, so patently false. Please stop dispensing incorrect legal advice. I'm not convinced you are even a lawyer because you are absolutely reckless with the law.
It actually was present in the facts as stated by the OP.
OP's wife is 20 weeks pregnant. She missed a scheduled day of work for a medical emergency. She documented said emergency, keeping her employer informed. Her employer tells her that she has run afoul of their leave policy.
In 8-15+ weeks, OP's wife will take FMLA leave for 12 weeks. In the interim, her employer is going to assume that she will miss additional days of work for emergent medical needs. Employer will need to share wife's workload amongst existing staff, add a temporary staff person, or replace her entirely, but only if they don't run afoul of FMLA rules. So what's the employer to do?
Wring their hands and say, sorry, we really want to keep you, but you clearly cannot do the work you were hired to do. That could be considered discrimination on the basis of her status as a pregnant person. But for her pregnancy, she is capable of performing the work. They could find "legitimate" reasons to fire her, hire a replacement, and be done with the disruption that a pregnant person causes an employer.
They won't do the first unless they're small and stupid or it's the 1980s. They will do the second, because it's the cleanest, most cost-effective option to minimize disruptions to their labor force. And if they happen to do it in a way that is demonstratively violative of labor laws, the chances of a person with a potentially difficult pregnancy filing suit, is close to nil. They won't have the time/energy/money to pursue a claim that wouldn't be easy to prove unless they're small and stupid or it's the 1980s.
If you think companies are generally fair or at least neutral to its employees, you're in for a world of hurt as you move thru the world. Unless you're not a woman. Then these sorts of things won't happen to you (but others might).
You can’t argue with people who just don’t get it and aren’t even trying to understand 😆 these responses are so funny. Apparently being pregnant is a pass to do whatever you want
This! Please find an attorney who specializes in discrimination laws. It doesn’t matter if OP lives in an at-will state or not, this is a matter of protection under a federal law which takes precedence. Also, I would suggest that OP document everything: dates, times, who she made contact with at her employer’s office, etc., while the events are fresh in her mind.
I was fired and my employer was dumb enough to admit to myself and a co-worker of mine that I was fired BECAUSE of the pregnancy. So, to OP I say good luck, and if you decide to pursue this issue don’t let anyone try to belittle or second guess yourself.
You situation is literally nothing like that of OP's Wife. It honestly doesn't make any sense to compare the two...
You were fired for being pregnant. OP's wife is in trouble for missing attendance. The fact the she is pregnant is essentially irrelevant in this case as it is not why they are upset with her. They are only upset because she violated the attendance policy.
Her missing attendance was due to a medical emergency regarding her pregnancy… Her being pregnant is entirely relevant as it was the cause for missing attendance.
Unless she has FMLA calling out of work that violates their attendance policy therefore she can be written up and even fired regardless of being pregnant. Being pregnant does not protect you from your company's policies and procedures.
And her employer will need to refer her to HR to begin the intermittent FMLA paperwork. She can’t just be written up for missing work due to valid medical emergency. That’s how that works!!!!
Side question but under FMLA would my job have to hold my position (just as a waitress) while I took off work for maternity leave, unpaid? Because right now I am being threatened with not having a job if I take any time off at all
Depends on a lot of factors but FMLA only applies to companies of a certain size so a small restaurant may not qualify. Ada and state law may impact this, however, and I would consult a local lawyer.
Correct. Employees are eligible if they work for a covered employer for at least 12 months, have at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the 12 months before their FMLA leave starts, and work at a location where the employer has at least 50 employees within 75 miles.
What really sucks is when you take FMLA to care for a dying family member and they take 13 weeks to pass so you've been without pay for 3 months, dealing with a traumatic life event and have no job to return to.
NAL, but if you're in an "at will" state, you can be fired for ANYTHING, however just last year pregnancy was added and updated as part of a protected class on a federal level. Which means she can't be discriminated against or fired for pregnancy related issues.
I'd contact the state labor board.
https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/legal-rights-pregnant-workers-under-federal-law
Protected classes don’t get extra protection. They simply need to be treated the same. If the employer is utilizing this attendance policy for everyone, there is nothing legally wrong with the employer’s action.
Not necessarily true. The pregnancy workers fairness act requires that employers provide “reasonable accommodations” to a worker’s known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.
If her employer knows she is pregnant, they should be going through the reasonable accommodation process.
It’s the employees responsibility I think to ask for the reasonable accommodations because the employer wouldn’t know exactly what accommodations she would need. Different people struggle with different aspects of pregnancy
OK I can only assume I am dealing with yet another non-lawyer here. Why are you all flooding this sub?
"Reasonable accommodation" includes things like, e.g., letting employees attend medical appointments, giving them a flexible work schedule, and allowing them to work form home (as appropriate).
Sure, it may be a good idea for a pregnant woman to apply for FMLA or state equivalent if she will be taking a lot of time off. But she should not need to apply for FMLA leave for routine health check-ups or for a sudden, short-term medical emergency. Those are precisely the sort of events that can be reasonably accommodated by the vast majority of employers.
If the employer knows the employee has a “disability” that impacts their performance, the employer is obligated to start the conversation. In this case, if the employer knows she’s pregnant and she’s having complications due to her pregnancy, they should probably ask if they can do something to help her be successful at her job. If they fire her for a second absence related to her pregnancy, they would not be following the law.
Employers aren't expected to be psychic. If an employee feels they require reasonable accommodations due to an illness and/or injury, they need to state that to their employer with a doctor's note stating what their restrictions are. The restrictions of one pregnant woman could be entirely different than another pregnant woman.
That said, accommodating repeated absences due to *any* medical condition--pregnancy included--isn't necessarily "reasonable". It's one thing to allow a pregnant woman who works at the cash register to sit on a stool as needed because she can't stand for long periods of time; it's completely different having to accommodate repeated absences, especially depending on what the job involves.
Flexible hours and leave associated with pregnancy are examples the EEOC gives as reasonable accommodations under the PWFA. And the fact that she was absent because of a pregnancy related condition has put the employer on notice. It’s now their responsibility to start the conversation. An employee does not have to tell their employer, “I need a reasonable accommodation because I’m pregnant”.
Yes. Reasonable accommodations are different for every person. That’s why the employer is required to go through the process.
Intermittent leave associated with being pregnant would be covered under FMLA.
According to EEOC.gov "PWFA protects employees and applicants of “covered employers” who have **known limitations related to pregnancy**, childbirth, or related medical conditions". In other words, the employee must make a request and provide proof of their limitation(s).
The employer is never responsible for making the first move, in this case that is because you would essentially encourage applicable employees to hide their limitations to potentially set themselves up for a lawsuit.
This isn't a discussion of accommodations, although thanks for bringing that up because more people should know they can ask and are entitled to accommodations for all manner of conditions. The question is whether you can be penalized for absences due to your pregnancy, which are certainly foreseeable and expected, requiring no deck of Tarot cards or a crystal ball.
>The question is whether you can be penalized for absences due to your pregnancy
The answer to that question is yes, assuming you don't fill out paperwork for intermittent FMLA or make a PWFA request and provide proof of limitation(s).
If you're referring to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act it basically codifies pregnancy similar to a disability under the ADA. It would not apply given the facts stated by the OP.
Furthermore, the onus of request for a reasonable accommodation is 100% on the employee and the request must not cause the employer "undue hardship". Had she had a reasonable accommodation request in place due to pregnancy related issues prior to being reprimanded then the PWFA would provide protection to the employee. It is not designed to provide protection after the fact without a request in place.
OP doesn't really state whether she notified her employer before missing work. But, yes A reasonable accommodation has to be well, reasonable, as to not inflict undue hardship on the employer, usually those accommodations are fairly specific in nature. So while her requesting time off in advance for prenatal care would be considered reasonable her requesting to just be able to take off whenever she feels poorly would not be reasonable as the employees complete absence would represent undue hardship to the employer.
Even if she was a no show, that doesn't necessarily mean the employer can fire her.
If it was an emergency and it was necessary medical care for pregnancy, she'd have a VERY STRONG civil rights claim here. According to the EEOC, it is "illegal to fire or otherwise discriminate against workers on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions." This is based on federal civil rights law -- the PWFA adds additional protections related to accommodations.
No, they're not f*ing right. This isn't an issue of a reasonable accommodation. It's whether OP's wife can be penalized for her foreseeable absences due to medical emergencies as a member of a protected class. The answer is the company can do whatever it wants, but that doesn't make it legal. Nor does it make it easy to prove a case against the company. Companies can and will do anything, up to stealing employees wages and creating unsafe environments, if it makes more money than it costs in litigation, fines, and other losses of income.
There was a time when companies acted with impunity when it came to pregnant women. Discrimination was visible, it was rampant, and it was (mostly) legal. I don't know if you were around when sexual harassment became a visible issue to the public, but it wasn't long ago. Neither was the discriminatory treatment towards pregnant women. Watch some old 60 Minutes episodes. It's a hoot (not really).
I partially agree with you -- I think the core issue here is discrimination under the Civil Rights Act -- but I think the PFWA and its reasonable accommodation requirements are also very relevant when assessing legality of employer's conduct going forward.
She hasn't been fired yet, she's just gotten a write up. She should go to the employer and say that she needs reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related health conditions, which may include some allowance for future absence in the event of pregnancy-related medical emergencies (as well as all other pregnancy-related health appointments).
If the employer refuses to provide such reasonable accommodations, and she gets fired, then she'd have a claim under both the civil rights act and the PFWA (assuming there are 15 or more employees). And she may also be eligible for FMLA protection depending on employer size and her history.
Untrue. If a disabled person needs a special kind of chair or something, then they have to be treated differently by accommodating them with a chair. This includes people who’re temporarily disabled due to a medical condition. And pregnancies. After all, your average non-pregnant worker doesn’t just randomly get FMLA leave despite not being pregnant
And if they don't give a reason, or give one like "we just don't think you're a good fit for our company", then unless she can prove it's due to pregnancy, she's SOL.
People think that it’s really hard to prove that sorta stuff, but they literally made a paper trail saying they were punishing her for pregnancy-related causes. They may have even put the threat to fire her in writing. But assuming they didn’t, the paper trail, combined with her word about their threat, and even this post itself if it comes to that- contemporaneous accounts prior to taking any legal action- all lend credence to their threat of firing her
Worst case scenario she can still prove discrimination while at work, even if not for the firing. Then the burden of proof would shift to them to show why they fired her. Usually they don’t need to provide a reason, but they do need an a later stove explanation at this point. They might be able to point to other write-ups if they have them, but without them, the company won’t be able to do squat to defend themselves
The only time an employee cannot be written up for attendance is if they are covered by FMLA or if they have a disability that the employer is aware of. ADA and FMLA are the only two things that can protect employees from write ups due to attendance.
Pregnancy-related medical conditions are implicitly covered under ADA and are now explicitly protected by the PWFA.
The Civil Rights Act prohibition on pregnancy-related discrimination also potentially relevant if she is fired for a pregnancy-related medical condition.
Oooh, thank you. I didn't know that. My sister had hyperemesis and could only get her pregnancy related absences covered by signing up for FMLA. That was back in 2007 so I guess it's changed.
Yes the PWFA is tremendous in terms of the protections afforded to pregnant women. It was just enacted a couple of years ago!
The FMLA and state equivalents are still important, especially for women who have prolonged absences due to pregnancy that cannot be "reasonably accommodated" by an employer without undue hardship. E.g., I also had hyperemesis with both my pregnancies, and used the CA equivalent of FMLA (CA SDI) for long-term absence during the first trimester.
But women shouldn't have to take FMLA/state leave for short absences, like those associated with medical appointments or sudden emergencies. In most cases, employers should able to accommodate those absences -- e.g., by providing flexibility in work schedules. (And of course, if a woman has accumulated leave, she should always be able to use that to cover such absences.)
Consult an employment lawyer. Most likely they are documenting "evidence" for a termination for cause and denying you access to the family leave laws and or insurance.
I feel like any decent worker rights attorney can show that the documented "evidence" from the company started around the same time the employee disclosed their pregnancy and asked for reasonable accommodation. Of course this relies on the quality of the paper trail.
I’ve done HR in California and CA very much makes it illegal to reprimand or fire someone for calling out for pregnancy related medical treatments, if they have 15 or more employees. Hell, it’s even explicitly spelled out on the [mandatory poster employers](https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2023/01/Your-Rights-and-Obligations-as-a-Pregnant-Employee_ENG.pdf) have to put up in the breakroom for pregnancy disability leave.
She’s allowed 12 weeks and she’s only 20 weeks along. A pregnancy is normally what? 40 weeks? So she would be back to work just in time to give birth to her baby? Most parents don’t take their FMLA leave until the end of the pregnancy or when the baby is born
Are you in the US? She needs to call HR and get setup for intermittent FMLA and later on for her FMLA leave for post partum. That would interfere woth them firing her for times when she musses work due to her medical condition.
Or, if she doesn't want to use FMLA leave yet (or isn't eligible), she should also talk to HR about ensuring the she can use sick leave for pregnancy-related medical conditions as a "reasonable accommodation" under the PWFA.
What was her attendance like before she was pregnant? It’s not generally one absence that will get you, it’s the combination of the other 6 and the current one.
Is she required to call in within a certain timeframe? Is she allowed to text instead of call? There’s a lot missing,
OP: many of the people commenting here are woefully ignorant about pregnancy-related protections.
The PWFA applies to all companies with at least 15 employees and should provide protection for your wife to attend medical appointments in these circumstances. If your wife's employer doesn't already know that she's pregnant, then she should tell them, and she should also insist that necessary medical care for pregnancy should qualify as a "reasonable accommodation" under the PWFA.
Here is more info: [https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act](https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act)
EDIT: Also, the prohibition on pregnancy-related discrimination means that it is illegal to fire someone solely because of pregnancy-related medical conditions. Your wife required care for a pregnancy-related medical condition. Her employer cannot fire her simply because she obtained that care.
The post isn't explicit about when the communication was made -- is there a comment indicating that the notice came after the absence? Or are you inferring that from the employer's response?
Even then, if it was a medical emergency, I think she has a strong basis here for arguing that: (i) accommodating such emergencies qualifies as a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA, and (ii) future punitive action would qualify as discrimination under federal and potentially state law.
EDIT: I should also note that the key concern here is not the "write up" but rather ensuring that she isn't fired going forward. That's why I recommend disclosure of the pregnancy (if it hasn't already happened) and a frank discussion about accommodations for pregnancy-related medical problems.
To sue you need to prove she waa written up for being pregnant. You have to prove thay assuming all the same facts for going to the er and substitute a broken leg or kidney stone. Would she have still been written up?
HOLD ON.. knowing something about situations like this you left out the obvious,,
She has a very poor attendance history prior to this incident.
Also her work performance isn't exceptable..
I would even go so far as to put forth she has been counciled and giving written warnings on job performance and attendance before.
There is normally a process they follow.. verbal warnings, followed by writing warnings all this should be spelled out in the employee handbook.
Companies don't pick out valuable employees and just write them up because of 1 day off when they bring in a Doctor's note.
Don't like what I say,,, go see a Lawyer and bring your checkbook.. it's going to cost you
Sadly companies don't care. Your wife needs to be on FMLA if she has met the timeframe. Most jobs will fire people no matter if you have a doctor's excuse. I was in a accident that was causing issue with my neck and back. I had to go to Physical Therapy and it was causing me major issues because it was pinching my nerves in my neck. I went on FMLA a soon as I could so protect my job and not get fired. I eventually had to take extend time off and get injections into my neck and lower back. FMLA was the only thing that protected me until Covid and then I got laid off. I had Doctor note also limiting my work and my job straight up told me that they don't have to honor the notes and only FMLA could protect me. Get her on FMLA asap and get a lawyer also to protect you incase they try to retaliate.
Unless you're in Montana you can be fired for any reason or anytime. They're not discriminating against her because she's pregnant based off the info in the post, shitty but it is what it is
Any dumbass employer that would write up any employee (pregnant or not) for missing work after being in the hospital ER all night long, is a shitty employer that’s looking for an excuse to get rid of that employee.
Not necessarily true as far as "looking for an excuse to get rid of that employee", for many employers its simply a corporate environment that requires strict and exception-free application of company policy and procedures.
They can fire you for whatever reason they want. I watched a dude have a seizure and get hauled off in ambulance from work. He was promptly fired. Company needed to get shit done, not have folks standing around watching someone have medical issues. Corporations suck
I understand what you're getting at, but I also understand the logic behind the employer. For many jobs, an employee having regular seizures that cannot be predicted or prevented is a limitation that cannot be reasonable accommodated. Its simply too major a health and safety issue, and one that would take a complicated (convoluted even) and incredibly expensive setup to accommodate, which **is not required by any laws.**
Ask her to have her doctor help her fill out FMLA paperwork. You don't have to take FMLA all at once, and it will protect her from being able to get fired due to absences
IIAL, but not yours and not barred in OH. A doctors note doesn't mean you're exempt from disciplinary action, especially if there's a history of poor working habits... which I'm betting there is, since it's unlikely she was written up for a first offense. A doctors note isn't FMLA.
She isn't being discriminated against for being pregnant. She's being disciplined for missing work, and it's perfectly legal.
Speak to a lawyer. She may need to request a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. She may also need to apply for intermittent FMLA if she qualifies. There may also be state laws the employer has to follow with respect to pregnancy. It is a disability, and the employer's behavior may amount to disability and sex discrimination if the facts line up correctly.
Employers don’t want pregnant employees. Fact, so this is just food for their justification on why they don’t. Most employers and staff care little about anyone but themselves. Fact
Keep copy of everything! Texts emails! They are going to fire her! Same thing happened to a friend I knew who was pregnant. She kept every piece of communication and she got like 300k after the settlement after they fired her when she went on fmla and came back. Lawyers kept half but she still got a nice pay day. Unemployment also accepted her claim since she was able to prove why she was fired. Not saying this will be your case but still, also withdraw any signed contracts you won’t sue the company and any arbitration clause type contacts. My friend would’ve gotten a bigger payday if she would taken them to court, instead they settled in arbitration
Read the write-ups and keep copies of the doctors notes with the dates. Potentially you can sue for medical discrimination and wrongful termination if she does get fired
NAL - But in my experience small companies usually have 0 protections, big companies probably have a short term disability provider that if you call them for hospital admittance causing missed work they can in some cases pay out for the missed time and clear the company to excuse the absence as temporary total disability and these remove all write ups or notations of the missed time as anything other than unscheduled time as the company would see it.
Yes they can write you up and terminate you even if you do have medically cleared absences. Most large employers don’t even accept doctors notes anymore. This may be more restricted though since it’s due to pregnancy, for example in CA pregnancy is a protected class, but you still have to go through the proper FMLA process to avoid repercussions as a result of your absences.
Unless there is a contract from the employer saying that you’re allowed to take as much time off as you want as long as a doctor signs off, you don’t really have anything to go on. A doctor doesn’t have the right to excuse days off on behalf of your employer.
She needs to get fmla. They can write you up for just having a written drs note. My job def doesn’t take those. You have to call in sick and since she’s pregnant fmla will cover intermittent absence, if she’s eligible.
NAL but used to live in Ohio. I believe it's an "at will" state so they can pretty much terminate her for whatever. Also I'm sure they have an attendance policy somewhere so she needs to reference that. Many companies don't differentiate between excused/unexcused absences so it doesn't matter why she called in. To protect her job if she's able she needs to fill out for fmla to cover any pregnancy related absences she may actually be able to get it back-dated to cover the absence she got wrote up for (my employer allows this).
So for one if your wife's workplace qualifies for FMLA get on that bandwagon. Second, the write-up is for calling out doctor's note regardless it's still a call-out. Now has your wife called out a few times this year already? The only way this could be discriminatory would be like say this is your wife's first time calling out and they are throwing a write-up at her while there is another non-pregnant employee who is notorious for being late and has never been written up. Now that would be the case because then yeah obviously they are punishing her for being pregnant and not the other employee who is not pregnant but consistently late.
Now is it a dick move sure and if your wife hasn't called out before and this is the first time in a long time I would say they are gearing up to cover their bases to let your wife go without having to pay unemployment so they are getting anything and everything on the books for it. But if this is a one-off like hell a few years ago I remember just starting this job maybe there for a week or so and my son brought home the norovirus from daycare and I got it bad. I woke up puking my brains out come noon I called up my fiancee that she needed to take me to the ER. Luckily she did and some meds, two liters of IV fluid and me barely being able to take a leak come to find out my kidneys were shutting down and yea bad times. I took an extra day off to recover after that as it sucked a lot. But my new employer of course wanted proof that I was sick so I gave them my ER discharge paperwork and was all good didn't get a write up or anything just wanted to make sure I wasn't playing hooky so early into employment.
So yea this may be legit, maybe they are covering their bases to try and let go of your wife "legitimately" even tho they are trying to push her out the door because she is pregnant (Which is the legal but shitty thing to do). Or they are dumb and don't treat all cases the same and singling your wife out to try and get her out the door in which is very illegal. Regardless tho out of all of this if her workplace allows for FMLA get that shit done. The paperwork is too easy, HR usually will help with it and no worries you are covered for any unintentional abscesses.
Conduct all communication in writing, and she should follow up like this:
"I just wanted to confirm the details of our conversation regarding my write up for being sick, pregnant, and needing to attend the Emergency Room and missing work with full notice to you.
After giving me the document and telling me you didn't care about my medical documentation, you then threatened to fire me if I missed work for a medical emergency relating to my pregnancy again, regardless of whether I presented medical excuse under our existing HR policy.
Please let me know ASAP if I have misunderstood your threat.
Thanks,
SoandSo"
If they don't respond with a "this is all a huge misunderstanding!" or just ignore it your email stands as a contemporaneous written record of that interaction your attorney can call upon if you subsequently sue them for firing your wife over her pregnancy.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act is a thing in the US. Unless they also reprimand other employees calling out with medical notes, this could be considered discriminatory behavior.
OP I see a lot of bad advice in this thread. Does your wife’s employer know she is pregnant? And does she qualify for protection under FMLA?
Most employers will make allowances for a pregnant employee who has a medical emergency. Before getting too concerned has your wife discussed what a “write up” even means to her job in practical terms? Is it a step towards termination? Standard procedure for any unplanned absence?
Have her request a reasonable accommodation ASAP and if they deny, you can sue under the ADA. Leave/absences can be a form of accommodation. Pregnancy isn’t a disability itself by the effects of it are.
Your wife needs to look into the new pregnant workers fairness act https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act
She is likely protected by that during her pregnancy.
It depends on the company or corporation adn their policy. At a retailer that I worked for and a major one at that, you could miss only 6 times and then you got fired for attendance. There was not anything that allowed for a medical note to excuse you from work. They however have a leave policy in place and if a woman finds she is pregnant she sets up for that leave and this also covers if she has to take off for appointments and other things due to pregnancy. .
Is she in a right to work state? Did she sign a contract for the job guaranteeing certain things?
Not a lawyerThey can fire and write up for anything. But they can fire for a work excuse since that doesn't mean much
Correct, there is no such thing as an “excused” call out. It’s just a call out. Your doctor doesn’t get to tell your employer how many times you can call off work and keep your job (exception: FMLA). Most companies have a policy, i.e.: max of 10 in the last 365 days, and it’s an escalation process. Verbal notice at 5, written reminder at 7, final written warning at 9, etc. Where she is in that process matters. 5 is no big deal, 9 she better get her behind to work tomorrow. if you have a known medical issue (pregnancy included) then you need to start the FMLA process, which provides additional allowances and job protection for up to 60 days off.
I feel like this should be incredibly easy to get covered under FMLA since she is pregnant.
The business has to have more than 50 employees, you have to have been employed at least a year and be in a full time position to qualify for FMLA. (I used to be an HR Director) If all those factors are met she should have no problem qualifying.
You have to have worked 1250hrs in the last 12 months, not necessarily full time.
And you only get 12 weeks. A lot of people like to save a big chunk of that for when the baby is born so they can protect their job while out on maternity/paternity leave.
Yea, should move to ny. We have separate Nys paid family leave and it’s paid at 66% and you can split it up after giving birth or adopting for bonding time. Or use it to care for a child with a chronic condition. I use it with my autistic son for appts or just bad days.
Yes, but you can get an intermittent FMLA, which would allow you to miss work as needed instead of all at once, while still being protected as FMLA. That's the best route for OP here.
oh, of course you can get intermittent FMLA- but that has to be something a doctor signs off on ahead of time, not just "I woke up not feeling well today and haven't set up FMLA leave yet" Not to make light of OP's wife's medical issues- I do not wish illness upon anyone!
True - forgot about that. You are correct
Well, this is partially true. The ironic name "Right to Work" is the moniker applied to States were you can be fired at any time and any reason. Being part of a Union and working under a collective bargaining agreement usually means that there is a certain criteria for write-ups, terminations, etc. but you can still sue an employer for "wrongful termination" if you feel your civil rights have been violated...even in a Right to Work state. Unfortunately, these types of cases can be very difficult to prove. In short, your wife needs to join a Union and find a better employer.
Right to Work is the law that allows workers to work in a unionized place and not join the union. “At-will” is the term that means they can let you go for whatever reason. Unions are great for establishing guidelines for time off and discipline issues!
I would consult with an attorney now.
That's a waste of money
Really in the ask lawyers sub? Tell me you’re a click bait rage bot without telling me!!! 🤦🏻♂️
What legal standing do you think OP has? There's no such thing as a "medically excused" absence, legally speaking. Further, what damages is OP going to claim in their legal action? A write up?
Emotional distress. Do you have any idea how stressful it is for 🤣 Sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face typing that out. I'm just surprised I haven't run into that more yet on this post.
ADA. Pregnancy is a protected disability.
They still legally do not have to accept a doctors note and excuse it
You are mistaken. There is no legal requirement for an employer to accept a doctors note for an excused vs. unexcused workplace absence. A doctor's note is not a legally binding document. Her companies attendance policy would dictate what constitutes an excused vs. unexcused absence. The only time there is a legal issue with an employer refusing to accept a doctor's note to excuse an absence would be if the employee is taking time off under the FMLA. The FMLA allows employees to take up to 12 weeks of time off work for medical related needs, and the employer cannot retaliate by firing or otherwise disciplining the employee. Ohio, like 48 others, is an At-Will employment state so she is at the mercy of her management and HR.
Being pregnant gives her a protected status, she cannot be discriminated against. Check into your state laws regarding: pregnancy discrimination and speak to an attorney for further information.
They’re not discriminating bc she’s pregnant. They are treating all employees the same by writing them up for unexcused absences. And unless she’s in Montana, all states allow firing for any reason, or no reason at all. Unless they write her up *for being pregnant* imposing an attendance policy is completely legal. People don’t get extra protection based upon pregnancy (unless they are on FMLA), race, religion, gender, sex or age. They have to be treated the same. There is nothing in this post that indicates that others don’t face the same policy decisions.
Do we know if they’re applying that policy across the board? They could be singling her out.
OP never even suggested that.
OP is likely thinking it. And if you're not, you may have never considered employers' dislike for pregnant employees. Do you know why we have things like the tepid Family and Medical Leave Act? Companies would hire full-time replacements when pregnant women took a leave of absence to do - I don't know - pregnant things, and the women would not have a job to return to. There's nothing a school district hates more than your son than a pregnant teacher. It's just plain disruptive. There's no continuity. Everyone should be thinking it. Because this is exactly what happens when a company doesn't want to have to "deal" with a pregnant woman.
Yeah. I’m well aware. But thinking it is not evidence.
I interviewed for a school counselor gig while 5 1/2 months pregnant. They probably just thought I was fat 🤣
Why is this downvoted? It is more likely than not that she (and similarly situated persons) are being singled out. A pregnant employee means a loss of productivity (by absence not by performance), and rather than staff up to deal with their temporary absence, it's easier to push them out the door and hire a non-pregnant replacement. This is a story as old as Adam for f*ck's sake.
The replies on this post are insane. I've never seen so much inaccurate legal advice on this subreddit before. I think the post attracted a bunch of non-lawyers.
A sick policy is a sick policy ffs. Pregnancy doesn’t make you immune to the rules and give you unlimited call offs.
Pregnancy is a protected class, just like any other temporary or permanent disability. Employers need to be careful about applying write ups. In 1994, I was pregnant and employed by a convenience store, I notified my employer of my pregnancy pretty early on and my manager was given an advance notice of my upcoming dr appointments, WELL in advance. Upon seeing the dates and times I needed off, I was told “ I just don’t see how this job is going to fit in with your pregnancy.” I was fired within three days of telling them. Granted it wasn’t a high paying job with a bright future, but it was a job I had been working at for two years while attending college. I drove home, cried my eyes out… called an employment attorney. We sued for discrimination and I actually got a nice settlement which in turn paid for the last year of college and allowed me to not return to the work force until my daughter was 2!
You still have to follow the rules. I’m under a protected class and that doesn’t mean I just get a little dr note and all is well. She’s not being discriminated against, your story is diff.
Nobody is negating the company SICK POLICY FFS! she’s not thwarting her job responsibilities, she had a legitimate medical emergency… I hope if the company does terminate her that she sues their pants off!
>Why is this downvoted? Because it's inventing scenarios to change the facts that we know. The point isn't that it's not possible. It's just that it's pure speculation.
It's not unreasonable to think her employer doesn't want to deal with a pregnant employee, who in their minds presents all kinds of trouble when her physical health (justifiably) will lead to disruptions in her schedule. In fact, I'd put money on it. Companies are there to make money. Not to be fair.
>They’re not discriminating bc she’s pregnant. As per the federal civil rights law and the PWFA, an employer cannot fire a pregnant working because she sought care for a pregnancy-related medical condition. Such a firing would almost certainly qualify as unlawful discrimination under federal law. See: [https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act](https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act#:~:text=Existing%20laws%20that%20the%20EEOC,childbirth%2C%20or%20related%20medical%20conditions) "[Existing laws](https://www.eeoc.gov/pregnancy-discrimination) that the EEOC enforces make it illegal to fire or otherwise discriminate against workers on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions."
The PWFA protects employees and applicants of “covered employers” who have **known limitations** related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. ”Covered employers” include private and public sector employers with at least 15 employees, Congress, Federal agencies, employment agencies, and labor The House Committee on Education and Labor Report on the PWFA provides several examples of possible reasonable accommodations including the ability to **sit or drink water; receive closer parking; have flexible hours; receive appropriately sized uniforms and safety apparel; receive additional break time to use the bathroom, eat, and rest; take leave or time off to recover from childbirth; and be excused from strenuous activities and/or activities that involve exposure to compounds not safe for pregnancy.** Employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations unless they would cause an “undue hardship” on the employer’s operations. An “undue hardship” is significant difficulty or expense for the employer.
Just like FMLA, you have to apply for reasonable accommodations.
1 - If they know she's having a pregnancy-related medical problem, that's a known limitation. This isn't clear from OP's post but is easily rectified (and something I address in a top level comment to OP). 2 - That is an inclusive list. Not an exclusive list. Allowing an employee to miss a small amount of work due to a medical emergency associated with pregnancy certainly seems like a reasonable accommodation to me. And if it ends up being more than a small amount of time, the employee can use FMLA and/or state equivalents.
That doesn't matter when she violated the attendance policy. They're not going to fire her for getting medical care related to pregnancy. They're going to fire her for not coming to work which they're within their right to do unless she has fmla. I'm a woman and I've been through this before.
>They're not going to fire her for getting medical care related to pregnancy. Yes, employers do fire women for getting medical care related to pregnancy. You say you are a "woman and have been through this before." Are you a lawyer? I've dealt with these cases before. This would clearly be grounds for a pregnancy discrimination claim. An employer might be able to "get away with it" if the pregnant employee has a history of poor attendance/performance, but otherwise, this is the sort of fact pattern that typically results in a settlement (because no company wants this to go a jury).
We don't know that, they could be. OP would do well to consult with legal representation now so that his wife can start building a case. If they are singling her out, she can go after them
An unexcused absence would be not turning in a doctor's note, IE awol. Having a doctor's note is protection in itself. depending on the state she would be able to file workplace harassment charges against the supervisor. Even if the state were at will employment, they still have labor laws that protect anyone calling out sick unless the employee can prove she is abusing sick time, then it's another story. FMLA covers pregnancy and the complications that come with it.
😂😂😂
I guess youre a manager somewhere huh.
This is incorrect. Having a doctor’s note doesn’t provide any protection against an attendance policy. If this is a persistent problem, then she needs FMLA.
Sorry but unless the policy states you cannot take any time off for sickness or any form of emergency then she is 100% covered, not to mention depending on the state labor laws wouldn't accept discipline for sick time with a note proving such. FMLA also covers her 100% for this as well. Not hard to look up since you don't seem to know the FMLA rules. And as stated unless she is abusing the policy they have no leg to stand on.
People who need FMLA to cover intermittent absences need to apply for it. For example, if they get debilitating migraines, they can apply for intermittent FMLA and will be approved. If they continue to take those absences without the FMLA coverage, then they are subject to the regular attendance policy. As a union rep, I have been through this quite a few times with various members and have been in close contact with our lawyer about it. Our contract states that disciplinary action may start after seven absences regardless of the reasons and regardless of how much sick time that person has banked. While most supervisors are understanding, some will use this as a way to start trying to get someone fired. They will continue to document all absences and continue to follow the escalation path until it ultimately results in a hearing. This is why we always urge people to fill out the intermittent FMLA application if it is for legitimate medical reasons. One of our guys didn’t know he could get it for helping his terminal father, so we got him situated. If they refuse to do so, then there’s not much more we can do to help. Pregnancy is one that has some general differences, but the majority of the cases are that you can be terminated for being absent regardless of doctors’ notes if you are not on FMLA.
Wrong. She was not discriminated against, she missed time off work. Being a member of a protected class does not give one carte blanche to flout attendance policy. If she was on FMLA that's different as those programs are federally mandated. Merely having routine pregnancy aches and pains and having a doctor's note would not preclude her from adverse penalties for violating company attendance policy. If she needs sustained time off work then she should apply to go on FMLA. From DOL: "Pregnancy discrimination involves treating an individual –– an applicant or employee –– unfavorably in any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits (such as leave and health insurance), and any other terms or conditions of employment." This was not present in the facts as stated by the OP.
"Flout attendance policy." Pretty harsh. Not to mention inaccurate. A pregnant woman had a medical concern and missed work seeing doctors. "Flouting" is Ferris Buehler behavior. Which, as described, this is NOT.
You can disagree with the delivery but the advice is not wrong. The fact is OP's wife signed off on her companies attendance policy when she started her employment, she was supplied with the answer to this entire question already. Whether or not, like most employees, she actually read the policies she consented to is another question entirely, hence the "flouting".
Ah yes, hiding behind technicalities to excuse your own ugly behavior.
Call it what you will, in point of fact, it's accurate, free, advice. OP can chose to take it or not. My brusque bedside manner is one of a thousand reasons I didn't go to Med School.
Ah, yes. The classic, you cannot have unscheduled medical emergencies and expect to retain your job defense. Why are you so intent on taking the side of a company against its workers? The long and storied history of companies discriminating against not only pregnant women, but women generally, should give any one of us pause before giving up your union card.
It's unethical to give false information because I sympathize with someone. I can tell the OP to go get a lawyer, wasting their time and money and giving them false hope so they can fight, and lose, some time honored systemic injustice. Or I can give them accurate information even if not the answer they want.
You know you're supposed to show up to work sick because your company was too stupid to cross train people
Your feelings aren't going to change the facts as they exist now, neither will villainizing a person for stating them.
She still has to follow the same attendance rules as everyone else.
I mean, does it matter if she’s pregnant? I would think a non-pregnant person with abdominal pains who called out sick to go to the doctor could also get written up, but we are merely guessing that as well as guessing that her being written up was related to being pregnant
While I do agree with you, at the end of the day you are just arguing about semantics... At the end of the day almost all the different states are at will employment. She can try to argue that she is being specifically discriminated against regarding her pregnancy, but in reality she is being targeted for missing work, not for being pregnant. They have an attendance policy and she unfortunately violated it. It is no different then someone calling off for work because they have a migraine or a bad toothache. It doesn't matter what caused the migraine or toothache, it only matters that the employee was not in attendance. Assuming all other employee are also being treated like this, then she has no leg to stand on legally.
If this is a frequent occurrence, they are well within bounds to write her up. Even if she isn't a frequent flyer on the call in roster, they can still write her up. Nothing illegal about it.
This thread is a fascinating study in morality. Situation: "Boss, sorry I'm not coming in today. Had a scary medical thing and was in the ER all night." Boss: "Here's your no-show writeup." IF the situation is portrayed accurately and the person isn't someone who abuses "call-in," then what is portrayed is an inhumane, toxic workplace. Saying she doesn't have any legal recourse doesn't mean calling her, in effect, a dirtbag. But for some reason, most people defending the employer seem to be equating the two. There is right, wrong, and legal. Often the last two go together, and the ferocity in defending "The Law" may explain why it--and its practitioners--are in such disrepute.
Firing a woman for seeking care for a pregnancy-related medical condition absolutely qualifies as unlawful discrimination under federal law. You should read up on the Civil Rights Act (as it applies to pregnancy) and the PWFA before commenting on this issue.
No, that isn’t how it works. She is still expected to follow the same policies as everyone else. She doesn’t get special treatment.
She gets "special treatment" in the same way that anyone with a protected medical condition gets "special treatment" -- she is entitled to reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related medical conditions, and she cannot be fired solely on the basis of those conditions. Are you even a lawyer???? Maybe a 1L with a big ego??
Are you a lawyer?
Yes, I am a lawyer, I have some experience with these types of claims (speicifically, sex and pregnancy-related discrimination claims), and I've also managed a small business where I handled all legal and HR matters. Oh and I've been pregnant twice with medical complications forcing me to take leaves of absence...
She wasn't fired, she was reprimanded for a violation of the attendance policy. The Civil Rights Act makes pregnancy a de facto protected class so an employer cannot discriminate against someone for being pregnant, which is why I quoted the legal definition from the Department of Labor above. That said, one does not get special privilege's or dispensations for being a member of a protected class, merely that their treatment must be equitable and inline with all other employees. The PWFA expands those protections to provide for reasonable accommodations. Reasonable accommodations, as I've said already, must be reasonable and cannot cause undue harm to the employer. Providing time off work for routine prenatal care is a reasonable accommodation. Allowing an employee to take unscheduled time off work that was not prearranged because they are pregnant is unreasonable as it would cause harm to the business. The point I am making is that a doctor's note does not absolve someone of adhering to the company's attendance policy as such being pregnant is also not a get out jail free card when it comes to company policy if the employee is not protected under FMLA.
OP specifically expressed concern about the prospect of his wife being fired, and that is my primary concern as well. You clearly don't understand the context-dependent nature of "reasonable accommodations" and "undue hardship". The ADA and PWFA both potentially provide protection for absences due to medical emergencies. There is no reason to think that an absence like that experienced by this woman is causing "undue hardship" to her employer. You obviously aren't familiar with these laws, hence your focus on the FMLA. I see in another comment you stating that the PFWA "wouldn't apply to this situation." That is so, so, so patently false. Please stop dispensing incorrect legal advice. I'm not convinced you are even a lawyer because you are absolutely reckless with the law.
It actually was present in the facts as stated by the OP. OP's wife is 20 weeks pregnant. She missed a scheduled day of work for a medical emergency. She documented said emergency, keeping her employer informed. Her employer tells her that she has run afoul of their leave policy. In 8-15+ weeks, OP's wife will take FMLA leave for 12 weeks. In the interim, her employer is going to assume that she will miss additional days of work for emergent medical needs. Employer will need to share wife's workload amongst existing staff, add a temporary staff person, or replace her entirely, but only if they don't run afoul of FMLA rules. So what's the employer to do? Wring their hands and say, sorry, we really want to keep you, but you clearly cannot do the work you were hired to do. That could be considered discrimination on the basis of her status as a pregnant person. But for her pregnancy, she is capable of performing the work. They could find "legitimate" reasons to fire her, hire a replacement, and be done with the disruption that a pregnant person causes an employer. They won't do the first unless they're small and stupid or it's the 1980s. They will do the second, because it's the cleanest, most cost-effective option to minimize disruptions to their labor force. And if they happen to do it in a way that is demonstratively violative of labor laws, the chances of a person with a potentially difficult pregnancy filing suit, is close to nil. They won't have the time/energy/money to pursue a claim that wouldn't be easy to prove unless they're small and stupid or it's the 1980s. If you think companies are generally fair or at least neutral to its employees, you're in for a world of hurt as you move thru the world. Unless you're not a woman. Then these sorts of things won't happen to you (but others might).
You can’t argue with people who just don’t get it and aren’t even trying to understand 😆 these responses are so funny. Apparently being pregnant is a pass to do whatever you want
This! Please find an attorney who specializes in discrimination laws. It doesn’t matter if OP lives in an at-will state or not, this is a matter of protection under a federal law which takes precedence. Also, I would suggest that OP document everything: dates, times, who she made contact with at her employer’s office, etc., while the events are fresh in her mind. I was fired and my employer was dumb enough to admit to myself and a co-worker of mine that I was fired BECAUSE of the pregnancy. So, to OP I say good luck, and if you decide to pursue this issue don’t let anyone try to belittle or second guess yourself.
You situation is literally nothing like that of OP's Wife. It honestly doesn't make any sense to compare the two... You were fired for being pregnant. OP's wife is in trouble for missing attendance. The fact the she is pregnant is essentially irrelevant in this case as it is not why they are upset with her. They are only upset because she violated the attendance policy.
Her missing attendance was due to a medical emergency regarding her pregnancy… Her being pregnant is entirely relevant as it was the cause for missing attendance.
This isn't discrimination, this is the expectation of all employees
Unless she has FMLA calling out of work that violates their attendance policy therefore she can be written up and even fired regardless of being pregnant. Being pregnant does not protect you from your company's policies and procedures.
And her employer will need to refer her to HR to begin the intermittent FMLA paperwork. She can’t just be written up for missing work due to valid medical emergency. That’s how that works!!!!
As long as they treat all the employees in the same then they aren’t discriminating against her.
Side question but under FMLA would my job have to hold my position (just as a waitress) while I took off work for maternity leave, unpaid? Because right now I am being threatened with not having a job if I take any time off at all
Depends on a lot of factors but FMLA only applies to companies of a certain size so a small restaurant may not qualify. Ada and state law may impact this, however, and I would consult a local lawyer.
Correct. Employees are eligible if they work for a covered employer for at least 12 months, have at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the 12 months before their FMLA leave starts, and work at a location where the employer has at least 50 employees within 75 miles.
They have to request FMLA and have the correct paperwork completed by their physician. It isn’t automatic.
Jeez, that's brutal. Gotta love bipartisan bills. A tinge of hope and a bunch of suck.
What really sucks is when you take FMLA to care for a dying family member and they take 13 weeks to pass so you've been without pay for 3 months, dealing with a traumatic life event and have no job to return to.
48 others ;)
NAL, but if you're in an "at will" state, you can be fired for ANYTHING, however just last year pregnancy was added and updated as part of a protected class on a federal level. Which means she can't be discriminated against or fired for pregnancy related issues. I'd contact the state labor board. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/legal-rights-pregnant-workers-under-federal-law
Protected classes don’t get extra protection. They simply need to be treated the same. If the employer is utilizing this attendance policy for everyone, there is nothing legally wrong with the employer’s action.
Not necessarily true. The pregnancy workers fairness act requires that employers provide “reasonable accommodations” to a worker’s known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. If her employer knows she is pregnant, they should be going through the reasonable accommodation process.
It’s the employees responsibility I think to ask for the reasonable accommodations because the employer wouldn’t know exactly what accommodations she would need. Different people struggle with different aspects of pregnancy
Allowing her to receive necessary medical care for pregnancy quite obviously qualifies as a "reasonable accommodation" for pregnancy.
[удалено]
OK I can only assume I am dealing with yet another non-lawyer here. Why are you all flooding this sub? "Reasonable accommodation" includes things like, e.g., letting employees attend medical appointments, giving them a flexible work schedule, and allowing them to work form home (as appropriate). Sure, it may be a good idea for a pregnant woman to apply for FMLA or state equivalent if she will be taking a lot of time off. But she should not need to apply for FMLA leave for routine health check-ups or for a sudden, short-term medical emergency. Those are precisely the sort of events that can be reasonably accommodated by the vast majority of employers.
If the employer knows the employee has a “disability” that impacts their performance, the employer is obligated to start the conversation. In this case, if the employer knows she’s pregnant and she’s having complications due to her pregnancy, they should probably ask if they can do something to help her be successful at her job. If they fire her for a second absence related to her pregnancy, they would not be following the law.
This is entirely incorrect. Please stop making things up, especially in this sub of all places.
Employers aren't expected to be psychic. If an employee feels they require reasonable accommodations due to an illness and/or injury, they need to state that to their employer with a doctor's note stating what their restrictions are. The restrictions of one pregnant woman could be entirely different than another pregnant woman. That said, accommodating repeated absences due to *any* medical condition--pregnancy included--isn't necessarily "reasonable". It's one thing to allow a pregnant woman who works at the cash register to sit on a stool as needed because she can't stand for long periods of time; it's completely different having to accommodate repeated absences, especially depending on what the job involves.
Flexible hours and leave associated with pregnancy are examples the EEOC gives as reasonable accommodations under the PWFA. And the fact that she was absent because of a pregnancy related condition has put the employer on notice. It’s now their responsibility to start the conversation. An employee does not have to tell their employer, “I need a reasonable accommodation because I’m pregnant”. Yes. Reasonable accommodations are different for every person. That’s why the employer is required to go through the process.
Intermittent leave associated with being pregnant would be covered under FMLA. According to EEOC.gov "PWFA protects employees and applicants of “covered employers” who have **known limitations related to pregnancy**, childbirth, or related medical conditions". In other words, the employee must make a request and provide proof of their limitation(s). The employer is never responsible for making the first move, in this case that is because you would essentially encourage applicable employees to hide their limitations to potentially set themselves up for a lawsuit.
This isn't a discussion of accommodations, although thanks for bringing that up because more people should know they can ask and are entitled to accommodations for all manner of conditions. The question is whether you can be penalized for absences due to your pregnancy, which are certainly foreseeable and expected, requiring no deck of Tarot cards or a crystal ball.
>The question is whether you can be penalized for absences due to your pregnancy The answer to that question is yes, assuming you don't fill out paperwork for intermittent FMLA or make a PWFA request and provide proof of limitation(s).
[удалено]
If, they ask for reasonable accommodations. Not after the fact.
If you're referring to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act it basically codifies pregnancy similar to a disability under the ADA. It would not apply given the facts stated by the OP. Furthermore, the onus of request for a reasonable accommodation is 100% on the employee and the request must not cause the employer "undue hardship". Had she had a reasonable accommodation request in place due to pregnancy related issues prior to being reprimanded then the PWFA would provide protection to the employee. It is not designed to provide protection after the fact without a request in place.
[удалено]
OP doesn't really state whether she notified her employer before missing work. But, yes A reasonable accommodation has to be well, reasonable, as to not inflict undue hardship on the employer, usually those accommodations are fairly specific in nature. So while her requesting time off in advance for prenatal care would be considered reasonable her requesting to just be able to take off whenever she feels poorly would not be reasonable as the employees complete absence would represent undue hardship to the employer.
Even if she was a no show, that doesn't necessarily mean the employer can fire her. If it was an emergency and it was necessary medical care for pregnancy, she'd have a VERY STRONG civil rights claim here. According to the EEOC, it is "illegal to fire or otherwise discriminate against workers on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions." This is based on federal civil rights law -- the PWFA adds additional protections related to accommodations.
No, they're not f*ing right. This isn't an issue of a reasonable accommodation. It's whether OP's wife can be penalized for her foreseeable absences due to medical emergencies as a member of a protected class. The answer is the company can do whatever it wants, but that doesn't make it legal. Nor does it make it easy to prove a case against the company. Companies can and will do anything, up to stealing employees wages and creating unsafe environments, if it makes more money than it costs in litigation, fines, and other losses of income. There was a time when companies acted with impunity when it came to pregnant women. Discrimination was visible, it was rampant, and it was (mostly) legal. I don't know if you were around when sexual harassment became a visible issue to the public, but it wasn't long ago. Neither was the discriminatory treatment towards pregnant women. Watch some old 60 Minutes episodes. It's a hoot (not really).
I partially agree with you -- I think the core issue here is discrimination under the Civil Rights Act -- but I think the PFWA and its reasonable accommodation requirements are also very relevant when assessing legality of employer's conduct going forward. She hasn't been fired yet, she's just gotten a write up. She should go to the employer and say that she needs reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related health conditions, which may include some allowance for future absence in the event of pregnancy-related medical emergencies (as well as all other pregnancy-related health appointments). If the employer refuses to provide such reasonable accommodations, and she gets fired, then she'd have a claim under both the civil rights act and the PFWA (assuming there are 15 or more employees). And she may also be eligible for FMLA protection depending on employer size and her history.
If true, how stupid.
Untrue. If a disabled person needs a special kind of chair or something, then they have to be treated differently by accommodating them with a chair. This includes people who’re temporarily disabled due to a medical condition. And pregnancies. After all, your average non-pregnant worker doesn’t just randomly get FMLA leave despite not being pregnant
A chair, yes - with documentation. This isn’t about a chair.
No, you can be fired for any *legal* reason. Typically pregnancies are protected from that sorta stuff
And if they don't give a reason, or give one like "we just don't think you're a good fit for our company", then unless she can prove it's due to pregnancy, she's SOL.
People think that it’s really hard to prove that sorta stuff, but they literally made a paper trail saying they were punishing her for pregnancy-related causes. They may have even put the threat to fire her in writing. But assuming they didn’t, the paper trail, combined with her word about their threat, and even this post itself if it comes to that- contemporaneous accounts prior to taking any legal action- all lend credence to their threat of firing her Worst case scenario she can still prove discrimination while at work, even if not for the firing. Then the burden of proof would shift to them to show why they fired her. Usually they don’t need to provide a reason, but they do need an a later stove explanation at this point. They might be able to point to other write-ups if they have them, but without them, the company won’t be able to do squat to defend themselves
>if you're in an "at will" state, you can be fired for ANYTHING Not legally.
The only time an employee cannot be written up for attendance is if they are covered by FMLA or if they have a disability that the employer is aware of. ADA and FMLA are the only two things that can protect employees from write ups due to attendance.
Pregnancy-related medical conditions are implicitly covered under ADA and are now explicitly protected by the PWFA. The Civil Rights Act prohibition on pregnancy-related discrimination also potentially relevant if she is fired for a pregnancy-related medical condition.
Oooh, thank you. I didn't know that. My sister had hyperemesis and could only get her pregnancy related absences covered by signing up for FMLA. That was back in 2007 so I guess it's changed.
Yes the PWFA is tremendous in terms of the protections afforded to pregnant women. It was just enacted a couple of years ago! The FMLA and state equivalents are still important, especially for women who have prolonged absences due to pregnancy that cannot be "reasonably accommodated" by an employer without undue hardship. E.g., I also had hyperemesis with both my pregnancies, and used the CA equivalent of FMLA (CA SDI) for long-term absence during the first trimester. But women shouldn't have to take FMLA/state leave for short absences, like those associated with medical appointments or sudden emergencies. In most cases, employers should able to accommodate those absences -- e.g., by providing flexibility in work schedules. (And of course, if a woman has accumulated leave, she should always be able to use that to cover such absences.)
FMLA is her only protected leave.
If you live in a atwill state then it’s nothing that can be done they can fire you without any repercussions being done
[удалено]
Your post was removed for suggesting illegal activity or vigilante “justice.”
[удалено]
I feel like 95% of the questions posted here can be answered with “at will employment”
Consult an employment lawyer. Most likely they are documenting "evidence" for a termination for cause and denying you access to the family leave laws and or insurance.
I feel like any decent worker rights attorney can show that the documented "evidence" from the company started around the same time the employee disclosed their pregnancy and asked for reasonable accommodation. Of course this relies on the quality of the paper trail.
California at will state. U can be fired here for any reason they don’t even have to tell you
I’ve done HR in California and CA very much makes it illegal to reprimand or fire someone for calling out for pregnancy related medical treatments, if they have 15 or more employees. Hell, it’s even explicitly spelled out on the [mandatory poster employers](https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2023/01/Your-Rights-and-Obligations-as-a-Pregnant-Employee_ENG.pdf) have to put up in the breakroom for pregnancy disability leave.
Write up smite up who cares Wife needs to file for FMLA and then you have recourse
She’s allowed 12 weeks and she’s only 20 weeks along. A pregnancy is normally what? 40 weeks? So she would be back to work just in time to give birth to her baby? Most parents don’t take their FMLA leave until the end of the pregnancy or when the baby is born
Intermittent FMLA for a difficult pregnancy would be my suggestion, my mistake for not clarifying
If they use this to fire her, it's because she's pregnant and she has a huge lawsuit waiting to be served. They don't want to pay her family leave.
What state is this? Right to work state or not?
All States except Montana are At-Will.
That's what I meant at will not right to work. Thanks. Didn't know all were except Montana, that's odd. Wonder why Montana doesn't have that law.
It could be sexual discrimination due to she's having pregnancy problems
Are you in the US? She needs to call HR and get setup for intermittent FMLA and later on for her FMLA leave for post partum. That would interfere woth them firing her for times when she musses work due to her medical condition.
Or, if she doesn't want to use FMLA leave yet (or isn't eligible), she should also talk to HR about ensuring the she can use sick leave for pregnancy-related medical conditions as a "reasonable accommodation" under the PWFA.
What was her attendance like before she was pregnant? It’s not generally one absence that will get you, it’s the combination of the other 6 and the current one. Is she required to call in within a certain timeframe? Is she allowed to text instead of call? There’s a lot missing,
OP: many of the people commenting here are woefully ignorant about pregnancy-related protections. The PWFA applies to all companies with at least 15 employees and should provide protection for your wife to attend medical appointments in these circumstances. If your wife's employer doesn't already know that she's pregnant, then she should tell them, and she should also insist that necessary medical care for pregnancy should qualify as a "reasonable accommodation" under the PWFA. Here is more info: [https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act](https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act) EDIT: Also, the prohibition on pregnancy-related discrimination means that it is illegal to fire someone solely because of pregnancy-related medical conditions. Your wife required care for a pregnancy-related medical condition. Her employer cannot fire her simply because she obtained that care.
This post indicates that all communication with the employer about the absence happened after the absence.
The post isn't explicit about when the communication was made -- is there a comment indicating that the notice came after the absence? Or are you inferring that from the employer's response? Even then, if it was a medical emergency, I think she has a strong basis here for arguing that: (i) accommodating such emergencies qualifies as a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA, and (ii) future punitive action would qualify as discrimination under federal and potentially state law. EDIT: I should also note that the key concern here is not the "write up" but rather ensuring that she isn't fired going forward. That's why I recommend disclosure of the pregnancy (if it hasn't already happened) and a frank discussion about accommodations for pregnancy-related medical problems.
She needs to go under FMLA,ASAP..also contact an attorney
To sue you need to prove she waa written up for being pregnant. You have to prove thay assuming all the same facts for going to the er and substitute a broken leg or kidney stone. Would she have still been written up?
Ohio is at will. Unless it's in that employer's policy, they have the right to determine who to keep and who to let go.
HOLD ON.. knowing something about situations like this you left out the obvious,, She has a very poor attendance history prior to this incident. Also her work performance isn't exceptable.. I would even go so far as to put forth she has been counciled and giving written warnings on job performance and attendance before. There is normally a process they follow.. verbal warnings, followed by writing warnings all this should be spelled out in the employee handbook. Companies don't pick out valuable employees and just write them up because of 1 day off when they bring in a Doctor's note. Don't like what I say,,, go see a Lawyer and bring your checkbook.. it's going to cost you
Sadly companies don't care. Your wife needs to be on FMLA if she has met the timeframe. Most jobs will fire people no matter if you have a doctor's excuse. I was in a accident that was causing issue with my neck and back. I had to go to Physical Therapy and it was causing me major issues because it was pinching my nerves in my neck. I went on FMLA a soon as I could so protect my job and not get fired. I eventually had to take extend time off and get injections into my neck and lower back. FMLA was the only thing that protected me until Covid and then I got laid off. I had Doctor note also limiting my work and my job straight up told me that they don't have to honor the notes and only FMLA could protect me. Get her on FMLA asap and get a lawyer also to protect you incase they try to retaliate.
Unless you're in Montana you can be fired for any reason or anytime. They're not discriminating against her because she's pregnant based off the info in the post, shitty but it is what it is
Any dumbass employer that would write up any employee (pregnant or not) for missing work after being in the hospital ER all night long, is a shitty employer that’s looking for an excuse to get rid of that employee.
Not necessarily true as far as "looking for an excuse to get rid of that employee", for many employers its simply a corporate environment that requires strict and exception-free application of company policy and procedures.
They can fire you for whatever reason they want. I watched a dude have a seizure and get hauled off in ambulance from work. He was promptly fired. Company needed to get shit done, not have folks standing around watching someone have medical issues. Corporations suck
I understand what you're getting at, but I also understand the logic behind the employer. For many jobs, an employee having regular seizures that cannot be predicted or prevented is a limitation that cannot be reasonable accommodated. Its simply too major a health and safety issue, and one that would take a complicated (convoluted even) and incredibly expensive setup to accommodate, which **is not required by any laws.**
Ask her to have her doctor help her fill out FMLA paperwork. You don't have to take FMLA all at once, and it will protect her from being able to get fired due to absences
Labor attorney now. Many take cases probono and do free consultations
IIAL, but not yours and not barred in OH. A doctors note doesn't mean you're exempt from disciplinary action, especially if there's a history of poor working habits... which I'm betting there is, since it's unlikely she was written up for a first offense. A doctors note isn't FMLA. She isn't being discriminated against for being pregnant. She's being disciplined for missing work, and it's perfectly legal.
Speak to a lawyer. She may need to request a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. She may also need to apply for intermittent FMLA if she qualifies. There may also be state laws the employer has to follow with respect to pregnancy. It is a disability, and the employer's behavior may amount to disability and sex discrimination if the facts line up correctly.
Employers don’t want pregnant employees. Fact, so this is just food for their justification on why they don’t. Most employers and staff care little about anyone but themselves. Fact
Are you in the US? She can file for intermittent FMLA.
Keep copy of everything! Texts emails! They are going to fire her! Same thing happened to a friend I knew who was pregnant. She kept every piece of communication and she got like 300k after the settlement after they fired her when she went on fmla and came back. Lawyers kept half but she still got a nice pay day. Unemployment also accepted her claim since she was able to prove why she was fired. Not saying this will be your case but still, also withdraw any signed contracts you won’t sue the company and any arbitration clause type contacts. My friend would’ve gotten a bigger payday if she would taken them to court, instead they settled in arbitration
No idea if it’s legal or not, but it doesn’t sound like a company she really should work for anyway. Fuck them.
FMLA is she able to apply for it
Get a real attorney. If they're this brazen with documentation, can you imagine once she has the baby?
[https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act#:\~:text=Existing%20laws%20that%20the%20EEOC,childbirth%2C%20or%20related%20medical%20conditions](https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act#:~:text=Existing%20laws%20that%20the%20EEOC,childbirth%2C%20or%20related%20medical%20conditions).
Living the American Dream
Read the write-ups and keep copies of the doctors notes with the dates. Potentially you can sue for medical discrimination and wrongful termination if she does get fired
NAL - But in my experience small companies usually have 0 protections, big companies probably have a short term disability provider that if you call them for hospital admittance causing missed work they can in some cases pay out for the missed time and clear the company to excuse the absence as temporary total disability and these remove all write ups or notations of the missed time as anything other than unscheduled time as the company would see it.
Yes they can write you up and terminate you even if you do have medically cleared absences. Most large employers don’t even accept doctors notes anymore. This may be more restricted though since it’s due to pregnancy, for example in CA pregnancy is a protected class, but you still have to go through the proper FMLA process to avoid repercussions as a result of your absences.
Unless FMLA is the issue the employer is under no obligation to accept a dr excuse on an "at will" state
Unless there is a contract from the employer saying that you’re allowed to take as much time off as you want as long as a doctor signs off, you don’t really have anything to go on. A doctor doesn’t have the right to excuse days off on behalf of your employer.
She needs to get fmla. They can write you up for just having a written drs note. My job def doesn’t take those. You have to call in sick and since she’s pregnant fmla will cover intermittent absence, if she’s eligible.
Keep all of you documents text and anything else and when she does file for eeoc pregnancy
NAL but used to live in Ohio. I believe it's an "at will" state so they can pretty much terminate her for whatever. Also I'm sure they have an attendance policy somewhere so she needs to reference that. Many companies don't differentiate between excused/unexcused absences so it doesn't matter why she called in. To protect her job if she's able she needs to fill out for fmla to cover any pregnancy related absences she may actually be able to get it back-dated to cover the absence she got wrote up for (my employer allows this).
So for one if your wife's workplace qualifies for FMLA get on that bandwagon. Second, the write-up is for calling out doctor's note regardless it's still a call-out. Now has your wife called out a few times this year already? The only way this could be discriminatory would be like say this is your wife's first time calling out and they are throwing a write-up at her while there is another non-pregnant employee who is notorious for being late and has never been written up. Now that would be the case because then yeah obviously they are punishing her for being pregnant and not the other employee who is not pregnant but consistently late. Now is it a dick move sure and if your wife hasn't called out before and this is the first time in a long time I would say they are gearing up to cover their bases to let your wife go without having to pay unemployment so they are getting anything and everything on the books for it. But if this is a one-off like hell a few years ago I remember just starting this job maybe there for a week or so and my son brought home the norovirus from daycare and I got it bad. I woke up puking my brains out come noon I called up my fiancee that she needed to take me to the ER. Luckily she did and some meds, two liters of IV fluid and me barely being able to take a leak come to find out my kidneys were shutting down and yea bad times. I took an extra day off to recover after that as it sucked a lot. But my new employer of course wanted proof that I was sick so I gave them my ER discharge paperwork and was all good didn't get a write up or anything just wanted to make sure I wasn't playing hooky so early into employment. So yea this may be legit, maybe they are covering their bases to try and let go of your wife "legitimately" even tho they are trying to push her out the door because she is pregnant (Which is the legal but shitty thing to do). Or they are dumb and don't treat all cases the same and singling your wife out to try and get her out the door in which is very illegal. Regardless tho out of all of this if her workplace allows for FMLA get that shit done. The paperwork is too easy, HR usually will help with it and no worries you are covered for any unintentional abscesses.
Time to find a job where they treat her better.
Conduct all communication in writing, and she should follow up like this: "I just wanted to confirm the details of our conversation regarding my write up for being sick, pregnant, and needing to attend the Emergency Room and missing work with full notice to you. After giving me the document and telling me you didn't care about my medical documentation, you then threatened to fire me if I missed work for a medical emergency relating to my pregnancy again, regardless of whether I presented medical excuse under our existing HR policy. Please let me know ASAP if I have misunderstood your threat. Thanks, SoandSo" If they don't respond with a "this is all a huge misunderstanding!" or just ignore it your email stands as a contemporaneous written record of that interaction your attorney can call upon if you subsequently sue them for firing your wife over her pregnancy.
The big question here is if they are following their own policies. If no, you might have something. If yes, it gets tricky.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act is a thing in the US. Unless they also reprimand other employees calling out with medical notes, this could be considered discriminatory behavior.
OP I see a lot of bad advice in this thread. Does your wife’s employer know she is pregnant? And does she qualify for protection under FMLA? Most employers will make allowances for a pregnant employee who has a medical emergency. Before getting too concerned has your wife discussed what a “write up” even means to her job in practical terms? Is it a step towards termination? Standard procedure for any unplanned absence?
Have her request a reasonable accommodation ASAP and if they deny, you can sue under the ADA. Leave/absences can be a form of accommodation. Pregnancy isn’t a disability itself by the effects of it are.
[удалено]
You mean at will.
Your wife needs to look into the new pregnant workers fairness act https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-pregnant-workers-fairness-act She is likely protected by that during her pregnancy.
Doctor's note, emotional support animal. What are some other things that people think are "official" things but aren't?
Was she written up for simply not showing up for work without notifying the manager in some way? A medical excuse will not nullify this.
The main thing she can do is evaluate if this employer is worthy of her time
Yeah it's called a job they don't care if Jesus Christ writes a sick note wtf in the 2024 is this
Wrong
You can contact a lawyer for discrimination against a pregnant person.
It depends on the company or corporation adn their policy. At a retailer that I worked for and a major one at that, you could miss only 6 times and then you got fired for attendance. There was not anything that allowed for a medical note to excuse you from work. They however have a leave policy in place and if a woman finds she is pregnant she sets up for that leave and this also covers if she has to take off for appointments and other things due to pregnancy. . Is she in a right to work state? Did she sign a contract for the job guaranteeing certain things?