Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

antigone382

(3,682 posts)
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:25 PM Sep 2012

Workplace Pregnancy Bill Introduced Despite Opposition

Source: Huffington Post

When Heather Wiseman began to suffer from bladder infections as a result of her pregnancy, the Walmart sales associate started carrying a water bottle during the day to stay hydrated. But the Walmart that employed Wiseman technically allowed only cashiers to have water bottles, and a note from Wiseman's doctor made no difference. Caught with a water bottle again, the pregnant Wiseman was fired from her job in 2007 for insubordination based on her failure to follow the water bottle rule.

(snip)

Both Wiseman and Serendy sued their employers for wrongful termination, and both of them lost their cases. But legislation recently introduced in the Senate could help to prevent situations like this from happening.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), introduced Friday by Sen. Jean Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), would require employers to make the same kind of workplace accommodations for pregnant women that current law requires them to make for people with disabilities.

(snip)

Pregnancy, however, is not considered a disability. Instead, pregnant women are protected by the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which makes it illegal to fire a woman just because she becomes pregnant. But employers can still refuse to accommodate pregnant women's basic, temporary medical needs at work, like Wiseman's request for a water bottle, essentially forcing them to choose between keeping their job and ensuring the health of their unborn child and themselves.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/25/workplace-pregnancy-bill-opposition_n_1914062.html



I did not know that pregnant women were so vulnerable to termination for having medical needs.

As you can imagine, "pro-life" Republican representatives oppose such legislation for the "unnecessary burden&amp" it would place on businesses.
22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Workplace Pregnancy Bill Introduced Despite Opposition (Original Post) antigone382 Sep 2012 OP
So the "Pro-life" repukes don't want a women to have access to birth control Drale Sep 2012 #1
Not just have no rights; they want her to choose between staying employed and endangering her child. antigone382 Sep 2012 #2
ding ding ding mopinko Sep 2012 #3
Republicans protecting the unborn booley Sep 2012 #4
It shouldn't really matter ... surrealAmerican Sep 2012 #5
That is a good point. antigone382 Sep 2012 #8
Sure it's despicable RT_Fanatic Sep 2012 #6
It's not just this specific incident, it's the inexorable move to an organization that has rules or jody Sep 2012 #7
I've never worked at a Walmart, but every place I have worked made sure gateley Sep 2012 #9
another chance for Republicans to stand up and tell women to go to hell. rurallib Sep 2012 #10
+1000. nt awoke_in_2003 Sep 2012 #14
Workers are treated like disposal garbage in non union shops.... Proletariatprincess Sep 2012 #11
In rightwing world, Ilsa Sep 2012 #12
To GOP staffers: "I understand the congressman/senator would deny pregnant women..." CBHagman Sep 2012 #13
republicans are pro-life as long as it does not cost them money Angry Dragon Sep 2012 #15
Another Reason why I DO NOT SHOP AT WALMART Heather MC Sep 2012 #16
Sad Loudestlib Sep 2012 #17
When I was pregnant with my first, and working in a job SheilaT Sep 2012 #18
Is is just me oldsarge54 Sep 2012 #19
Fuck Walmart - what kind of assholes don't let someone, let alone a docgee Sep 2012 #20
kick n/t antigone382 Sep 2012 #21
Fucking Wal-Mart gopiscrap Sep 2012 #22

Drale

(7,932 posts)
1. So the "Pro-life" repukes don't want a women to have access to birth control
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:28 PM
Sep 2012

but they also want her not to have any rights when she gets pregnant? Why don't they just say what they mean, "We are mad because we haven't had any good sex in years and we are going to take it out on you?"

antigone382

(3,682 posts)
2. Not just have no rights; they want her to choose between staying employed and endangering her child.
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:30 PM
Sep 2012

The story of the woman being told to do heavy lifting without help after a near miscarriage--and losing in court after being fired--just totally galls me.

booley

(3,855 posts)
4. Republicans protecting the unborn
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:43 PM
Sep 2012

Your milage will vary.

I guess after screwing over 9-11 responders and veterans and basically half the country, they figure why not pregnant women too?

surrealAmerican

(11,365 posts)
5. It shouldn't really matter ...
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:43 PM
Sep 2012

...what the cause of an employee's temporary medical need is. If, in the example you excerpted, her bladder infections were not caused by pregnancy, she should still not have faced the loss of her job over this.

antigone382

(3,682 posts)
8. That is a good point.
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:51 PM
Sep 2012

I suppose I might note, however, that pregnant women are somewhat uniquely vulnerable to being fired for their medical needs...employers who want to get rid of a woman who they know will be spending a bit of time out of the workplace in coming months may look for ways to fire her without breaking federal laws.

However, pregnant women are not the only people vulnerable to bosses looking for unethical but technically legal excuses to fire them, and you call attention to the reality that we should all be able to meet our own health needs without fear of losing our jobs.

 

jody

(26,624 posts)
7. It's not just this specific incident, it's the inexorable move to an organization that has rules or
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:50 PM
Sep 2012

laws that govern ever thing a person might do.

We the People threw off the yoke of a monarch anointed by the leader of the state religion to declare each and every one of us was his subject and declared each of us was a sovereign unto our self.

Later in the Articles of Confederation and its successor our Constitution we created a government with limited powers retaining some rights and powers for ourselves.

It really makes me angry that some would claim We the People do not have natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable rights; only privileges granted by an omnipotent, omniscience central government.

Now to trump the omni-government that threatens us we close the door to individual freedom in favor of corporations.



They kept taking

First they took our steel mill jobs, and the people ignored the cries of steel mill workers.

Then they took our textile jobs, and the people ignored the cries of textile workers.

Then they took our automotive jobs, and the people ignored the cries of automotive workers.

Then they took our high-tech jobs, and the people ignored the cries of high-tech workers.

Then they bribed the people's representatives in Washington and the people ignored their loss.

And the only jobs left were in the U.S. Foreign Legion, defending the worldwide assets of those who had taken the people's jobs and stolen the people's government.

The people shouted, "We the people are dead, long live the corporation."

And the high priests of Mammon laughed about how easy it was to destroy the world's longest running, most successful experiment in democracy.

And the thirsty and hungry and sick and imprisoned and naked prayed to Mammon to have mercy on their wretched. miserable bodies because the people had lost the very soul of democracy.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
9. I've never worked at a Walmart, but every place I have worked made sure
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 10:15 PM
Sep 2012

extra consideration was afforded to pregnant woman, so this shocks me. Infuriating.

11. Workers are treated like disposal garbage in non union shops....
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 10:42 PM
Sep 2012

American men and women deserve to be treated with justice and dignity in the workplace and thier health and safety must be protected at all times by the employer. Pregnant women or anyone with a medical condition must be accomidated.
Only a Free and Democratic Union Movement can force these employers to do the right thing because corporations have long forgotten that they were granted incorporation BY THE GOVERNMENT to serve the public interest and not solely to make profits by exploitation of people and resources.
I would like to see the Waltons and the Kochs and their like behind bars and all Walmart stores closed while reparations are paid to communities destroyed by such criminal enterprises are used to create new worker owned and operated businesses.

Like I always like to say:
CRUSH THE CORPORATE INSECT THAT FEEDS ON THE BLOOD OF THE WORKERS!

Ilsa

(61,705 posts)
12. In rightwing world,
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 10:50 PM
Sep 2012

She's supposed to stay home barefoot while she's pregnant, including after the baby comes. Then rightwingers can make fun of her for staying home to care for her child while drawing WIC or SNAP, or food stamps.

CBHagman

(16,992 posts)
13. To GOP staffers: "I understand the congressman/senator would deny pregnant women..."
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 11:03 PM
Sep 2012

"...a safe workplace and allow her to be unjustly terminated based on her pregnancy. This hurts women and families."

Call your 'can congressman with that one.

 

Heather MC

(8,084 posts)
16. Another Reason why I DO NOT SHOP AT WALMART
Tue Sep 25, 2012, 11:45 PM
Sep 2012

Ever sense K. Olbermann reported about the walmart employee that was hit by a truck and Walmart took her 417,000 settlement
I have not entered walmart

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
18. When I was pregnant with my first, and working in a job
Wed Sep 26, 2012, 12:27 AM
Sep 2012

that might occasionally require moderately heavy lifting, I was able to opt out of the lifting. As I should have been able to.

I have also seen men (who, in case you hadn't noticed, will NEVER be pregnant themselves) complain bitterly about such special accommodations. I've seen those same men unable to see supplies that are slightly below their line of vision, because it doesn't occur to them to look a little lower.

Anyway, I don't want to be bashing men in general, just idiotic companies like WalMart.

Oh, and it's important to note: I can recall the 1960's when a lot of workplace laws and rules that discriminated against women were justified because, after all, the woman might become pregnant. We apparently haven't made a lot of progress since then.

oldsarge54

(582 posts)
19. Is is just me
Wed Sep 26, 2012, 07:09 AM
Sep 2012

Or is this another attempt to reintroduce serfdom? Or is it this an example of firing someone a couple years before retirement to avoid pensions, or firing someone before the end of the pregnancy in order to avoid paying the medical bills. I know Americans don't take the vacations days they are qualified for because they fear being fired.

Is there a new serfdom coming? Tug our forelock and say "right cher are" to the foremen?

docgee

(870 posts)
20. Fuck Walmart - what kind of assholes don't let someone, let alone a
Wed Sep 26, 2012, 09:03 AM
Sep 2012

pregnant woman carry a bottle of water at work?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Workplace Pregnancy Bill ...