Woman Fired for Pumping at Work: thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Has anyone heard if the case in which a woman was fired at Isotoner/Totes for pumping at work (they were considered unauthorized work breaks) case is being appealed?

Here's an excerpt from the decision:

"Allen gave birth over five months prior to her termination from [Isotoner]. Pregnant [women] who give birth and choose not to breastfeed or pump their breasts do not continue to lactate for five months. Thus, Allen's condition of lactating was not a condition relating to pregnancy but rather a condition related to breastfeeding. Breastfeeding discrimination does not constitute gender discrimination."

According to the Columbus Dispatch, the woman did not talk to her supervisors about taking breast pumping breaks and did not follow orders about when she could take breaks. I'm concerned over the precedent that this case might set for mothers who return to the workplace and choose to continue to breastfeed.

Here's how the case was reported in the Columbus Dispatch: http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/08/28/LACTATE.ART_ART_08-28-09_B1_8EET5UK.html?sid=101


Here's the story that was run in Salon.com: http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/08/28/fired_for_pumping/index.html

If you want to call or e-mail Isotoner about this case, here's their contact information:

# Email [e-mail]. Please be sure to include your name and contact information with your inquiry.
# By phone at 513-682-8389.

[Anonymous]

Here's additional information about the case from the WSJ The Juggle blog:

http://blogs.wsj.com/juggle/2009/08/31/can-pumping-at-work-get-you-fired/

[Anonymous]

Yeah there were a couple of threads on here about it. Here's one:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/67472.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone heard if the case in which a woman was fired at Isotoner/Totes for pumping at work (they were considered unauthorized work breaks) case is being appealed?

Note that the termination and the decision were not about breastfeeding, per se, but about whether Isotoner had the right to fire her for taking unauthorized breaks. According to the article, the court specifically stated that it wasn't addressing whether lactation was protected as part of/extending from pregnancy since the employee never sought accommodation in the first place.

Courts, especially when you are talking Supreme Courts (state or the US) try to focus on as narrow an issue as possible when deciding the case. Had the employee asked for special accommodation to take additional breaks to pump and Isotoner declined, then you'd have a case. But, it sounds as though she just walked off the job (probably repeatedly), and since the company says they fired her for that without regard for her reasons, the court decided based on that set of circumstances.

If you are seeking accommodation under the law, it isn't always automatic -- you have to ask for it and determine together with your employer the appropriate accommodation. If you are a member of a protected class, you have a right to the accommodation, but you don't get to unilaterally decide what that entails. I'd be very upset if the court had ruled that it wasn't protected activity, but they avoided that subject so I'm really not that distressed with this decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah there were a couple of threads on here about it. Here's one:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/67472.page

thanks! I searched the forum before I posted, but nothing came up in the query.