User talk:A.holmes011/sandbox

INCLUDE A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF WHAT PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION IS SO PEOPLE HAVE SOMETHING TO REFER BACK TOO

History of the Act The Geduldig v. Aiello case in 1974 involved a pregnant woman who was denied medical benefits under her disability insurance, citing the 14th Amendment, and claiming sex discrimination. The U.S. Supreme Court found that there was no evidence of sex discrimination, and that there was no violation of the Equal Protection Clause, as men and women were both receiving equal protection under the insurance program. [1] This case also did not use a heightened level of scrutiny, which was criticized by Justice Brennan in a dissent noting that physical gender differences should not lead to unequal compensation.[2]

General Electric v. Gilbert in many ways was influenced by the decision of Geduldig v. Aiello, as the court again found no evidence of discrimination. Again, Justice Brennan dissented, noting for a second time that women were receiving unequal compensation. Due to this dissent and the dissent from Geduldig v. Aiello, U.S. Congress saw a gap in protections and created the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) in response.[2]

ADD ANOTHER CASE (MAYBE INCLUDE THE WAL-MART CASE FROM THE ERA BOOK)

Disability Clause Pregnancy is considered a temporary disability in the eyes of the law, meaning the treatment of pregnant employees falls under the same jurisdiction as disabled employees. Treating a pregnant employee in a way that would violate disability standards is also a violation of the PDA. (WHAT IS THE PDA - HYPERLINK AND GIVE FULL NAME)

"If an employee is temporarily unable to perform her job due to pregnancy, the employer must treat her the same as any other temporarily disabled employee; for example, by providing light duty, modified tasks, alternative assignments, disability leave, or leave without pay. An employer may have to provide a reasonable accommodation for a disability related to pregnancy, absent undue hardship (significant difficulty or expense)." [3] (MOVE THIS UP TO THE THE TOP RIGHT BEFORE THE HISTORY) Critiques of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act The act does have many critiques about who is included, and what is protected by the clause. Some critique that the Act protects employees in a way that is too focused on biology, and does not protect the social aspects of motherhood. Meaning, that while employees would be protected by the PDA for missing work due to her pregnancy, they would not be protected if they had to miss work to care for their sick child.[4]

Other critiques include that the Act does not take into consideration the implications of having the capacity to become pregnant. This means that women are discriminated against in the workplace due to the fact that they could become pregnant, causing them to be given lower wages, fewer promotions, and less authority in the workplace. Criticizers note that because the PDA protects against discrimination "on the basis of pregnancy" that wage differences, lack of advancement, hiring, firing and other discriminatory acts towards women are due to their childbearing capacity, and should be protected by the PDA. [4]

Transgender exclusion is also a huge critique brought up by the PDA. Transgender men who still have the capacity to become pregnant are often excluded from the protections of the act due to the language and scope of the protected class defined by the PDA. The PDA states that it protects: "women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions" which leaves transgender men, and non-binary gender identities outside of the protected class. Many theorists and activists are pushing to change the language of the PDA to make sure that all gender identities will be protected. [5]

--A.holmes011 (talk) 14:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)'Bold text'Bold text