Human Resource Management 15th Edition by Robert Mathis,John Jackson,Sean Valentine ,Patricia Meglich

Exercise 1

Conflict over an Employee's Pregnancy at UPS
There is sometimes pushback in companies when women become pregnant and request changes to their work schedules and responsibilities. In some instances, pregnant women are asked to take unpaid leave or are pressured to quit their positions. The troubling fact is that many of these situations could be more effectively handled with some type of accommodation that is both reasonable and fair. Providing reasonable accommodations to pregnant women, similar to those provided to individuals with physical or mental challenges, is the best strategy for avoiding poor morale and potential lawsuits. Pregnancy discrimination falls under the umbrella of many major employment laws.
A UPS driver, who had been working for the company for seven years at the Landover, Maryland facility, faced some of these issues when she became pregnant. She was sent to the firm's nurse, who told her that she needed to see a doctor to get a more detailed assessment of her needs. The doctor provided her with a note stating that she should not lift packages heavier than 20 pounds. This requirement was not an issue because she mostly dealt with light materials. Upon submitting the note, she was told that the company had a policy stating that lightweight duties could not be given to individuals who had health concerns that were caused outside of the workplace. Her manager indicated that she was a potential liability, and that she should return to her job after her pregnancy was over. Consequently, the individual's pay and benefits came to a halt. The HR department was not contacted because she assumed that the company was following its stated policies.
While on unpaid leave, she pursued a complaint in federal court that UPS violated the requirements of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). A district court decided that UPS was not in violation of the PDA. The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supported this decision, stating that UPS's policy did not adversely target the employee based on her pregnancy. It is speculated that the ruling might have been different if the case had occurred after the ADAAA was passed. Maryland also passed a law that provides pregnant employees special accommodations similar to those given to individuals who have short-term physical challenges.
What can HR professionals do to mitigate concerns about pregnancy discrimination in the workplace? What does the law say companies need to do to avoid violating the rights of pregnant employees?