In 1978, Congress amended Title VII's definition of gender-based employment discrimination to specifically include discrimination because of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.
Of course, it was left to the courts to grapple with the application of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act ("PDA"), as the amendment came to be known, to specific factual contexts.
In this edition, we discuss two recent federal appellate decisions construing the PDA vis-a-vis two very different pregnancy-related issues. First, Brian Franklin examines Doe v. C.A.R.S. Protection Plus, Inc., a Third Circuit decision extending the Act's protection to female employees having elective abortions. In our second article, I summarize the Seventh Circuit's opinion in Hall v. Nalco Company, which allows PDA claims for adverse employment actions taken against women undergoing in vitro fertilization.
Peter Strelitz and Arturo Aviles follow with their recap of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decisions concerning retaliation claims based on two separate federal statutes (42 U.S.C. 1981 and 29 U.S.C. 633a) and ADEA claims relating to pension benefits.
Thank you for your continuing readership and feedback.