Purchase Solution

Pregnancy Discrimination in the workplace

Not what you're looking for?

Ask Custom Question

Victoria Williams has been employed by TEDCO for 3 years. During that time, she has been an exemplary employee, repeatedly receiving the honor of being named employee of the month. TEDCO has 150 employees, 47 of them female, yet none of its female employees have young children. However, several of the male employees have young children. TEDCO provides health insurance and disability insurance for all full time employees. Victoria told a co-worker that she was pregnant. The co-workers warned her not to tell her supervisor, Brian. Victoria told Brian anyway, informing him that she intended to take 3 months off after she had the baby. Brian didn't like having pregnant women on his team. He thought they became inefficient, missed work due to "morning sickness" and to attend doctor's appointments, and were more emotional than non-pregnant workers. Furthermore, he didn't want Victoria to return to work after the baby was born because he didn't want to deal with the hassle of having an employee with a young child and all the potential issues that go along with it. Brian started to criticize Victoria's performance, claiming that her work was substandard and that she was not a productive member of the team. Brian fired Victoria in her 6th month of pregnancy. She found out later that Brian had fired another employee when she told him she was pregnant. Does Victoria have a valid claim for pregnancy discrimination against TEDCO? Explain the reasons for your answer. Does Victoria have a valid claim based on Brian's attitude towards women with young children? Again, explain your answer.

Bennett-Alexander, D. D., & Hartman, L. P. (2009). Employment law for business (6th ed.).New York, NY: McGraw- Hill

TThere is a 200 word minimum response required.

Credible reference materials, including your course textbook(s), may be used to complete the assessment. In-text and reference citations are REQUIRED for all written responses.

Purchase this Solution

Solution Summary

This solution provides the student with an hypothetical answer based on current employment law regarding pregnancy discrimination in the workplace. A hypothetical case is given and answered.

Solution Preview

Victoria has a valid claim because the manager and company are in violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993. She works for a company with over 50 employees has been at the business for at least a year and put in presumably over 1,250 hours during her 3 year tenure at the establishment. She also gave the required 30 day advance of her intent to take her federally protected 12 ...

Solution provided by:
Education
  • Associates of Arts , Lone Star Community College
  • Bachelor of Science , Sam Houston State University
  • Masters of Science, Kaplan University
  • Masters of Science , Kaplan University
Recent Feedback
  • "Thank you however I have two questions: 1.) where in this passage is the actual problem statement? 2.) if you used references can you please provide them? This is great work and I am so grateful. "
  • "Thank you very much"
  • "excellent analysis"
  • "graet job very helpful"
  • "Thank you, excellent and very detailed."
Purchase this Solution


Free BrainMass Quizzes
Title VII Laws

Learn the basics of the laws under Title VII.

Constitutional Law Rights

How much do you know about Constitutional Law Rights? Find out with this quiz!

Evidence

Do you know your evidence objections? Find out with this quiz!

Contract Requirments

How much do you know about the legal requirements for a contract? Find out with this quiz!

Title VII

This Quiz pertains to the spectrum of Human Rights through Title VII