Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [lactivism] August 2009: Woman fired for pumping breaks

Expand Messages
  • Webmail wchappel
    Heehee, Jake worked up over USBC again. I am shocked, I tell you, shocked!!! NOT! Lorrie
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 22, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Heehee, Jake worked up over USBC again.  I am shocked, I tell you, shocked!!! NOT!


      On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Jake Marcus <jake.a.marcus@...> wrote:

      This case got a lot of press and led to lots of Internet discussions that too often missed what happened in this legal decision. The significance of this Ohio Supreme Court decision was that the facts of this case (in my opinion anyway) gave the Court a near perfect opportunity to state that lactation is a condition covered by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, therefore employment discrimination on the basis of lactation is prohibited. Instead the Ohio Supreme Court avoided making a decision concerning lactation and found that other employee conduct in this case was alone sufficient to justify her firing. While I had had very high hopes for this decision (the oral arguments were extraordinary) and was very disappointed that the Ohio Supreme Court took what I considered to be a cowardly way out, this is *not* a legal decision finding that firing because of pumping is lawful. Press coverage was very sloppy and it is possible (and I think likely) that if this legal issue were before the Ohio Supreme Court again, the Court would find that lactation discrimination is prohibited.

      Just some thoughts after being irked at the USBC mailing.

      Jake Aryeh Marcus, J.D.

      On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Ninette58 <ninette@...> wrote:

      I don't think this was posted here, just saw it posted elsewhere:




      "Firing woman for taking unauthorized breaks to pump breast milk OK, Ohio top court rules"

      NO PART OF THIS E-MAIL MAY BE COPIED OR FORWARDED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR. No part of this e-mail should be deemed legal advice or to create an attorney/client relationship.  The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.
      Its contents (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information.    
      If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents.
      If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.