ORCID (Links to author’s additional scholarship at ORCID.org)
The Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. outlined a new analytical framework for Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) claims that challenge employers’ failure to “accommodate” pregnant workers. That framework was intended to lessen the evidentiary burden on plaintiff-employees in showing that others “similar in their ability or inability to work” were accommodated and to increase the burden on defendant-employers in justifying such differential treatment. In the five years since Young, however, lower courts have been inconsistent in their application of this mandate. In this Article, we survey the precedent that set the stage for Young, the decision’s new approach to accommodation claims under the PDA, and the mixed precedent that has followed. We identify for practitioners the flawed reasoning in negative post- Young rulings and emphasize arguments that best fulfill the letter and spirit of Young’s expansive approach to the PDA.
Harvard Law & Policy Review
Joanna Grossman & Gillian Thomas, Making Sure Pregnancy Works: Accommodation Claims after Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 14 HARV. L. & POL'y REV. 319 (2020)