Skip to main content

Updated: Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Clears House of Representatives

 

Recently, with the U.S House of Representatives voting 329 - 73 in favor of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, the legislation moves to the Senate for further debate and (unlikely) vote.

Readers will recall that last month I had highlighted this legislation as one to keep an eye on.  The legislation, sponsored by Democrats (who have majority control of the House), would require employers to provide reasonable accommodations to help pregnant workers continue working as well as prohibit employers from denying employment opportunities to these workers because they are pregnant.

As I had noted in my prior post, even with this legislation clearing the House (by a sizable margin), I think it is unlikely it will get very far in the Senate for a few reasons.  For starters, the Senate is in effect operating on a limited capacity for a few weeks because of several Senators testing positive for the coronavirus.  As well, once the Senate gets back to business as usual, I suspect the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett for the United States Supreme Court will occupy much of the Senate’s time.  With Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell likely making other legislation a priority while Republicans have majority control of the Senate (possibly only for a limited time, depending the outcome of several Senate races on November 3rd), the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act will likely languish in a Senate Committee for the time being.  The one hope for advocates of the legislation?  Either Democrats gain majority control of the Senate in November or enough Republican Senators voice their support for passage of the legislation that the Senate Majority Leader acquiesces and allows a floor vote.  

Stay tuned.


For additional information:  https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2694/text

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more