Search form

Four-Month Leave for California Pregnancy Disability is Beginning, Not End, of Employer's Obligation

By Jamerson C. Allen and Mark S. Askanas
  • March 4, 2013

An employee who was disabled as a result of her pregnancy and had exhausted all leave under California Pregnancy Disability Leave Law (“PDLL”) and the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”) was entitled to additional leave as a reasonable accommodation under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), the California Court of Appeal has ruled in a case of first impression. Sanchez v. Swissport, Inc., No. B237761 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 21, 2013). 

Background

Ana G. Fuentes Sanchez worked as a cleaning agent for Swissport, Inc. when she became pregnant. Shortly thereafter, Sanchez was diagnosed with a high-risk pregnancy and required bed rest for the remainder of her pregnancy. Swissport granted Sanchez 19 weeks of leave, consisting of leave under the California Pregnancy Disability Leave Law, California Family Rights Act, and accrued vacation time. On July 14, 2009, Swissport terminated Sanchez from employment. She had exhausted all available leave, was still on bed rest, and was unable to perform the essential functions of her position.

Sanchez sued Swissport for failing to accommodate her pregnancy-related disability in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. The company asked the trial court to dismiss the case, arguing, “The pregnancy disability statutes and regulations are clear: pregnancy disability leave is capped at four months. Sanchez was permitted all of the pregnancy leave to which she was entitled, and her employment was terminated only when that leave expired and she was not able to return to work.” The trial court agreed with the company and dismissed the case. Sanchez appealed.

Applicable Law

The PDLL provides that “[i]n addition to the provisions that govern pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition in Sections 12926 and 12940,” an employer must “allow a female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition to take a leave for a reasonable period of time not to exceed four months and thereafter return to work .” Cal. Gov’t Code § 12945(a)(1).

The FEHA prohibits an employer from discriminating on the basis of sex, physical disability, or medical condition, among other things. Cal. Gov’t Code § 12940(a). “Sex” is defined to include “[p]regnancy or medical conditions related to pregnancy.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 12926(q)(1). The FEHA also requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodation for an employee’s known disability, unless the employer demonstrates that the accommodation would produce “undue hardship… to its operation.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 12940(m). 

No Cap on Leave

Swissport argued that Sanchez was entitled to a maximum leave period of four months under the PDLL, and once that period is used up, she was entitled to no other protection under the FEHA. The Court concluded that Swissport’s argument was “contradicted by the plain language of the PDLL,” which provides that its remedies “augment, rather than supplant, those set forth elsewhere in the FEHA.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 12945(b). The Court also noted that its ruling was supported by the new Pregnancy Disability Leave Regulations, effective December 30, 2012, which provide that the “right to take pregnancy disability leave under Government Code section 12945 and these regulations is separate and distinct from the right to take a leave of absence as a form of reasonable accommodation under Government Code section 12940. At the end or depletion of an employee’s pregnancy disability leave, an employee who has a physical or mental disability (which may or may not be due to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions) may be entitled to reasonable accommodation under Government Code section 12940.” Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 7291.14.

The Court concluded that Sanchez could pursue her claims for pregnancy-related disability discrimination based on her termination, as well as on the company’s denial of additional leave as a reasonable accommodation and its failure to engage in the interactive process to determine an effective accommodation.

* * *

Following Sanchez, California employers may be required to provide leave for pregnancy, pregnancy-related disabilities, and even baby bonding for much longer than the length of a typical pregnancy. An employee disabled by pregnancy or pregnancy-related conditions may take up to four months of pregnancy disability leave under the PDL and may take additional leave as a reasonable accommodation for any pregnancy-related disability under the FEHA. After giving birth, the employee also may be entitled to another 12 weeks of CFRA leave if such leave has not otherwise been exhausted.

Consequently, California employers should review their leave of absence policies to ensure that they are consistent with California law. Employers also should review their policies and practices regarding reasonable accommodation and the interactive process to confirm that they cover pregnancy-related disabilities.

 

©2013 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

August 27, 2015

Reminder of Challenges Associated with Workplace Violence Prevention

August 27, 2015

The August 26 shooting of two journalists by a former co-worker on live TV in Virginia is a stark reminder that a worker may become violent. Violent incidents at work resulting in death or serious injury to employees have risen dramatically. Two million American workers a year report having been victims of workplace violence, with one... Read More

August 21, 2015

Rhode Island Employers Must Accommodate Workers with Pregnancy-Related Condition

August 21, 2015

Rhode Island legislation has created new burdens for employers. The Ocean State joins a growing number of states requiring employers to reasonably accommodate a worker’s condition related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical condition. (See our articles, California Issues Amended Pregnancy Regulations, Extends Coverage to... Read More

August 10, 2015

Death Threats against Co-Workers Defeat Employee Disability Discrimination Claim, Federal Court Rules

August 10, 2015

A depressed employee who was fired for threatening to kill his co-workers was not a qualified individual entitled to protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act, as the employee could not perform essential job functions, with or without an accommodation, a federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled, affirming judgment in... Read More