Discrimination Complaints Against Frontier Airlines by Employee Moms Mount
Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday broadened its legal battle on behalf of pregnant and breast-feeding mothers by…
May 17, 2017 at 11:11 AM
4 minute read
Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday broadened its legal battle on behalf of pregnant and breast-feeding mothers by filing another discrimination complaint against Frontier Airlines.
It is the second time the ACLU and its pro bono partner, New York litigation boutique Holwell Shuster & Goldberg, has gone after Frontier. A prior complaint on behalf of four women pilots is pending before the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Jim Faulkner, head of corporate communications at Frontier, said in a statement, “Our policies and practices comply with all federal and state laws as well as with the relevant provisions of the collective bargaining agreement between Frontier and its flight attendant group. We have made good-faith efforts to identity and provide rooms and other secure locations for use by breast-feeding flight attendants during their duty travel.”
Galen Sherwin, staff attorney with the ACLU in New York, said the group has litigated and successfully settled numerous cases involving pregnant or nursing employees, and has several charges pending now with the EEOC in various parts of the country. Another breast-feeding case against the city of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Sherwin said.
The ACLU led the amicus brief effort on the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case, filed against UPS, that established that failure to accommodate pregnant workers can amount to sex discrimination under federal law.
In Tuesday's complaints to the EEOC, flight attendants Jo Roby, a 13-year Frontier employee, and Stacy Rewitzer, an 11-year employee, said they were forced to take unpaid leave after having their babies. They also said Frontier refused to provide accommodations for them to pump breast milk, and that they were told not to pump while on duty.
The attendants said in their affidavits that they often work 10-hour or longer shifts, but need to pump their milk about every four hours. Their charges assert that Frontier's policies violate federal and state laws against discrimination based on sex, pregnancy, childbirth and disability in employment, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Last year the ACLU and the law firm filed similar discrimination charges against Frontier with the EEOC on behalf of the pilots. That claim says the company forces pregnant pilots to take eight to 10 weeks of unpaid leave before their due date; allows a maximum of 120 days of maternity leave, all of it unpaid, and fails to make accommodations to enable pilots who are breast-feeding after they return to work.
Lani Perlman, associate at Holwell Shuster, said, “We did reach out to Frontier before filing the flight attendant charges. We are always pleased to have companies change their policies without litigation, but Frontier did not do so.”
Perlman added, “This is an issue that has come to light throughout the aviation industry after the pilot charges were filed. Some other airlines are trying to address the issue.”
A Milwaukee law firm employment blog reported that last year Delta Air Lines settled a claim by a flight attendant who said Delta violated a New York City human rights law by failing to provide her with space to pump breast milk.
Delta reportedly paid $30,000 and agreed to revise its accommodation policies. An airline spokesperson couldn't address the settlement, but told the blog the company strives “to provide a great place to work … including offering lactation rooms and other reasonable accommodation to new mothers and expectant mothers.”
Contact the reporter Sue Reisinger at [email protected].
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEvaluating the Biden Administration's Business and Human Rights Agenda
10 minute readConservative Groups Challenge Corporate DEI Initiatives With Recent Success
7 minute readNovel Suit Calling Workday's AI-Driven Hiring Tool Biased Advances, Setting Up Precedent-Setting Showdown
'Deeply Troubling': Tesla Sued Over 'Racially Hostile Work Environment' Amid Surge of Racial Discrimination Litigation
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and Pryor Cashman have entered appearances for Diageo Americas Supply d/b/a Ciroc Distilling Co. and Sony Songs, a division of Sony Music Publishing, respectively, in a pending lawsuit. The case was filed Sept. 10 in New York Southern District Court by the Bloom Firm and IP Legal Studio on behalf of Dawn Angelique Richard. The plaintiff, who performed as a member of producer Sean 'Diddy' Combs girl group Danity Kane and later his band, Diddy - Dirty Money, claims that she was financially exploited by Combs and subjected to inhumane working conditions. Among other violations, Richard claims that Combs required group members to remain at his residences and studios, deprived them of adequate food and sleep and forced them to rehearse for 36 to 48 hours without breaks. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, is 1:24-cv-06848, Richard v. Combs et al.
Who Got The Work
Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Kevin M. McGinty of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, as well as Jesse W. Belcher-Timme of Doherty, Wallace, Pillsbury & Murphy, have stepped in to defend Peter Pan Bus Lines in a pending consumer class action. The suit, filed Sept. 4 in Massachusetts District Court by Hackett Feinberg PC and KalielGold PLLC, accuses the defendant of charging undisclosed 'junk fees' on top of ticket prices during checkout. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni, is 3:24-cv-12277, Mulani et al v. Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250