Share this Post
In December 2022, Congress passed the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) to ensure workplace equality and rights for women. This law mandates employers to provide reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related conditions, aiming to support pregnant employees unless causing undue hardship.
However, a federal agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), responsible for enforcing such laws, has sparked concern. Despite the PWFA’s intent to safeguard pregnant women and their unborn children, the EEOC’s proposed regulations avoid explicitly referencing women, using generic terms like “worker” or “employee” instead. This omission raises questions about why the agency circumvented specifying the group the law primarily protects.
Historically, women have faced discrimination in employment, and previous laws acknowledged and protected them during pregnancy and childbirth. Yet, a critical gap existed in mandating common-sense workplace accommodations, which the PWFA aimed to bridge.
The EEOC’s use of gender-neutral language, such as “they” and “their,” in place of female pronouns for pregnant employees, despite the biological reality that only women can experience pregnancy and childbirth, has raised concerns. This move to avoid acknowledging women contradicts the essence of the PWFA, which recognizes and safeguards the unique needs of pregnant women in the workplace.
The agency’s choice to use gender-neutral language coincides with broader societal shifts, including efforts by the Biden administration to adopt more inclusive terminology. However, this move in the context of the PWFA raises questions about erasing the biological distinction and the intent of laws protecting pregnant women’s rights.
In light of these developments, it becomes crucial for federal agencies like the EEOC to acknowledge and uphold the biological reality in workplace regulations, especially in laws like the PWFA meant to protect and support pregnant women.