Trying to Get Pregnant? Management Would Like to Know.
The co-leader of Jones Day's health care practice at a recent meeting apparently "encouraged" women to tell management if they were pregnant or planning on be. Is that so wrong?
October 08, 2018 at 01:48 PM
4 minute read
I am so grateful for white, middle-aged male partners. If it weren't for them, I honestly don't know what I'd write about!
Take Stephen Sozio,the co-leader of Jones Day's health care practice who also chairs the firm's litigation department in Cleveland. At a recent office meeting, he apparently “encouraged” women to tell management if they were pregnant or planning on be, reports Elie Mystal at Above the Law.
Oh, I know all you Blue state, coastal types are getting all up in arms about this. But pipe down. Sozio didn't ask for some nefarious reason. According to Above the Law, Sozio was just inquiring so that management could plan its budget for the upcoming year. You can't blame a guy for fiscal planning.
Besides, I'm not sure he did anything wrong—legally, speaking. From what I can tell, all he did was ask—and nicely, too. He also expressed understanding that women in their first trimester might not want to disclose their pregnancies to him; in that case, he suggested that women contact his administrative assistant instead. (I reached out to Sozio for comment and have yet to hear back.)
“Asking about pregnancy is in itself not illegal, if done in a respectful way,” says employment lawyer Gerald Hathaway, a partner at Drinker Biddle. The tricky part is asking the question appropriately. The woman who's put on the spot might wonder “whether giving that information has some impact on employment decisions being made about her, even when the decision has nothing to do with pregnancy status,” explains Hathaway. “So while not illegal, it is not advisable.”
Not advisable is putting it mildly, says Kamee Verdrager, who sued Mintz Levin for gender discrimination related to her pregnancy in a case that dragged on for several years. (It was settled in December 2016).
“In my opinion, that is definitely an unlawful inquiry,” says Verdrager. “There are several things at play: the imbalance of power, the invasive nature of the question and the potential for evidence to support an inference of discrimination.”
She adds that she tried and won a case for a female client several years ago in Massachusetts in which “the single act of discrimination/retaliation was one conversation where the employer aggressively demanded information about my client's child care plans.” After the pregnant woman refused to provide specifics, but indicated her intention to return to work full time, the employer fired her, citing her “nasty and disrespectful attitude,” says Verdrager.
From a “business perspective,” adds Verdrager, “asking such a question exposes the firm to tremendous liability.” Permit me to be more blunt: It's just stupid to ask female employees about their baby plans.
So how has Jones Day dealt with this little public relations calamity? It issued a statement by Heather Lennox, partner-in-charge of its Cleveland office, that says, in part: “Mr. Sozio's actual remarks were simply to thank all in attendance for their hard work on behalf of Firm clients and to request that, if anyone is presently planning a leave of any kind (including clerkships) next year and would be comfortable sharing the information, it would help the Firm in doing its annual budgeting.”
Nice attempt at spin, but I think it's obvious that Sozio put his foot in his mouth.
These days, most firms are much savvier about how they deal with these issues in the workplace. They know what to tout, like their awesome parental leave policies, flexible working arrangements and how they pay for overnight shipment of breast milk. Most firms would not want to be known as the one that asked women to put their pregnancy plans on the firm calendar.
In any case, I'm not here to slam Sozio. I don't believe he was out to get mommies. He's simply a bit out of it about the dos and don'ts of handling women's issues. Maybe he didn't get the memo about unconscious bias and all the insulting/insensitive/dumb/possibly illegal things male partners shouldn't do or say to women at the workplace.
Remember, just because it's 2018 and #MeToo is the raging topic of our day doesn't mean every guy is “woke.”
So let's be nice to the hapless white guy from Ohio and give him some time to catch up. It's the least we can do.
Read more:
Contact Vivia Chen at [email protected]. On Twitter: @lawcareerist.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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