totes/Isotoner Fires Woman for Pumping at Work, and It’s NOT Discrimination!?!
Posted Aug 31 2009 11:16pm
When LaNisa Allen appealed her termination for taking unscheduled breaks, she probably thought it was a clear-cut case of sex discrimination. After all, Allen was only taking breaks to pump breastmilk for her infant at home. Something that, you know, only WOMEN do.
However, in the case of Allen vs. totes/Isotoner Corp., the Supreme Court of Ohio upheld Allen’s termination, ruling that Allen couldn’t prove that Isotoner, by calling her breaks to pump a “failure to follow directions” and firing her for it, was, in fact, discriminating against her based on her sex.
Because men wouldn’t be allowed to take breaks to pump their breastmilk, either.
The Supreme Court of Ohio also claims that Allen’s dismissal wasn’t dicrimination based on pregnacy, because Allen wasn’t pregnant.
Discrimination based on the product of a pregnancy, perhaps?
Allowing women to pump at work encourages them to feed their children with breastmilk, raising healthier babies that cost less to insure. Allowing women to pump at work permits them to work more productively, and for longer hours. Allowing women to pump at work keeps them from becoming engorged or getting mastitis, which will make them less productive and also cost insurance money.
But, of course, if you just fire a woman who wants to pump at work, why, then you could hire a man to replace her, and then you won’t have to worry about pumping at all!