Acting Attorney General Robert Lougy and the Division on Civil Rights announced today that a woman who was hired for a warehouse packing job, then discharged three days later after it became known she was pregnant, stands to collect more than $7,000 as the result of a settlement with her former employer.
The court-appointed trustee for bankrupt Diamond Staffing has agreed to process a settlement payment of $7,900 to resolve allegations the employment agency placed Alyssa Walsh, of North Bergen, in an assembly line job then terminated her upon learning she was expecting.
Under terms of the settlement, Complainant Walsh could receive her full lost wage claim of $7,900 from Diamond Staffing’s assets, once those assets are liquidated under supervision of the bankruptcy trustee. The $7,900 is to compensate Walsh for lost pay from a job she held for three days at a plant in Secaucus before being removed by her supervisors and told that, because of her maternity, there was no work for her.
On March 19, 2014, the pregnant Walsh was assigned by Diamond Staffing, of West New York, to work as a packer on an assembly line operated by Port Logistics Group in Secaucus.
In interviews with Division investigators, the two sides disagreed with respect to the ensuing sequence of events. However, the net result was that Walsh’s employment ended after three days.
Walsh told the Division she was forthcoming about her pregnancy with a Diamond Staffing recruiter/dispatcher who assigned her to the job in Secaucus. She said she was working the job successfully, and uneventfully, until she was approached by an on-site Diamond Staffing manager who asked if she was pregnant. After advising the manager that she was in fact pregnant, Walsh told investigators, she was reassigned to “light duty” chores for the remainder of that day.
Walsh claimed she was subsequently told by Diamond Staffing there was no work for her at the Secaucus location. She said she was advised the company would seek other jobs for her – jobs ostensibly more suited to her condition -- but that such work never materialized. She also alleged that a Diamond Staffing recruiter told her she was welcome to return when she was no longer pregnant.
Diamond Staffing maintained that Walsh failed to disclose her pregnancy to its recruiter/dispatcher at the outset, but once hired and actually working the job in Secaucus, she refused to perform related lifting duties citing her pregnancy. However, witnesses stated that Walsh never refused to work and never asked for an accommodation for her pregnancy.
The Division issued a Finding of Probable Cause (FPC) crediting Walsh’s complaint in July 2015. In that FPC, the Division observed that the LAD makes it illegal to discharge or otherwise discriminate against an employee based on pregnancy, and that employers are duty-bound under the law to make “reasonable accommodation” for pregnant workers. While the $7,900 settlement negotiated on Walsh’s behalf by the Division was approved by both Walsh and her former employer, it remains subject to approval by the Bankruptcy Court.
In an unrelated wrongful discharge case that also involves workplace maternity, the Division issued a Finding of Probable Cause against a Camden city liquor store owner for allegedly firing a female employee on the basis of her pregnancy and gender.
Betzaida Sanchez, a former full-time employee of Eddie Azcona’s Liquors in Camden, was hired in April 2015 and discharged in mid-October 2015 – several weeks after disclosing to her male supervisor that she was pregnant.
Sanchez, who worked as a cashier and stock person, subsequently filed a Complaint with the Division alleging that she was wrongly terminated. In her complaint, Sanchez alleged that she was told by her employer it was against the law for her to work in a liquor store while pregnant.
The store owner denied firing Sanchez, saying she’d instead been “encouraged to accept a layoff until maternity leave would be completed.” The owner also denied telling Sanchez it was illegal to work in a liquor store when pregnant, but provided shifting explanations for letting Sanchez go.
In one instance, he said he feared Sanchez or her unborn child might be injured if Sanchez continued to work in the liquor store. In another instance, he told investigators that business at the store was “slow” around the time Sanchez was discharged, and also expressed reluctance to “leave a girl working alone in the liquor store” for fear of crime.
In issuing a Finding of Probable Cause against the store owner, Director Sashihara noted that an employer – no matter how well-intentioned – cannot exclude a pregnant woman from employment based on stereotype-driven assumptions about her ability to work, or about any harm that might flow from her working.
The Director also observed that Azcona’s other rationale for dismissing Sanchez -- that it was inappropriate to have a “girl” working in the liquor store for fear of crime – was evidence of gender bias driving an adverse personnel decision.
In a third, unrelated pregnancy-in-the-workplace matter, Director Sashihara issued a Finding of No Probable Cause in the case of former AT&T retail store sales employee who alleged that she was fired for requesting an on-the-job accommodation while pregnant.
The woman alleged that, on her doctor’s advice, she asked to work no more than a six-hour shift at her job in an AT&T retail store in Cherry Hill, and also requested a chair in order to sit. Director Sashihara issued a Finding of No Probable Cause after a Division investigation revealed that, prior to her discharge for what her employer said was repeated misconduct, the woman was repeatedly warned and disciplined for excessive use of her company-issued phone for non-business purposes, and for careless treatment of the devices (for example, two separate company-issued devices assigned to her sustained cracked screens.)