Marina Chavez gave birth to her fourth child a month prematurely in April 2007 and returned to work at a Los Angeles-area taqueria 30 days later, needing the $7.55-an-hour cashier job to feed her family.
On her third night back, her boyfriend brought their newborn son to work and Chavez breastfed the child in their car during her lunch break.
The next night, she got a call from the company's general manager, Jaime Acosta, who, according to a state civil rights commission, told her he didn't want her back at work until she was done breastfeeding. When Chavez said she couldn't wait that long, Acosta replied that he didn't like her attitude and she was fired, the commission said.
Her dismissal has led to a precedent-setting ruling by the state Fair Employment and Housing Commission in San Francisco. The decision, made public last week, said punishing a female employee for breastfeeding during a work break amounts to sex discrimination.
"Breastfeeding, on her own break time, is an activity intrinsic to Chavez's sex, female, and also protected under California law," the commission said.
The commission also said her former employer, Acosta Tacos, had discriminated against Chavez by not holding her previous job open for her during her pregnancy leave, forcing her to work at different locations each night as openings occurred. The commission ordered the company to pay her $21,645 for lost wages and $20,000 for emotional distress, and to pay a $5,000 fine to the state for a willful civil rights violation.
"It is unconscionable that a working mother should be penalized for needing to feed her newborn baby," said Phyllis Cheng, director of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which represented Chavez before the commission.
That isn't what happened, Acosta said Friday. He said he fired Chavez for incompetence and insubordination, an assertion he also made to the commission, which didn't believe him.
"I did not fire her because she was breastfeeding," he said in an interview. "I just made a comment to her - 'Is it safe to be out here in the parking lot?' " If the law requires employers to allow breastfeeding, he said, "I have no problem with that."
Acosta said the small company, which owns three taquerias in Inglewood and Hawthorne, would appeal the ruling, but might have to file for bankruptcy because of the damage award.
A 2002 California law requires employers to provide a reasonable amount of break time for an employee who wants to breastfeed an infant child, unless a break would seriously disrupt the employer's operations. California also allows a mother to breastfeed her child "in any location, public or private."
No state court or agency had previously considered, however, whether denying the right to breastfeed amounts to sex discrimination. Awarding damages to an employee in such a case is rare if not unprecedented in the United States, said Loretta McCallister, spokeswoman for La Leche League, a support organization for breastfeeding women.
"That's teaching employers that there's nothing wrong with it," she said.
The next night, she got a call from the company's general manager, Jaime Acosta, who, according to a state civil rights commission, told her he didn't want her back at work until she was done breastfeeding. When Chavez said she couldn't wait that long, Acosta replied that he didn't like her attitude and she was fired, the commission said.
Her dismissal has led to a precedent-setting ruling by the state Fair Employment and Housing Commission in San Francisco. The decision, made public last week, said punishing a female employee for breastfeeding during a work break amounts to sex discrimination.
"Breastfeeding, on her own break time, is an activity intrinsic to Chavez's sex, female, and also protected under California law," the commission said.
The commission also said her former employer, Acosta Tacos, had discriminated against Chavez by not holding her previous job open for her during her pregnancy leave, forcing her to work at different locations each night as openings occurred. The commission ordered the company to pay her $21,645 for lost wages and $20,000 for emotional distress, and to pay a $5,000 fine to the state for a willful civil rights violation.
"It is unconscionable that a working mother should be penalized for needing to feed her newborn baby," said Phyllis Cheng, director of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which represented Chavez before the commission.
That isn't what happened, Acosta said Friday. He said he fired Chavez for incompetence and insubordination, an assertion he also made to the commission, which didn't believe him.
"I did not fire her because she was breastfeeding," he said in an interview. "I just made a comment to her - 'Is it safe to be out here in the parking lot?' " If the law requires employers to allow breastfeeding, he said, "I have no problem with that."
Acosta said the small company, which owns three taquerias in Inglewood and Hawthorne, would appeal the ruling, but might have to file for bankruptcy because of the damage award.
A 2002 California law requires employers to provide a reasonable amount of break time for an employee who wants to breastfeed an infant child, unless a break would seriously disrupt the employer's operations. California also allows a mother to breastfeed her child "in any location, public or private."
No state court or agency had previously considered, however, whether denying the right to breastfeed amounts to sex discrimination. Awarding damages to an employee in such a case is rare if not unprecedented in the United States, said Loretta McCallister, spokeswoman for La Leche League, a support organization for breastfeeding women.
"That's teaching employers that there's nothing wrong with it," she said.
E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page C - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/23/BAVO19BMJ1.DTL#ixzz0PdpUh6Oo
No comments:
Post a Comment