The United States Supreme Court heard arguments in the Young v. UPS case on December 3, 2014. That’s the case dealing with the issue of whether or not the PDA requires an employer to provide the same accommodations to a pregnant employee with work restrictions with other employees with similar work restrictions caused by an on-the-job injury.
I listened to the oral arguments this morning and it was fascinating: One hour of argument over the following text:
(k) The terms ‘because of sex’ or ‘on the basis of sex’ include, but are not limited to, because of or on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions; and women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions shall be treated the same for all employment-related purposes, including receipt of benefits under fringe benefit programs, as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work, and nothing in section 703(h) of this title shall be interpreted to permit otherwise.
There was a lot of back-and-forth between the justices and the attorneys over the language prior to the semi-colon vs. the language after.
You can find all of the briefs here.
You can listen to the oral arguments here.
You can read SCOTUSBLOG’s background on the case here.
And you can read my previous ramblings on the case here.