MENU

Tag: breastfeeding

Breaking It Down: Georgia Paid Lactation Breaks

November 9, 2020

Thanks to the relevatively recently enacted paid lactation breaks law, providing lactation breaks is required of all employers in Georgia.

Lactation breaks were already required under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and most states have followed suit. Now, however, Georgia is taking it a step further and adding more protection to its law for the sake of its employees. O.C.G.A. § 34-1-6. Keep reading to learn everything that you need to know.

The Battle for Breastfeeding

There has been an ongoing debate for years over the propriety of breastfeeding in public, in the workplace, or anywhere other than the comfort of home. However, as this is a natural and necessary part of motherhood for many, it is unfair and illegal to discriminate against women who need to take additional breaks in the workplace or have some type of support to allow them to handle their lactation needs.

The battle for equality in the workplace has been raging for years and may never fully become realized entirely, but at least for now, those who need lactation breaks can trust that they will get them. The FLSA has had a provision in place for some time that mandates that employers allow lactation breaks in a space other than a bathroom. However, this does not require those breaks nor require that they be paid, simply to be provided as they are needed to any woman who is nursing and may need to take a break as a result.

Georgia Takes It Further

The initial law in Georgia was a permissive provision that followed the exact parameters of the FLSA requirement. For a while, that worked for the state. However, it has recently updated the lactation breaks law to include paid breaks for all employees. Under the new guidelines, the law states that:

  • Employees must be given breaks of a “reasonable duration”

  • Breaks should be paid at their regular compensation rate

  • Breaks are not mandated when employees are working away from the main worksite

  • Employers cannot reduce pay or force employees to use paid leave to cover lactation breaks, even for salaried and exempt employees

  • A private location, other than a bathroom, needs to be provided

There is also a provision in the new law for smaller employers with fewer than 50 employees permitting them to follow this code, so long as it does not cause “undue hardship” to the business. Companies will need to consider their size, resources, and nature of business to determine whether they have any situations that would qualify as undue hardship, but this is typically decided on a case-by-case basis.

The employer does still have some say in what is deemed “reasonable” and “necessary”, of course, but for the most part, employees can take the breaks that they need, when they need them. If they are a Georgia employee, they are now also going to get paid for that time.

To make sure that the FLSA is expanded upon properly, Georgia also put provisions to prevent a one-year cap on this allowance. Instead, employees can continue to take the breaks for as long as reasonably necessary. Georgia, and all states, can provide this greater benefit because the FLSA does not preempt any state laws offering better protection. The FLSA is the minimum standard, and nothing more.

The FLSA does provide protection from retaliation for employees. If an employer is not pleased with having to provide these breaks, they may try to dock the employee’s pay or retaliate against them in another way. The FLSA prohibits this behavior, and as noted above, the new Georgia law reinforces that no one can be penalized for taking these breaks, including exempt and salaried employees.

New Times Call for New Considerations

As the public health crisis continues to put the emphasis on people first, companies are starting to come around to better benefits, such as in the case of the updated paid lactation breaks law in the state of Georgia. Things are changing. As a result, previously contentious topics like lactation breaks are now coming to the forefront hoping to be impacted positively by the wave of change.

It will be a matter of time until the benefits of this new law are seen firsthand, but it already gives working nursing mothers more peace of mind.

Case Summary: Pregnancy Discrimination Act Protects Breastfeeding

September 27, 2017

In STEPHANIE HICKS v. CITY OF TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA, the 11th Circuit Court held that the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) guarantees women the right to be free from discrimination in the workplace based on gender-specific physiological occurrences – including breastfeeding.

Stephanie Hicks brought this civil action against the Tuscaloosa Police Department under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Ms. Hicks worked first as a patrol officer and then as an investigator on the narcotics task force. When she became pregnant she requested assignments that prevented late night work and weekend work, this was granted but only after being demoted only eight days after returning from FMLA leave. Hicks overheard multiple conversations in which officers of the police department used defamatory and sexist language about her. After the baby was born, Ms. Hicks requested accommodations that would have allowed her to breastfeed in the workplace and would have excused her from duties which required wearing a vest that according to her doctor could cause a breast disease that would inhibit breastfeeding. These accommodation requests were denied.  Ms. Hicks viewed these actions as a constructive discharge and filed suit.

Ms. Hicks prevailed at a jury trial wherein she was awarded $161,319.92 plus costs and attorney fees. The City appealed but the 11th Circuit Court, of which the State of Georgia is included, affirmed the decision.

The Court stated the important legal tests as follows:

  • The PDA amended Title VII to include discrimination “on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” – the ultimate question is “whether the evidence, when viewed as a whole, yields the reasonable inference that the employer engaged in the alleged discrimination.

  • Under the FMLA the ultimate questions are whether: “(1)Hicks availed herself of a protected right under the FMLA; (2) [s]he suffered an adverse employment decision; and (3) there is a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse employment decision.

In application of these tests to the facts as summarized above, the Court concluded there was ample evidence that Hicks was both discriminated against on the basis of her pregnancy and that she was retaliated against for taking her FMLA leave. Furthermore, the Court found that the PDA covers discrimination against breastfeeding mothers and the City’s failure to accommodate Hicks’s requests, when it allowed accommodations to others similarly situated, constituted discriminatory constructive discharge, in violation of the PDA.