
Richard D. Alaniz
At most companies, employees with caregiving responsibilities at
home present management with a series of difficult problems. Are these
employees always available as needed? Are they as productive as others? Will
other employees become angered if they perceive special treatment for
co-workers, such as flex-time? Can caregiving employees be penalized if they
are less productive or effective?
In its continuing effort to promote work-life balance, the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently weighed in with new
guidelines outlining how working parents or those caring for elderly parents
may be able to claim discrimination in the workplace. The new guidance
underscores the fact that employers must be extremely cautious when dealing
with caregivers - even though they are not a specifically protected “class”
under EEO laws.
“Although the federal EEO laws do not per se prohibit
discrimination against caregivers, there are circumstances in which
discrimination against caregivers might constitute unlawful disparate
treatment,” according to the 33-page enforcement guidance, “Unlawful Disparate
Treatment Of Workers With Caregiving Responsibilities,” which was released May
23.
The guidance does not create a new protected class of workers;
rather, it is intended to help investigators, employers, and employees
determine whether a caregiver may have been unlawfully discriminated against
under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. Treating a caregiver differently from other
caregivers of different race, sex, national origin, religion, or age can result
in a potential discrimination claim.
Testifying before the
EEOC last April, Heather Boushey, senior economist for the “progressive” Center
for Economic and Policy Research, pointed to the fact that families are
striving to create a work-life balance, since “the overwhelming majority of children do not have a full-time caretaker
at home.” Boushey cited information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that
said two-thirds of families with children have all available
parents at work. In 62 percent of married-couple families, both parents work.
In 71 percent of single-mother families and 83 percent of single-father
families, the parent works.
“Achieving work/life balance is not a
problem for just a few U.S. workers but, rather, is the norm for the majority
of the U.S. workforce,” Boushey said. “Workers across a multitude of
demographic dimensions - age, race, ethnicity, marital status, income,
educational attainment, and kind of job - face work/life issues. Yet, the majority
of the U.S. workforce reports having little or no flexibility in setting their
hours and nearly two-thirds report not having paid sick days to cover their
time if a family member is ill.”
Boushey also pointed
to work-life challenges of those who must care for elderly parents. “An
indication of the growing importance of elder care is that over the next 10
years, home health aides are projected to be the fastest growing occupation in
the United States, increasing by over 50 percent,” she said.
It seems clear that
the EEOC has taken steps to assist caregivers as much as possible without
defining them as a protected class. Instead, the EEOC has pointed out the high
correlation between caregivers and those in protected classes, and used the new
guidance to put employers on notice. As the EEOC has noted, caregiver
discrimination extends far beyond mothers of young children.
Men and women are increasingly caring for elderly parents, and
those numbers will only rise as Baby Boomers age. And unlike the
responsibilities of caring for children, which generally decrease with time,
the burdens of eldercare often grow more demanding as parents age. Unexpected
health problems can make eldercare demands on employees’ time much less predictable
than those of childcare.
Employees who care for disabled family members, such as adult
children, spouses, or parents, may also present circumstances that could lead
to claims of discrimination. According to the most recent U.S. census, nearly a
third of families have at least one family member with a disability, and about
one in 10 families with children under 18 years of age includes a child with a
disability. Most men and women who provide care to relatives or other
individuals with a disability are employed.
Today, most of the caregiving burden still falls to working
women, and statistics show that the demands are particularly heavy for women of
color, especially African-American women. But men are taking on more of the
care, so their potential for claiming discrimination is also growing. Between
1965 and 2003, men nearly tripled the amount of time they spent on childcare,
and more than doubled their time spent on household chores.
There are countless
actions that employers may presume to be fair, but might in fact be considered
unlawful discrimination. The EEOC has laid out several common scenarios under
which discrimination against a worker with caregiving responsibilities might
constitute unlawful disparate treatment. Among those:
•
Treating male
caregivers more favorably than female caregivers
Denying women with
young children an employment opportunity that is available to men with young
children may be cause for a claim of discrimination.
•
Sex-based
stereotyping of working women
The EEOC outlines several ways that stereotyping working women can open
employers up to a potential discrimination claim. The EEOC points to such
examples as reassigning a woman to less desirable projects based on the
assumption that, as a new
mother, she will be less committed to her job, or reducing a female
employee’s workload after she assumes full-time care of her niece and nephew
based on the assumption that, as a female
caregiver, she will not want to work overtime.
•
Subjective
decisionmaking
Employers must be very
careful about lowering subjective evaluations because of an employee’s
caregiving duties. For example,
an employer should not assume that a female employee’s work performance will
worsen after she becomes the primary caregiver of her grandchildren, until and
unless there is an actual decline in work performance.
•
Assumptions
about pregnant workers
Employers should not
limit a pregnant worker’s job duties based on pregnancy-related stereotypes.
•
Discrimination
against working fathers
Employers should be conscious about
treating male and female caregivers equally. Discrimination could be claimed for denying a male caregiver leave to
care for an infant under circumstances where they would grant leave to a female
caregiver.
•
Discrimination
against women of color
Reassigning a Latina worker to a lower-paying position after she becomes
pregnant could open employers up to potential discrimination claims.
•
Stereotyping
based on association with an individual with a disability
Employers should not, for example, refuse to hire a worker who is a
single parent of a child with a disability based on the assumption that
caregiving responsibilities will make the worker unreliable.
•
Hostile
work environment affecting caregivers
This can take several forms, according to the EEOC. Those include
subjecting a female worker to severe or pervasive harassment because she is a
mother with young children, subjecting a female worker to severe or pervasive
harassment because
she is pregnant or has taken maternity leave, or subjecting a worker to
severe or pervasive harassment because his wife has a disability. What may
constitute “severe or pervasive harassment” is a subjective determination
filled with risk for employers.
“With this new
guidance, the Commission is attempting to clarify how the federal EEO laws
apply to employees who struggle to balance work and family,” said agency Vice
Chair Leslie E. Silverman. The key for employers is to make sure they are
evaluating employees based on actual performance and not on assumptions or
stereotypes, and are treating all employees who are caregivers on an equal
basis.
Publication
date: 09/24/2007