June 4, 2019

Settlement in Paid Parental Leave Suit Provides Fathers With Enhanced Leave Options

JPMorgan Chase reached a tentative settlement in a class-action suit alleging discrimination in their paid parental leave policy. Derek Rotondo, an investigator from the company’s Ohio office, initiated the suit after he was denied the 16-week paid parental leave from JPMorgan Chase because he was determined not to be the “primary caregiver.” As the non-primary caregiver, he was offered only two weeks paid leave.

Although parental leave policies based on “primary” and “secondary” caregivers were originally an attempt to gender-neutralize leave in response to increasing numbers of same sex parents, Cynthia Calvert of the Center of WorkLife Law argues that these categories quickly became code for “mother” and “father”. In May 2017, Rotondo consulted with the human resources department about the upcoming birth of his second child and was told in writing that “per our policy birth mothers are what we consider as the primary caregivers”. The only exceptions are if his spouse returned to work before the end of 16 weeks, he could use the balance of the time, or if the mother was medically unable to provide child care, demonstrating that the policy was not actually gender neutral.

The proposed settlement includes a $5 million fund to compensate fathers who were affected by this unfair treatment between 2011 and 2017. It also includes steps to ensure that the parental leave policy is administered in a gender-neutral way. JPMorgan Chase is not the first company to have its parental leave policy challenged. However, this could be the first settlement to result from a class-action case brought by the employees, potentially incentivizing other workers to come forward.

Other large companies have also had their parental leave policies challenged. In 2015, CNN settled with a correspondent who complained to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that the company’s policy was discriminatory. It granted biological mothers 10 weeks of paid leave, but only two weeks for biological fathers. CNN has since changed its policy in an effort to be more equal. Similarly, in 2018 the EEOC brought suit against Estée Lauder for discriminating against fathers of newborns, where it was estimated around 200 men were affected. In the settlement Estée Lauder also agreed to change its policies to be more equitable.

Since this suit, JPMorgan Chase increased the parental leave for nonprimary caregivers to six weeks. Any new parent can claim primary or nonprimary leave with proof of birth or adoption, and their status can be changed if new circumstances arise.

Discrepancies in access to parental leave continue to be widespread. Only a minority of employers offer paid parental leave, but the number is rising. Even if employers offer paternity leave, there is still a large disparity in the number of fathers who take leave under these policies. With the rise of state-based paid leave policies, like New York State’s Paid Family Leave, and continued attention to employers’ parental leave policies, this area for the law is continuing to change.

Written by Emily Entwistle, Summer Law Clerk


The Week in FFCRA Cases: Judge Invalidates DOL Implementation, Expanding Eligibility

August 18, 2020
Disability Discrimination
Leave
The complaints we found relevant this week are eerily similar—parents who need to take care of their children, some of whom are immunocompromised, are being denied telework or leave or are being terminated. Further, we are continuing to see plaintiffs who voice concerns to their employers about workplace safety being terminated after doing so.

Federal Family and Sick Leave for Covid-19 Expanded by New York District Court

August 14, 2020
Leave
Paid Family Leave
Pregnancy Discrimination
FMLA
S.D.N.Y. Judge Paul Oetken invalidated parts of the Department of Labor’s interpretation of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act in a lawsuit brought by New York State Attorney General Letitia James.

New York State Human Rights Law Invoked in Sexual Harassment Arbitration Case

August 11, 2020
Sexual Harassment
A split has appeared in how to handle sexual harassment cases with a New York trial judge ruling recently that the state’s Human Rights Law prevents companies and employees from entering arbitration over sexual harassment. This contradicts an earlier ruling in New York’s Southern District where a judge ruled that arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) supersedes New York’s statutory prohibition against arbitration.

Get In Touch

Knowing where to turn in legal matters can make a big difference. Contact our employment lawyers to determine if we can help you.