Print This Post Print This Post

The Ohio Supreme Court handed down a decision today in McFee v. Nursing Care Management of America, Inc. that holds that, “…it’s not gender discrimination for employers to require a minimum tenure for employees to take an extended leave for any purpose, pregnancy included.” (See this Columbus Dispatch blog post.)

What’s the problem?

Kellie Copeland, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio, said [that the ruling punishes] working women for having children.

“This is appalling,” Copeland said. “We should be having policies in place that allow people to have children and not lose their jobs because they choose to have a child. This illustrates a major hole in Ohio law – there is no protection for women in this type of situation.”

As for employers’ ability to not support working women:

R.C. Chapter 4112 does not require employers to provide pregnancy/maternity leave when it provides no other leave or to waive or ignore minimum-length-of-service eligibility requirements for obtaining a leave of absence when an employee requests pregnancy/maternity leave.

So this is where I see the separation of women who support women wheat from women who say they support women but don’t really support women chaff:

Nikki Haley, Sarah Palin, Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina: Gonna bare those mama grizzly features on behalf of the working mama grizzlies being denied pregnancy leave in Ohio? Two of you are running to be your state’s governor. You better believe you need to address this.

And I’m completely not kidding. They must be required to answer this situation, or their mama grizzly image becomes exactly what some of us have suspected all along: all image, no substance. As Betsy Reed recently wrote in The Nation:

Fresh new faces aside, the Republican party’s stance on the issues that matter to working mothers is as regressive as it has ever been….It’s one thing – and not a small thing – to celebrate the strength of women in politics. But it’s supremely cynical to do so, as the GOP year-of-the-woman revellers have, while working to undercut the strength of women in society. Now, will the real Mama Grizzlies please rise up?”

UPDATE: A good post on why this decision impermissibly discriminates against pregnant women from Amie Newman at RH Reality Check. Note this spot-on observation in the comment thread:

There seems to me to be a contradiction between all the angst about women being urged to continue their pregnancies to ‘save the life of the innocent fetus’ and the dismissal of the actual childbirth itself as a ‘life-style option’ which shouldn’t be allowed to have a negative impact on the bottom line.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a clearer demonstration of how all the concern for the fetus evaporates as soon as its born. ‘Buy some bottles and formula, dump that baby in daycare and back to work at once! No UNPAID leave for you!’

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:45 pm June 23rd, 2010 in Abortion, Business, conservatives, democracy, Economy, Education, employment, Gender, Government, Health Care, intolerance, Law, leadership, Media, Mental health, Ohio, Parenting, Politics, Religion, Sexism, Social Issues, Women, Youth 

Comments

2 Responses to “Ohio Sup Court Discrimination: Will Palin’s Mama Grizzlies Rise Up for Mama Grizzlies-To-Be?”

  1. 1 Barbara Krecic on June 23rd, 2010 10:16 pm

    Actually what it really says is if a company has a policy that requires “term” that means one must work there x amount of days before they are eligible for leave and their job is protected then that policy must be applied to all. If there is no policy in place and one takes leave, then the company isn’t required to hold a job position.
    The Supreme Court is very clear. With a policy, they’d better hold to it. As I understood the case, there was a term policy in place and the employee hadn’t worked there long enough to receive leave benefits.

  2. 2 Jill Miller Zimon on June 23rd, 2010 10:31 pm

    Thanks, Barbara. I do understand that. I’m expressing the opinion that female politicians who call themselves or consider themselves to be Mama Grizzlies should be addressing the negative and discriminatory effect of laws – whether case or statute – that would allow such burdensome workplace practices, given the frequently held pro-life and pro-woman stance that the so-called Mama Grizzlies supposedly possess.

    We need to do better for the mama grizzlies to be. Say that the law says or allows one thing or another isn’t good enough.

  • Mothers Mean Business When It Comes to Governing

  • Find Me On

  • 2011 Campaign Innovator Award

  • Category Specific RSS

    Pepper Pike
    Cleveland+
    Politics
    Women
    Ohio
    Elections
    Law
    Jewish
  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Calendar

    June 2010
    S M T W T F S
    « May   Jul »
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    27282930  
  • Meta

  • Notorious Women through History


  • Our Bodies, Our Blog


"));