Understanding the Rights and Legal Protections for Pregnant Employees: A Guide for Minnesota Workers

Pregnancy can be both an exciting and challenging time, especially when balancing work responsibilities with the needs of growing your family. As a pregnant employee, it’s important to know that both Minnesota and federal laws offer you a range of rights and protections in the workplace. In this blog post, we’ll outline these rights, explain how they apply, and highlight what steps you can take if you believe your rights have been violated.

Federal Protections for Pregnant Employees

At the federal level, three key laws protect pregnant employees:

Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA):

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, makes it illegal for employers with 15 or more employees to discriminate against employees or job applicants based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. Under the PDA:

  • Equal Treatment: Employers must treat pregnancy-related conditions in the same way they treat other temporary disabilities. For example, if your employer offers light-duty assignments to employees with injuries, they must offer similar accommodations to pregnant employees.
  • Hiring and Promotions: Employers cannot refuse to hire or promote you because you are pregnant, as long as you are able to perform the essential functions of the job.
  • Job Security: You cannot be fired, demoted, or forced to take leave just because you are pregnant.

Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA):

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) applies to employers with 50 or more employees within a 75-mile radius. It provides eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave for specific family and medical reasons, including:

  • The birth of a child and caring for the newborn
  • A serious health condition that makes you unable to perform your job functions

To be eligible for FMLA, you must have worked for your employer for at least 12 months and have clocked at least 1,250 hours of service during that period. While FMLA leave is unpaid, it ensures that your job (or an equivalent position) will be available when you return.

Pregnant Workers’ Fairness Act (PWFA):

The Pregnant Workers’ Fairness Act (PWFA), which went into effect on June 27, 2023, requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers and those with conditions related to pregnancy or childbirth. This federal law focuses specifically on workplace accommodations, similar to those provided under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under the PWFA:

  • Reasonable Accommodations: Employers must provide accommodations for pregnant workers unless doing so would cause an undue hardship on the business. Examples include modifying work schedules, providing light-duty assignments, allowing additional breaks, and offering seating options.
  • Interactive Process: Employers are required to engage in an interactive process with the employee to determine the most appropriate accommodations.
  • Prohibition of Retaliation: Employers cannot retaliate against employees who request accommodations or exercise their rights under the PWFA.

The PWFA provides important protections that go beyond what the PDA and FMLA offer by explicitly requiring accommodations for pregnant workers to ensure they can perform their jobs safely and effectively.

Minnesota-Specific Protections for Pregnant Employees

Minnesota goes a step further than federal law, offering additional rights to pregnant employees under state law:

Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA):

The MHRA prohibits discrimination based on pregnancy and applies to employers with one or more employees. This law provides similar protections to the federal PDA, making it illegal to treat an employee or job applicant unfavorably due to pregnancy, childbirth, or related conditions.

Minnesota Pregnancy and Parenting Leave Act (MPPLA):

The MPPLA is similar to the federal FMLA, but is unique to Minnesota and has broader protections regarding pregnancy and parenting leave. This law applies to all employers, regardless of how many employees work there. So even if an employer only has one employee the MPPLA applies. And the right to leave begins immediately upon hire. Unlike the FMLA, a Minnesota employee is not required to work for an employer for 12 months in order to qualify for MPPLA leave.

Note that MPPLA leave is subject to some important limitations:

  • The leave must be taken within 12 months of the birth or adoption.
  • Employees must request the leave from their employer.
  • Employees can choose when the leave will begin.
  • Employers can adopt reasonable policies about when requests for leave must be made.

Importantly, an employer may not deduct any time used for prenatal care from the 12 weeks of protected leave.

Pregnancy Accommodations under Minnesota Law:

Starting in 2023, Minnesota law requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant employees, even if they do not request them. Some examples of accommodations include:

  • More frequent restroom breaks
  • Food and water breaks
  • Seating arrangements
  • Limits on lifting, moving, or similar physical restrictions

These accommodations must be granted unless the employer can demonstrate that they would cause an undue hardship on the operation of the business. Unlike under federal law, Minnesota employers cannot require a doctor’s note to provide these basic accommodations.

What to Do if You Experience Pregnancy Discrimination

If you believe that your rights as a pregnant employee or employee seeking parental leave have been violated, consider the following steps:

  1. Document Everything As Best You Can: Keep a detailed record of all discriminatory incidents, including dates, times, locations, and the individuals involved.
  2. Speak to HR: Report your concerns to your employer’s Human Resources department. They may not be aware of the issue and might take corrective action once informed.
  3. File a Complaint: If the issue is not resolved internally, you may be able to file a formal complaint directly with your employer. Or you may be able to file a charge with either the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under federal law or the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) under state law.
  4. Consult with an Attorney: An experienced employment law attorney can help you understand your rights, guide you through the complaint process, and represent you in legal proceedings if necessary.

Conclusion

Both federal and Minnesota laws offer pregnant employees robust protections against discrimination, ensuring that you can continue to work and provide for your family without fear of unfair treatment. Understanding these rights can help you advocate for yourself in the workplace and take action if your employer fails to meet their legal obligations.

If you believe your rights have been violated or you have questions about pregnancy discrimination, our experienced employment law team is here to help. Contact us today for a consultation and let us fight for the fair treatment you deserve.

Frances Baillon Co-Authors Article Explaining Revisions to MHRA and Increased Worker Protections

Frances Baillon, with co-author Sam Kramer, wrote an article published in the September 2024 edition of Bench & Bar. The article, “Toward a More Perfect Minnesota: How the ’23-’24 Legislature Expanded Civil Rights Protections,” describes the most recent amendments to the Minnesota Human Rights Act. These include increased protections in the areas of disability, gender identity, familial status and damages available for violations of the Act. The article discusses the impact of these amendments and how they will continue to ensure strong civil rights protections for all Minnesotans.

The full article is available here.

Frances is a distinguished attorney recognized for her exceptional legal expertise and dedication to her clients. She has been named a Super Lawyer and is repeatedly celebrated among the Top 50 Women and Top 100 lawyers in her field. Frances is a frequent speaker and author on employment law given her extensive experience and many accolades and achievements.

If you have any questions about recent legislation affecting employees in Minnesota, or employment law more generally, do not hesitate to contact us to see how we can help.

Brian Rochel Quoted in Article Discussing Tim Walz’s Labor Record

We are proud to announce that Brian Rochel, a partner at Kitzer Rochel PLLP, was recently quoted in a Law360 article discussing Vice President Kamala Harris’s newly announced running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. Rochel was asked to comment on Governor Walz’s extensive labor and employment record. In the article, Brian highlights the significant impact of Walz’s policy initiatives, particularly in areas such as pay transparency, paid leave, and gig worker protections.

Brian noted, “It would be fair to look at some of the policy initiatives that Gov. Walz has helped champion in Minnesota as the kinds of things that I would expect would show up on a platform for a Harris-Walz ticket.” His insights provide valuable context on how Walz’s track record could influence future national labor policies if elected as Vice President in the 2024 election.

You can find the full article here.

We are pleased to see Brian’s expertise recognized in this important discussion about the future of labor and employment law in the United States. Stay tuned for more updates from Kitzer Rochel, PLLP as we continue to advocate for the rights of workers across the nation.

Whistleblower Rewards Can Help Stop Employee Retention Credit (ERC) Violations

The Employee Retention Credit (ERC) was introduced as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to help businesses retain employees during the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. While the ERC has been a lifeline for many businesses, it has also unfortunately opened doors for fraudulent claims and misuse.

Kitzer Rochel specializes in whistleblower reward cases and are dedicated to helping those who come forward with valuable information about ERC violations. If you have knowledge of a business or organization that is fraudulently claiming the ERC, you may be eligible to file a claim and receive a significant reward for your efforts.

What is the Employee Retention Credit?

The ERC is a refundable tax credit for businesses that continued to pay employees despite experiencing a decline in revenue due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This credit is designed to encourage businesses to keep their workforce intact during challenging economic times. However, the complexity of the ERC’s eligibility criteria and the significant financial benefits it offers have unfortunately led to instances of fraud and abuse.

Common Violations of the Employee Retention Credit

Some common violations of the ERC include:

  • Falsifying Eligibility: Businesses misrepresenting their revenue decline or operational status to qualify for the credit.
  • Inflated Payroll Costs: Reporting inflated payroll costs or employees that do not exist to maximize the credit.
  • Double Dipping: Claiming the ERC while also receiving benefits from other COVID-19 relief programs, such as the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), in ways that are not permitted.
  • Improper Record Keeping: Failing to maintain accurate records or intentionally altering records to support fraudulent claims.

How Whistleblowers Can Help

Whistleblowers play a crucial role in exposing fraud and protecting the integrity of government programs. If you are aware of any fraudulent activities related to the ERC, you have the power to make a difference. By coming forward with your information, you not only help to ensure that government funds are used appropriately, but you may also be eligible for a financial reward.

Potential Rewards for Whistleblowers

The rewards for whistleblowers can be substantial. Under the IRS Whistleblower Program, individuals who provide information that leads to the recovery of unpaid taxes can receive between 15% and 30% of the total amount collected by the government. This means that if your information helps uncover significant ERC fraud, your reward could be substantial.

Why Choose Kitzer Rochel?

At Kitzer Rochel, we are committed to protecting whistleblowers and ensuring they receive the rewards they deserve. We understand the courage it takes to come forward, and we are here to provide you with the support and expertise you need every step of the way.

***

Reporting ERC violations is not only a civic duty but also an opportunity to receive significant financial rewards. If you have information about fraudulent ERC claims, don’t hesitate to take action. Contact us today for a confidential consultation and let us help you navigate the whistleblower claim process.

Together, we can make a difference and ensure that the Employee Retention Credit program is used as intended – to support businesses and employees in times of need.

Arbitration Agreements Deemed Invalid for Sexual Harassment Claims Filed After New Law

In a significant ruling, a federal appellate court clarified that sexual harassment and similar claims cannot be forced into arbitration. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed that arbitration agreements cannot be enforced for claims of sexual harassment and assault filed after the enactment of the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021. This decision came in the case of Famuyide v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., where the court upheld a district court’s refusal to compel arbitration based on this new federal law.

The case centers on Eniola Famuyide, who filed a lawsuit against Chipotle in April 2023, alleging sexual harassment and assault by a co-worker, as well as related claims under Minnesota law. Chipotle attempted to enforce an arbitration agreement that was part of Famuyide’s employment contract. However, the court determined that the dispute arose after March 3, 2022, the effective date of the federal law, allowing Famuyide to bypass the arbitration clause.

The ruling highlights the court’s interpretation of when a “dispute” arises under the statute. The court rejected Chipotle’s argument that the dispute began when the harassment and assault occurred in 2021, or when preliminary legal correspondence was exchanged in early 2022. Instead, the court found that no formal conflict or controversy existed between Famuyide and Chipotle before the Act’s effective date, making the arbitration agreement unenforceable.

This decision underscores the protection the Ending Forced Arbitration Act provides to survivors of sexual harassment and assault, ensuring that such claims can be pursued in court, rather than being forced into private arbitration, as long as the disputes arose after the law’s enactment. The Eighth Circuit’s ruling is a clear message that arbitration clauses will not be a barrier to seeking justice in these sensitive and significant cases.

If you have questions about sexual harassment, forced arbitration, or employment law generally, contact our team of experienced trial lawyers today.

The Law Continues to Get Better for Minnesota Employees: MHRA Expanded

The Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) has been expanded in several important ways that will help employees across Minnesota. Governor Walz has signed a new bill, HF 4109, and it’s packed with great updates to the MHRA to help workers all over the state. Some highlights of the changes include:

Key Points of the New Law

  1. Intersectional Discrimination: The new law recognizes that discrimination can happen to people who belong to more than one protected group. This means if someone faces unfair treatment because they belong to multiple groups, like being both a woman and a person of color, the law will protect them.
  2. Disability Definition: The law now has a broader definition of “disability.” It includes conditions that come and go or are in remission, aligning more closely with the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA).
  3. Harassment Protection: It’s now clear that harassment based on any protected characteristic (like race, gender, or disability) is against the law, not just sexual harassment.
  4. Familial Status: The definition of “familial status” has been expanded, but the details are not provided in the summary.
  5. Extended Deadlines: If the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) dismisses a claim, workers now have 90 days to file a lawsuit, instead of the previous 45 days. This matches the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) limit.
  6. Statute of Limitations: If MDHR takes too long to investigate a case, workers won’t lose their right to file a lawsuit because of it. This fixes some old case law problems.
  7. Punitive Damages: There is no longer a cap on punitive damages for claims against non-government entities. This means workers can potentially receive more money if they win their case because their employer intentionally or recklessly violated the law.
  8. Treble Damages: The law confirms that workers can get triple the amount of emotional distress damages, not just economic damages.
  9. Jury Decisions: In cases under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, a jury, not a judge, will decide all damages questions.

How the Law Came to Be

This bill was created by the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) and is the first of its kind. The MDHR submitted an omnibus bill that was carried forward and put into law in a bipartisan effort, and signed by Governor Walz. Kitzer Rochel attorneys Frances Baillon, Phillip Kitzer, and Brian Rochel all helped in the effort to expand the MHRA along with many other members of Minnesota’s Chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association (MN-NELA). Thanks to the effort of many dedicated lawyers and lawmakers, we’ve achieved something amazing by working together. This new law will provide better protection and support for workers in Minnesota.

When Do the Changes Come Into Effect

Some of the new provisions are in effect already because they only clarify the existing law. Any new legal requirement added by the law will go into effect on August 1, 2024. Contact us if you have questions about this exciting new update or employment law more generally.

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Major Victory in Sex Discrimination Case, Lowering the Standard for Proving Discrimination

On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling clarifying that any discriminatory treatment of an employee violates Title VII. The Court ruled in favor of an employee, Sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow, in her sex discrimination case against the City of St. Louis. Muldrow, who worked as a plainclothes officer in the St. Louis Police Department’s Intelligence Division, was transferred to a uniformed job in the Fifth District against her wishes. She alleged that the transfer was due to her being a woman and that it negatively impacted her employment terms and conditions.

The lower courts had rejected Muldrow’s claim, stating that she needed to show that the transfer caused a “significant” employment disadvantage. However, the Supreme Court rejected this approach, stating that Title VII’s text does not establish such a high bar for proving harm in a discrimination case.

Justice Kagan, who delivered the opinion of the Court, emphasized that while an employee must show some harm from a forced transfer (or other type of employment action) to prevail in a Title VII suit, they need not show that the injury satisfies any sort of significance test. The Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

This decision is a major victory for employees who face discrimination in the workplace, as it clarifies that they do not need to meet an elevated threshold of harm to pursue a Title VII claim. The Supreme Court’s ruling reinforces the importance of protecting workers from discriminatory practices that adversely affect their employment terms and conditions, regardless of the perceived significance of the harm caused.

If you have questions about the Muldrow decision, gender discrimination, or employment law generally, please contact us today.

 

Navigating Unique Terrain: Employment Law for Physicians in Minnesota

Physicians play a crucial role in the healthcare landscape, dedicating their expertise to the well-being of patients. However, the practice of medicine isn’t just about patient care; it’s also about understanding the legal framework that governs employment in the medical field. In Minnesota, like in many other states, physicians encounter a unique set of employment laws that require careful navigation. In this post, we explore several distinctive aspects of employment law specifically relevant to physicians in Minnesota.

Licensing and Credentialing:

Minnesota has its own licensing and credentialing requirements for physicians, which can impact their employment. From obtaining a medical license to privileges at specific hospitals or healthcare facilities, physicians must adhere to state regulations. Moreover, credentialing processes can vary between institutions, requiring physicians to stay abreast of each entity’s specific requirements. Failure to maintain proper licensure or credentials can jeopardize employment opportunities and professional standing.

Whistleblower Protections:

Physicians, as advocates for patient safety and ethical medical practices, may find themselves in situations where they need to report wrongdoing or unsafe conditions. Minnesota law provides protections for whistleblowers who report violations of law or regulations in good faith. In fact, Minnesota law provides specific protections for any employee who reports a concern about the standard of patient or healthcare. Navigating whistleblower protections can be complex, as physicians must ensure their actions are lawful and in the best interest of patient care while also safeguarding themselves from retaliation.

Wage and Hour Laws:

Physicians, especially those in residency programs or employed by healthcare institutions, are subject to both Federal and Minnesota wage and hour laws. Understanding regulations regarding minimum wage, overtime pay, and meal and rest breaks is crucial for both employers and physicians. Additionally, residency programs must comply with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) standards, which include duty hour restrictions to prevent physician fatigue and ensure patient safety.

Telemedicine Regulations:

With the rise of telemedicine, physicians must also be aware of the regulatory landscape governing remote healthcare services in Minnesota. State laws dictate licensure requirements, patient consent protocols, and standards of care for telemedicine practitioners. Physicians engaging in telemedicine must adhere to these regulations to avoid legal repercussions and ensure quality patient care.

In conclusion, employment law for physicians in Minnesota presents a complex and evolving landscape that requires careful attention to detail and compliance. If you have questions about employment law generally, or how it applies in the physician or healthcare setting, contact experienced attorneys at Kitzer Rochel, PLLP today.

Hennepin County Jury Awards Landmark Verdict of Over $4.6 Million in Whistleblower Case

In January 2024, Brent Bullis, a radiologist and senior shareholder of Consulting Radiologists, Limited (CRL) in Eden Prairie, was granted a historic jury verdict of $4.6 million in a case against his employer for wrongful termination.

Dr. Bullis brought a claim against CRL and Allina Health System for retaliation in violation of the Minnesota Whistleblower Act and the Minnesota Human Rights Act. Dr. Bullis alleged that he was terminated in retaliation for his reports of sex discrimination, billing fraud, patient care violations, and illegal and fraudulent activity to CRL. Dr. Bullis, who had worked with CRL for over 18 years, brought forth these concerns to leadership out of good faith and hope that CRL would change its practices so that he could continue his career at CRL. However, when CRL repeatedly failed to act, he warned that he would have to report his concerns to Allina Health, the parent company of Abbott Northwestern Hospital where Dr. Bullis practiced through CRL. In response, CRL terminated his employment. 

While Bullis’ claims against Allina Health were dismissed in August 2023, his claims against CRL proceeded to trial. After a two-week long trial, the jury ruled in favor of Dr. Bullis and granted him $ 4,587,602 in damages. The damages calculation included actual and compensatory damages, including past and future wage loss and emotional distress.  

This damages award was a significant victory for Dr. Bullis, for employment rights advocates, and for future plaintiffs. A jury award this high shows that the Minnesota community does not tolerate employers who retaliate against their employees for reporting ethical and legal violations and safety concerns. The inclusion of emotional distress damages also recognizes that the effects employees face after discrimination in their workplace extends beyond just the loss of a paycheck. Losing a job often leads to significant effects on a person’s mental and physical health, reputation, and dignity.  

If you have questions about employment law, or feel that your rights may have been violated, contact Kitzer Rochel today.

What to Know about Minnesota’s Pregnancy and Parental Leave Laws

This past legislative session, Minnesota passed a law guaranteeing employees the right to paid pregnancy or parental leave. This will go into effect on January 1, 2026.

As it stands, employees are entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave within 12 months of the birth or adoption of a child. Employees can choose when they would like to take this leave, with the only requirement being that they provide reasonable notice to their employers. Employees are entitled to their job back when they return from leave and they are entitled to continue receiving health insurance benefits while on leave, although they may be asked to pay for it.

Starting in 2026, the State of Minnesota will begin paying you a portion of your wages while you are out on leave, becoming the 12th state to offer such a program.

If you are experiencing discrimination or retaliation on the basis of your pregnancy or other protected status, contact Kitzer Rochel. Our experienced employment law attorneys would be happy to discuss your case and understand your legal rights and options.