Angela Ames says Nationwide forced to resign her position on her first day back from maternity leave. According to Ames, Nationwide denied her access to the lactation room (and was told it could take up to three days to get access), was sent to non-private locations to pump, had unreasonable expectations placed on her when she returned, and told her to just go home and be with her kids. While visibly upset and in tears about the situation (and in pain from engorged breasts — she hadn’t pumped in nearly 5 hours), her manager handed her a pen and paper and then dictated her letter of resignation.

Sounds terrible, right? When I read this article, I was outraged. I was even more up appalled when I read that the Supreme Court upheld the Eighth Court of Appeals ruling that there was no discrimination.  I was also disappointed in myself for not keeping up with Supreme Court rulings on these issues. So, I did what ever reasonable attorney would do – I headed to Lexis to read the Supreme Court opinion. And what I found was slightly different than what was presented in the article.

The Supreme Court did uphold the ruling of the Eighth Court of Appeals – they just denied certiorari. While this is effectively upholding the ruling, it really isn’t the same. Yes, I know this is lawyer-speak – but there IS a difference. And frankly, after reading the opinion from the Eighth Court of Appeals, I do not question their decision not to accept the case.

Instead, I questioned the point of the article. The title of the article, “Breast-Feeding Mom Loses Discrimination Case Because Men Can Lactate Too,” drew me in. I needed to know more. The point of the article was to get me excited and upset with the courts. However, this wasn’t the fact pattern for this excitement.

I agree that we, as a society, need to support women and encourage mothers to remain in the workplace. But that doesn’t mean that it will always be easy. This article seems to suggest that it is okay to back down when things get hard. That’s not what being a professional is about. It is about being strong and pushing forward.

According to Slate, the court should have found that Ames was constructively fired because her first day back was really tough – even though it was hard because she didn’t follow company policy. It doesn’t encourage women to fight for their positions. Instead, it portrays women in the role of a victim. I don’t want that for myself or my daughters.

If you want to read more about Ames’ case and the Eighth Court of Appeals decision, keep reading…

 

The Eighth Court of Appeals decided this case on issues dealing with constructive termination. The main question became: Did Ames do enough to keep her job? In short, the court wanted to see her fight for her job. We all know it’s hard to be a working parent. But you have to fight for what you want and need to succeed. You cannot wait around for someone to hand it to you.

Ames started working for Nationwide in October 2008. She had her first child in May 2009 (meaning, she was pregnant when she started working) and took eight weeks of maternity leave. She then returned to work around July 2009 and then, only three months later discovered she was pregnant with baby number 2. Because of pregnancy complications, she was placed on bed rest in April 2010.

The head of her department and her direct supervisor made jokes about Ames’ maternity leave. One of them said: “Oh, yeah, I’m teasing her about taking a week’s worth of maternity leave. We’re too busy for her to take of that much work.”

After being on leave for about a month, Ames gave birth on May 18, 2010. Nationwide told her that her FMLA leave would expire on August 2, 2010. On June 16, 2010, her supervisor called to tell her that the leave had been miscalculated. She would need to return to work on July 12, 2010. She would be allowed to take additional unpaid leave until August but that would raise some red flags. Her supervisor offered to extend her leave one week and they agreed she would return to work on July 19, 2010.

Before she returned to work, Ames had inquired about where she could express milk and was told that there was a lactation room. Although Nationwide’s lactation policy was provided at quarterly maternity meetings and available on the company intranet, Ames did not know what was required to access the lactation rooms. (And, it doesn’t sound like she inquired any further while she was on leave.)

On her first day back, Ames learned from the company nurse that she needed to apply to have access to the lactation rooms and that was normally a three-day process. Ames completed the paperwork and the nurse requested security rush the application and give Ames access to the rooms as soon as possible. The rooms were accessed by badge and she needed her security badge updated. In the interim, the nurse suggested she pump in the wellness room. Unfortunately, at that time, the room was occupied and the nurse suggested she try back in about 20 minutes.

While waiting for the room to become available, her department head told her that none of her work had been done while she was on leave. Ames would be required to work overtime to get caught up and she needed to be caught up within two weeks. She was threatened with unspecified disciplinary action if she didn’t catch up.

She then asked her immediate supervisor for assistance with the lactation room. At this point, Ames was visibly upset and in tears. Her supervisor handed Ames a piece of paper and a pen and told her, “You know, I think it’s best that you go home to be with your babies.” He then dictated to Ames what to write on the piece of paper to effectuate her resignation.

Ames then sued Nationwide alleging sex and pregnancy discrimination. She cited the unavailability of the lactation room, her urgent need to express milk, and the unrealistic expectations regarding her work production as causes for her forced resignation or constructive discharge.

But, is this REALLY discrimination?? Was Ames really discharged or forced to quit because she needed to pump or had just returned from maternity leave?

While I do not want to judge another mother, I do not think she fought for her position. What mother’s first day back at the office was great? Mine was terrible! During my first pumping session at work, my boss walked in on me. (Mind you, the firm denied my request for a lock on the door because it would have been too expensive for the building to install. – but I digress…)

Coming back from leave is hard. Which is why you need to prepare. Being a mother and a professional is difficult. It takes hard work, preparation, and planning. If you don’t adequately prepare, it will be even harder. As women, we need to encourage and teach each other to plan. Unfortunately, the Slate article doesn’t do that.