"FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES DISCRIMINATION" LAWSUITS: From the American Prospect

The backlash against the reigning "ideal worker" construct -- long hours away from home, 24/7 availability, always ready to travel -- has been mounting for some time now. It's self-evident not just among working moms and work-life analysts but among rebellious elites and working-class men, too. These painfully outmoded assumptions about how to work are based on 1950s-era men with stay-at-home wives. Today more women are in the workforce than ever; fathers want to be more involved in the domestic sphere; people are living longer and are more dependent on their children as they grow infirm. Yet in spite of all this flux, the workplace has remained stagnant, with a "this is just the way things are done" mentality.

But some workers who see these outdated policies as discriminatory are seeking recourse in the courtroom. Employees who were denied that promotion, faced hostility at work, or were fired because they had to care for family members are stepping up to sue. And 50 percent of their cases, known as Family Responsibilities Discrimination (FRD) suits, are winning. These lawsuits put the workplace on trial, wrote Mary C. Still in "Litigating the Maternal Wall: U.S. Workers Charging Discrimination Against Workers with Family Responsibilities," a paper published by the Center for WorkLife Law. FRD lawsuits document the struggle between iconoclastic employees and conventional employers over what the ideal worker looks like. Now the question is whether these lawsuits will actually spark change in the workplace. And if so, how much?

more
posted by Eve at 2:27 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home