NJ Division on Civil Rights Pursues Case of Alleged Denial of Family Leave
Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal and the Division on Civil Rights (DCR) announced today that DCR will pursue before an Administrative Law Judge a former corporate marketing director’s pregnancy discrimination complaint against her ex-employer.
In her original complaint against her former employer, VCNY Home of North Bergen, the former marketing director alleged that VCNY denied her rights under the New Jersey Family Leave Act, retaliated against her after she filed a complaint with DCR about the denial, and eventually fired her.
The discrimination allegedly began soon after she advised VCNY that she was planning to take time off under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to physically recover from giving birth, and then take an additional 12 weeks of leave under New Jersey’s Family Leave Act to care for her newborn child.
Under the law, an employee who gives birth does not exhaust her New Jersey Family Leave Act time by first taking federal FMLA time to physically recover from childbirth.
However, VCNY sent the woman a letter in March 2018 advising that federal FMLA and state Family Leave Act time run concurrently. The letter directed her to return to work on June 18, 2018 and warned that if she failed to do so, the company would view it as her resignation.
The marketing director filed her complaint with DCR on April 10, 2018. In January 2019, she filed an amended complaint alleging that, upon her return to work in July of 2018, VCNY retaliated against her in multiple ways and eventually discharged her as a reprisal.
The woman alleged that VCNY retaliated against her when she returned to work after her leave by, among other things, diminishing her role in the company and excluding her from projects and meetings she had previously been involved in.
According to the complainant, VCNY then fired her when she refused to take a two-week international business trip to India and China while she was breastfeeding her baby.
“New Jersey law protects the rights of new parents during those early days when infants require so much care,” Attorney General Grewal said. “Employers should make certain they understand family leave protections under both state and federal law. We take these protections seriously, and will hold accountable employers who violate the rights of their workers.”
“No parent should be forced to choose between their job and caring for or breastfeeding their child,” said DCR Director Rachel Wainer Apter. “And it is all too common for mothers, in particular, to be sidelined at work after they return from leave. That is illegal. New Jersey law protects a parent’s right to take leave to care for a newborn child and to return to the same position after leave.”
VCNY officials interviewed by DCR acknowledged a reduced role for complainant after her return from pregnancy leave and confirmed her exclusion from some meetings and events. However, they cited a marketing department “restructuring” as the reason, and denied retaliation.
As to the two-week international trip, when the complainant asked to be excused from the trip as a breastfeeding accommodation, VCNY offered to pay for her baby and a childcare provider to travel with her.
The complainant declined VCNY’s offer based on advice from her child’s pediatrician and provided VCNY with a medical note which explained why this international trip posed “significant health risks” to her child.
She proposed other measures to support the trip; however, VCNY subsequently fired her for her “inability or unwillingness to perform an essential function of job.”
DCR conducted an investigation in the case and subsequently issued a Finding of Probable Cause against VCNY earlier this year. (A Finding of Probable Cause does not resolve a civil rights complaint. Rather, it means the State has concluded its preliminary investigation and determined there is sufficient evidence to support a reasonable suspicion the law has been violated.)
The Division then attempted to resolve the matter through its conciliation process. Because no agreement was reached during Conciliation, DCR will pursue the case in the Office of Administrative Law.