I am interested in Listserv participants reactions to the following story
(which I have copied below from the following site:
http://www.gastongazette.com/news/college-36646-discriminated-eeoc.html )
____________________________
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined that Belmont Abbey
College discriminated against women and retaliated against faculty members who
filed a charge of employment discrimination, according to EEOC documents.
An EEOC determination letter states that the college discriminated based on
gender by denying contraceptive benefits in the college’s health coverage plan,
according to an EEOC determination.
Contraception, abortion and voluntary sterilization came off Belmont Abbey
College’s faculty health care policy in December 2007 after a faculty member
discovered that coverage, according to an e-mail Belmont Abbey College
President Bill Thierfelder sent to school staff, students, alumni and friends
of the college.
“By denying prescription contraception drugs, Respondent (the college) is
discriminating based on gender because only females take oral prescription
contraceptives,” wrote Reuben Daniels Jr., the EEOC Charlotte District Office
Director in the determination. “By denying coverage, men are not affected, only
women.”
The EEOC also determined that the college retaliated against eight faculty
members who filed charges with the EEOC by identifying them by name in a letter
to faculty and staff.
“It is the Commission’s position that the identity of an individual who has
filed a charge should be protected with confidentiality during the Commission’s
investigation,” Daniels wrote. “By disclosing Charging Party’s name, a chilling
effect was created on Respondent’s campus whereby other faculty and staff
members would be reluctant to file a charge of employment discrimination for
fear of disclosure.”
The EEOC asked both the faculty and the college to work with it to reach a
resolution. If the college declines to discuss the settlement or an acceptable
settlement is not reached, the director would inform the two sides and advise
them of the court enforcement alternatives available.
_____________________________
There are a couple of things that I find fascinating about this story:
(a) First, although not explicitly mentioned in this particular story, the EEOC
reversed its former finding that there was no discrimination by the college.
(You can find mention of this reversal in other stories on the web including
http://www.campusreportonline.net/main/articles.php?id=3235)
I am not an employment expert, but it is my understanding that reversals of
position by the EEOC are exceptionally rare (and presumably take place as a
result of a "directive from on high"). Do any Listserv members have insight on
this point?
(b) Although the college modified its health insurance coverage to exclude
abortion, sterilization and contraception, the EEOC decision only focuses on
contraception. I wonder about the rationale involved here, particuarly
vis-a-vis abortion. The EEOC held that: "By denying prescription contraception
drugs, Respondent (the college) is discriminating based on gender because only
females take oral prescription contraceptives." Using that rationale, why
would the same not apply to abortion? Was the EEOC simply shying away from
abortion as a more hot button issue?
My guess is that we will be seeing more and more lawsuits in this area of the
law. This is particularly likely if employers are mandated to provide health
insurance coverage under a new federal system which requires health insurance
coverage for abortion / sterilization / contraception.
I look forward to your comments.
Will
P.S. For full disclaimer, I am an alum of Belmont Abbey College, taught a
pre-law course there as an adjunct faculty member a few years ago, and remain
involved in alumni activities with the college. I am not however, involved in
the EEOC action in any way other than as an observer.
Will Esser --- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Charlotte, North Carolina
********************
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark;
the real tragedy is when men are afraid of the light.
Plato (428-345 B.C.)
********************
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
