Family Responsibility Discrimination (FRD) is clearly one of the hot HR topics of the day, but what does it really mean? What should you do about it?
Today’s expert, attorney Christopher M. Leh, a partner with Boulder, Colorado, office of law firm Holland and Hart LLP, answered those questions and more during a recent BLR audio conference.
FRD Is a Concept
First or all, says Leh, FRD is a concept; it’s not a rule or statute. FRD is an umbrella term that refers to claims made under existing discrimination laws that involve situations in which people are treated worse at work because of caregiving responsibilities.
For example, if a woman with childcare responsibilities is treated different than a male with similar responsibilities, that would be an FRD issue, but the actual charge would be sex discrimination under Title VII.
Why the Sudden Interest in FRD?
A lot of the interest in FRD is fueled by Baby Boomers, who are also known as the “sandwich” generation because they shoulder both childcare and eldercare responsibilities.
An additional challenge is that these responsibilities tend to fall more heavily on women, which makes sex discrimination cases likely.
Further, among women, there are certain groups that studies show as having proportionately more responsibility for caregiving—African-American women, for example, which makes racial discrimination cases likely.
Using the “hope” system? (We “hope” we’re doing it right.) Check out every facet of your HR program with HR Audit Checklists. Try it for 30 days! Click here
Claims Under the FRD Umbrella
Leh gives a rundown of the types of claims encompassed by FRD.
Gender-based FRD claims. For example, female caregivers are treated different than male caregivers, or if a company discriminates against women with children.
Unlawful stereotyping. For example, in one early claim of FRD, the Martin Marietta case, the company didn’t accept applications from women with preschool-aged children. The court said that approach is impermissible.
Different standards for females. For example, if a supervisor gives new mothers lesser work assignments or encourages them to go home early. Such acts may be benevolent, but if the effect is a reduced chance for promotion or bonuses, it can be discriminatory.
Pregnancy discrimination. An employer can’t discriminate against employees because they are pregnant. A typical scenario would involve a worker allowed leave for a few days missed due to pregnancy, while a similarly-situated man who missed similar amounts of time was not allowed leave. That’s probably going to be a valid claim, says Leh.
Discrimination against women of color. This area is being litigated more and more, says Leh. It’s especially bad because it combines both sex and race discrimination. In one typical scenario, a Latina worker requests comp time so she can be absent occasionally to care for her child. Her request is denied, but an investigation reveals that several white employees in the same job did get time off for child care. Once again, this would probably be a successful discrimination charge.
Male caregivers. We often think that FRD claims are those that only a woman can bring, but think about male caregivers who have custody of children, says Leh. Gender stereotypes can affect these men if the employer puts greater strain or added responsibilities on the employee because he is male and the boss thinks men should be the breadwinners, whose place is, therefore, at work.
Don’t “just do it” … do it right. HR Audit Checklists ensures that you know how. Try the program at no cost or risk. Read more
Association discrimination. Consider a male applicant who has children who are not disabled and a female applicant with a child who is disabled. The employer hires the male because hiring the female is potentially going to create a situation where she is not focused on the job because of her association. This is prohibited under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
What to Do
Leh says the key to FRD is simple: Focus on individual employee’s work performance, the requirements of the job, and whether the employee is fulfilling them, not on pregnancy, childcare, or other family responsibilities, says Leh.
In the next Advisor: Leh’s step-by-step advice for FRD management, and an introduction to a checklist system that helps keep all your policies up to date.
Kudos to Mr. Leh on a terrific column.
A couple of observations: While Mr. Leh is correct at the federal level that FRD is not expressly prohibited by statute, it is worth noting that the District of Columbia expressly prohibits FRD in employment and Alaska expressly prohibits employment discrimination based on parental status. California passed a bill last year that would have added FRD to the state’s anti-discrimination statute, but the governor vetoed it. At least two other states are now actively considering adding “family responsibilities” to their state anti-discrimination statutes. In addition, many counties and cities have ordinances that prohibit FRD in employment, and some of those allow private lawsuits to be brought for violations. The Center for WorkLife Law has a partial list of these on its website as part of its model policy for employers (http://www.worklifelaw.org/EmployerModelPolicy.html), and the Center is now completing a more thorough survey of ordinances and will post a more complete list on its website this fall.
Even as a “concept” on the federal level, FRD cannot be overlooked. Remember that sexual harassment is “just a concept,” too — employees use Title VII to bring sex discrimination claims for sexual harassment in the same manner as employees use Title VII and other statutes to bring claims for FRD. The EEOC recognized the effectiveness of Title VII as a means of redress when it issued its Enforcement Guidance on Caregiver Discrimination (another name for FRD) — available here: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/caregiving.html.
I whole heartedly agree with Mr. Leh that focusing on individual work performance is key. At WorkLife Law, we counsel employers to provide training for their supervisors and managers on what FRD is, why it arises, the everyday factual situations that commonly lead to FRD, and steps to take to prevent FRD. WorkLife Law has training packages available for employers, and also has a free email alert for employers about developments in FRD law. For lawyers who represent employees, WorkLife Law also has the only treatise about FRD law (WorkLife Law’s Guide to Family Responsibilities Discrimination).
I look forward to reading Mr. Leh’s column in the next Advisor.
Cynthia Calvert
Deputy Director, WorkLife Law