PRACTICE LOCATIONS: VA, DC, MD, NY, NC

contact@spigglelaw.com[email protected]
  • TALK TO A REAL PERSON
  • 202-980-3857202-980-3857

SPLF Employment Blog

Paternity Leave Discrimination: Can Fathers Be Victims Too?

dadpic4We recently blogged in an article titled “Can a Man Be the Victim of Family Responsibilities Discrimination” that men can be illegally discriminated against for taking or requesting leave for family responsibilities. But it turns out this isn’t the only discrimination that men face in the workplace.

For example, has your employer treated fathers and mothers differently when it comes to parental leave by providing more maternity leave than paternity leave? If the answer is yes, your employer may be illegally discriminating against fathers. Perhaps you have been the victim of such discrimination.

Josh Levs recently faced this sort of discrimination, but he didn’t just sit back and take it. He fought his employer and won. Read below for details about his case as well as an explanation as to why he prevailed.

Josh Levs’s Case Against Time Warner

Josh Levs is a journalist for CNN, which is a division of Time Warner. Time Warner provided new mothers and adoptive parents (whether a mother or father) 10 weeks of paid leave. However, new biological fathers only received two weeks of paid leave. Josh Levs repeatedly asked for 10 weeks of paid leave since that’s what was available to new mothers and adoptive parents, but the company denied his request.

Levs believed this was discriminatory and filed a charge of discrimination against Time Warner with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. A charge is a formal written complaint.

As a sidenote, filing a charge is often a prerequisite for bringing a civil lawsuit against your employer. For a general background about filing a charge and how it fits into an overall discrimination claim, take a look at our articles “How to File a Pregnancy Discrimination Claim in Virginia” and “How to File a Pregnancy Discrimination Claim in Washington, D.C.

About a year after he filed the charge, Time Warner agreed to change its parental leave policy so that any parents, whether biological or adoptive, would get six weeks of paid leave to be with their new child.

If you would like more information about Levs’s fight against Time Warner, check out the New York Times article “Standing Up for the Rights of New Fathers.”

How and Why Did Josh Levs Win?

Let’s look at the legal basis for his claim. Levs’s claim was brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Among other things, Title VII prohibits discrimination based on gender. Levs argued that Time Warner’s policy of offering only two weeks of paid leave to biological fathers was discriminatory since biological mothers were given 10 weeks of paid leave.

But you might be thinking, “What about women who need more time off from giving birth? After all, they’re the ones physically giving birth and perhaps they need more time to recover from the birth than a man would need.” This argument is plausible, especially since the law allows for differential treatment among men and women in certain situations.

However, if Time Warner made this argument, it would fail because it gave new adoptive parents 10 weedadpic3ks of paid leave, regardless of whether the new adoptive parent was a mother or father. Also, adoptive parents, by definition, haven’t given birth to the child they are adopting. So Time Warner’s reason for giving new biological fathers so much less paid leave is not based on medical necessity due to physical childbirth. Understandably, Time Warner changed its parental leave policy.

For more information about how Title VII protects men, see our article “Title VII Applies to Men Too!

Summing It Up

  • As evidenced by Josh Levs’s case against Time Warner, a parental leave policy that discriminates based on sex is likely to be considered illegal by the EEOC and courts.
  • Title VII protects men, in addition to women, against sex discrimination.
  • A charge is a formal written complaint and must be filed before you can bring a civil lawsuit.

 

 

 

Share this post

Latest Articles

The Biggest Theft That Nobody Is Talking About

The Biggest Theft That Nobody Is Talking About

At a time when billionaire extraordinaire Elon Musk is dominating headlines with his multi-billion-dollar buying spree, there is another story worth billions that is curiously absent from our Twitter feeds. Unfortunately, rather than recount the spending of riches, this story tells the tale of one of the greatest thefts in American history. Every hour, millions …

The Biggest Theft That Nobody Is Talking About Read More »

Maryland Passes Two Bills To Strengthen Anti-discrimination and Harassment Protection In The Workplace

Maryland Passes Two Bills To Strengthen Anti-discrimination and Harassment Protection In The Workplace

Last night the Maryland General Assembly passed two bills, SB 450 and SB 451, which will increase protections for victims of harassment and discrimination in the workplace.  SB 450 eliminates the ‘severe or pervasive’ standard for harassment claims and creates a new standard for harassment claims in the workplace. The prior ‘severe or pervasive’ standard …

Maryland Passes Two Bills To Strengthen Anti-discrimination and Harassment Protection In The Workplace Read More »

DMV Survey Series: Wage Theft Edition

DMV Survey Series: Wage Theft Edition

*In this series, the author will explore the differences in specific areas of the law between D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, and hopefully answer the age-old question: which state is best for employees? Please remember that this blog post, like all of our posts, offers general information and is NOT legal advice. – Upon reading this …

DMV Survey Series: Wage Theft Edition Read More »

The Supreme Court Decides to Block and Uphold Biden’s Vaccination Mandates

The Supreme Court Decides to Block and Uphold Biden’s Vaccination Mandates

On January 13, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court made two major decisions. These related to President Biden’s attempts to increase the number of workers who are fully vaccinated against the coronavirus. The first decision temporarily blocked the vaccinate-or-test regulation that applied to employers with 100 or more employees. The second decision allowed the vaccination requirement …

The Supreme Court Decides to Block and Uphold Biden’s Vaccination Mandates Read More »

Talk To A Real Person