Institutional Inequality and the Mobilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act

DESPITE THEIR HISTORY OF EXCLUSION FROM WORK, TODAY it is generally accepted that women and people with disabilities can be legitimate workers, and that parents with the responsibility of caring for children can and – at least in the context of welfare policy – should work (Orloff 2002). At the same time, it seems natural and normal to many people that part-time workers be laid off before full-time workers regardless of seniority, that employers be able to fire workers who miss some work because of serious illnesses or disabilities, that employers not be required to accommodate absences resulting from morning sickness or the normal physical challenges of pregnancy, and that employers control work schedules, including requiring overtime or changing workers' schedules with no notice.

These expectations have begun to change, however. Some states now provide paid family leave and require employers to accommodate pregnancy-related restrictions (Albiston 2005, 2007). The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) requires employers to provide pregnant workers with at least the same leave protections as they provide to other workers who are similar in their inability to work. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) specifically states that modified schedules can be a reasonable accommodation within the meaning of the Act. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) requires employers to grant leave to qualified employees when those workers are seriously ill, are needed to care for seriously ill family members, or need time off for pregnancy, childbirth, or to care for a new child in the family.