:mad: Hello,

I Am 2 Months Pregnant and my doctor give me (letter) lifting restrictions (no push and lifting more than 15 pounds) .my job requirements are lifting more than 50-100 pounds. At this time I am capable to do any job with out any problems or do other light duties can get accomplished. I am working in the radiology department. My manager is looking for reason-way to get rid of me. HR manger forced me to get on FMLA and after two weeks I have no job, no health insurance for my baby. WHAT SHOULD I DO?

Something just doesn’t seem fair with this situation, I has been with this employer for over nine months. Please help me……

thanks
PK

If your job requires heavy lifting and you cannot lift, that's a shame, but your employer is not required to create a new job for you to do within your restrictions.

If you have only worked there for nine months, FMLA does not apply.

hello,:rolleyes:


I’m willing to lift more than 15 pound in the radiology department, but my doctor wrote lifting restrictions is only 15 pounds and doctor is willing to change the lifting restrictions. Still….the problems is my HR department is sticking with doctor’s note (15 pound)and not letting me work any where, eventhogh other departments willing to use me to get the job done.

I think that's a shame……………………
:mad:

THX

Sorry, but your employer is smart to follow your doctor's advice. They do not and should not allow you to work against doctor's orders.

If your doctor rescinds the lifting restriction, the reason for terminating you should be eliminated, and one would think you would be permitted to work unless your employer is trying to get rid of you because you are pregnant -- which, of course, would be illegal.

Have there been any nonpregnant employees in your department who have hurt their backs outside of work so they couldn't lift things temporarily at work? Or have any other employees been unable to lift things at work for a while because they were recovering from surgery or some similar thing? What happened to them? If they were not terminated, then you should not be terminated either. If they were allowed to work for another department, you should be allowed to.

Also: when you say your job requirements are to lift 50 - 100 pounds, is that something you actually do, or is it just a policy? Were you tested before employment to make sure you could lift that weight, and are you periodically re-tested? The reason I ask is that some employers have created arbitrary weight lifting requirements that are not necessarily related to job duties, which have had the effect of making some women and most pregnant women ineligible for the job. Courts have said that if the weight lifting requirement is not actually necessary to the job, it is discrimination to terminate or refuse to hire women who cannot lift the weight.

--Cynthia
www.worklifelaw.org

**The foregoing is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.**

The reason I ask is that some employers have created arbitrary weight lifting requirements that are not necessarily related to job duties, which have had the effect of making some women and most pregnant women ineligible for the job. Courts have said that if the weight lifting requirement is not actually necessary to the job, it is discrimination to terminate or refuse to hire women who cannot lift the weight.

Good point, Cynthia; thank you for picking that up.

If I have an employee who presents one set of restrictions from their doctor and immediately upon being told that there isn't a way to accommodate those restrictions they suddenly disappear, I'm going to be very very skeptical. If it is a matter of raising the restriction from 15 lbs to 20 lbs, maybe. But there is a huge difference between a 15 lb limit and being allowed to lift 50-100 lbs.

In a medical setting I'd be very surprised if the employees was not required to lift that much as patient transfers are not uncommon and even when lifts are used they often require the employee to support 50 lbs to operate them properly.

hello,

:confused:
My doctor is new; she is young and she just starting her carrier. She accidentally wrote a letter (lifting restrictions 15-20) not thinking I ‘m going to have conflict with my company policy. I think My Company (HCA) doesn’t have any lifting policy, it is only in my department; it is 50 to 100 ponds. I’m only two month old Pregnant and I am capable to lifting more than 50 pounds. My job place is become a “hostile work environment” after I notified that I am pregnant.

Now my manager is forced me to apply in other department as a file person forever, not letting me return to my original position as an X-ray tech after the baby born. I am willing to take temporary position as a filing. I’m state certificated X-ray Tech not a file person.

The problems is my HR department is sticking with doctor’s note (15 pound)and not letting me work any where, eventhogh other departments willing to use me. I know they just want get rid of me. I have two more weeks, some one please help me.

THX
:rolleyes:

If the letter was written accidentally and wasn't true, why did you give it to your employer?

I'm not sure what constitutes a hostile environment for you. Can you explain?

Better, have you explained that and the fact that your boss refuses to allow you to ever return to your department because you are pregnant? Stupid managers happen. unfortunately, if no one reports it, then no one can do anything about it.

I agree with Elle -- you may want to think about raising all of this with your HR department. That would give HR a chance to step in and correct the situation.

You may not have much to lose, and a lot to gain, by going to HR and making a full complaint. You can't be retaliated against for making a complaint, and the law that protects you against retaliation just got stronger thanks to a recent Supreme Court case.

I know a lot of hostile work environment cases in which women were treated very harshly after announcing their pregnancy. I'm sure your HR department is aware of them, too, and will investigate your complaint.

--Cynthia
www.worklifelaw.org

**The foregoing is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.**

hello,:)

thank you for your help.....HR manager directly requested from my doctor, I did not give anything to them... I think HR manger and my manger are working together to get rid of me.

THX
PK:)


If the letter was written accidentally and wasn't true, why did you give it to your employer?

I'm not sure what constitutes a hostile environment for you. Can you explain?

Better, have you explained that and the fact that your boss refuses to allow you to ever return to your department because you are pregnant? Stupid managers happen. unfortunately, if no one reports it, then no one can do anything about it.

Why would they want to be rid of you? Do they treat others who are pregnant this way? I can't imagine that in a medical setting you are the only one to become pregnant.

hello,:)

thank you for your help.....HR manager directly requested from my doctor, I did not give anything to them... I think HR manger and my manger are working together to get rid of me.

THX
PK:)


If the letter was written accidentally and wasn't true, why did you give it to your employer?

I'm not sure what constitutes a hostile environment for you. Can you explain?

Better, have you explained that and the fact that your boss refuses to allow you to ever return to your department because you are pregnant? Stupid managers happen. unfortunately, if no one reports it, then no one can do anything about it.

:) Hello,

As soon as I announced my pregnancy, there have been lot unexpected changes in my work environment, my manger and VP of HR worked together to get rid of me last two weeks. According to my lawyer, I have sent a letter to my manger, how I feel about my pregnancy and work environment. …. Two day later they call me back and let me work as a PRN and that's all I want to do is raise my family. Well… I hope this letter will help other pregnant women like me.

Thanks to every one that helped me in this forum.:p
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

November 3, 2006


To Whom It May Concern:


My name is XXXXXX, an employee of the (hospital), working in a cardiac cath lab as a Special Procedures Tech-1. (ARRT Registered Tech). I would like to notify the management about my pregnancy and work related stress issues. I am two months pregnant and under the care of (doctor. During the period of my pregnancy should you have any questions or concerns in regards to me working at the cardiac cath lab, please call my physician.

According to the (hospital) radiation safety guidelines, management has informed me that as a pregnant radiation technologist I am unable to continue my position at the cardiac cath lab as Special Procedures Tech-1. I would like to continue with my current position, but I also want to be able to work in an environment where my unborn child is not at risk. I have been working in the radiology department as PRN Radiology Tech. Since I am unable to work in a high-level radiation environment (cardiac cath lab), please allow me to continue with my practice as an ARRT Tech at the radiology department during my pregnancy. Currently there is a PRN position available for radiology Tech and I am willing to take the job. I am requesting management to complete the necessary paper work that is required for that position.

Upper management suggested that I should take FMLA or change my profession to a file clerk. I do not wish to take an unnecessary FMLA or change my profession as a Radiology Tech. Nevertheless, I am temporally willing to perform other job duties other than working in the cardiac cath lab. In the past it has be known that RT pregnant employees worked in the radiology department and completed their pregnancy cycle while they remained employed there. I am currently not experiencing any complications with my pregnancy and my physician has approved for me to perform my duties as a Radiology Tech. I hope that I receive the same kind of respect as I give to the company.

Per conversations between I and the HR department on November 2, 2006, HR manager (VP) expressed a concern in regards to the lifting requirement that is applicable to my current position. Also, did not notify me that I cannot continue practice with my profession as an ARRT Tech anywhere within the company. Even though, other departments are willing to hire me. Cardiac cath lab’s lifting requirement for ARRT Tech is purely artificial. I was not asked prior to or after being hired for the position on whether or not I was capable of lifting between 50-70 lbs. In fact, other applicants hired for the same or similar positions are not questions whether he or she is capable of lifting between 50-70lbs. Soon after the announcement of my pregnancy, there have been several unexpected changes in my working environment, which is highly stressful for my unborn child and me. I believe that pregnant women in the workplace should be receiving the same fairness and equality their co-workers are treated with. I look forward to continuing my employment with the company and in working with you as a team; as we serve our community with their healthcare needs.

Sincerely,

You’re Name

The names of the specific hospital and doctors, and all identifying information, has been deleted for your own protection. It is NOT a good idea to publically name your employer and doctors on an open internet board.

In addition, to anyone who is reading this and is not the OP, I do NOT advise using someone else's letter. Circumstances vary and someone else's letter does not take that into consideration.

What if you were healthcare worker that was pregnant and you informed your employer that you needed to decrease your working hours and restrict your lifting from 150lbs to 25lbs for example and you were granted light duty while waiting for your MD to reviewed your job description and provided a medical note. Upon the employer receiving the information in writing from the MD that stated the same information that the employee informed the employer, the employer requested that you take immediate medical leave and discontinue providing light duty? Is that unlawful, the employer intended to provide light duty, in fact did provide light duty, then terminated employee once recieving medical documenation?

Light duty is being provided by the company for work related injuries but not to pregnany or non work related in MA, is this against the laws according the MA commission against discrimination?

No, it's not. There is nothing in MA laws that requires an employer to provide light duty at all. It is not illegal discrimination to provide light duty only to work related conditions.

According to the MCAD it is unlawful to provide light duty to work related injuries and not investigate whether or not a nonwork related injury can be reasonably accomodated...

Please answer first question, what if employer provides light duty upon request then takes it away? read previous message posted on 11/18

According to the MCAD it is unlawful to provide light duty to work related injuries and not investigate whether or not a nonwork related injury can be reasonably accomodated...

That is with reference to disabilities that may fall under the ADA, which does NOT include pregnancy.

Since the law does not require that you be provided with light duty, there is nothing illegal about providing it only for a short time. There are NO circumstances, even under the ADA (which again does not include pregnancy) under which an employer is required to create a light duty position where one would not normally exist.

If my medical note given to the employer said "due to complications with her pregnany,... restrict to light duty, for example." wouldn't the employer need to request further medical information to define if complication were pregnancy related only or was a pregnacy with a disability. According to the ADA it is advisable if the company is a large one, provided its employees with light duty, that it should try to provide reasonable accomodations to a pregnant woman with restrictions.
why is it that, if a woman who could normally lift 250lbs without a problem is suddenly unable to lift more than 20lbs due to complication with pregnancy is that not a disabling condition. It is clear that everyday normal life function for that employee is changed and restricted. what if that women also had siatica, chronic muscle spasms, increase edema, increase joint laxity, does that declear the pregnany employee to be disabled or does the law see it just a pregnancy symptoms? Please define what the law would govern to be disabilty related to pregnancy

An individual is considered to have a "disability" if s/he has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment. Persons discriminated against because they have a known association or relationship with an individual with a disability also are protected.


The first part of the definition makes clear that the ADA applies to persons who have impairments and that these must substantially limit major life activities such as seeing, hearing, speaking, walking, breathing, performing manual tasks, learning, caring for oneself, and working. An individual with epilepsy, paralysis, HIV infection, AIDS, a substantial hearing or visual impairment, mental retardation, or a specific learning disability is covered, but an individual with a minor, nonchronic condition of short duration, such as a sprain, broken limb, or the flu, generally would not be covered.

http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/q%26aeng02.htm

Pregnancy and any resulting restrictions are temporary as a "nonchronic condition of short duration".

If the employee is experiencing an ADA qualifying disability at the same time as pregnancy and requires an accommodation for that underlying disability, then it is the employee's responsibility to make that known. Employer's are not required to read minds though it would be a very handy skill to have some days.

Employer's are not required to read minds though it would be a very handy skill to have some days.[/QUOTE]

It is nice to see that people on this site have a sarcastic mindset...Even if the employer of a healthcare environment could read minds he/she still wouldn't assist the employee. These laws were obviously created by a male or person that has never given birth to a child....why protect two people, that would be too much to ask, perhaps the healthcare employer wishes injury to the pregnany employee so more business could be brought in...

The laws were enacted by Congress. If you want more women in Congress, vote for them.

Actually, both are being protected just not in the way the employee would prefer. If there is an ADA situation, then all the employee has to do is say so and provide documentation. That is not a terrible burden.

We can discuss all day what the law should be but that isn't going to help anyone.

And I don't think discussing it all day is a good idea.