Mixed Bag

So given how I lost both of my last two jobs after I gave birth to my children, I was following with interest the case of Todaro v. Siegel Fenchel & Peddy, which is in the Eastern District of NY. In this case, one plaintiff, an associate, left her job citing hostile work environment, after she received a paycut from $102,000 to $77,000 shortly after telling her employer she was pregnant. The employer claimed the associate's work product quality had decreased. The other plaintiff, a paralegal, was actually let go after she returned from maternity leave and proved that she received raises every year of her employment except the two years she gave birth.

Details about the cases are at:

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202423744292 and

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202423970420


The paralegal received a judgment of $203,838 (plus punitive damages, which are being contested); the associate got $16,499, apparently only because after her pay cut, the next lowest paid associate still made $20,000 more than her, thus violating the Equal Pay Act.

Now, I don't know all the details of the case, but I have to wonder what difference there was between the two. Either there was discrimination against pregnant women/mothers, or there wasn't. I did notice that while the firm touted itself as 'women friendly,' apparently only one other woman at the firm had kids, a named partner (though no mention is made as to their ages or what her family situation is like).

Did it make a difference that the paralegal was fired, while the associate quit? How many people do you know could stay in a job with a 25% pay cut? Does this mean that all an employer has to do is cut a pregnant woman's salary and claim that work product was 'going downhill?' Some women blossom in pregnancy, but for some (myself included) its a miserable experience that I couldn't wait to be done with, I was sick and exhausted all the time. I'm sure my work wasn't as "top notch" as it is normally.

Did it make a difference that the associate got a bunch of perks (golf clubs and lessons, a five figure wedding gift, paid off car lease) that most jurors would never see in their jobs? Maybe. Hard to know when one doesn't know the jury make-up (although in my experience, high paid professionals are never jurors).

In any event, I thought this case was a real mixed bag for women's rights.