that is the crux… they still have employment w/them, they just can’t be parkettes… i bet they were making great tips as cocktail waitresses… but i bet that after the pregnancy, they could get that orignal job back… if these girls did not like the new position, they should have been fortunate that the company offered to keep them onboard… if these parkettes do get photo ops, how many of them would have like to seen pregnant ones? if its’ the company policy, i can understand, because they did not fire them, but offered a new position. i hope that intention that it would be temporary due to the pregnancy. sounds like the parkettes jobs are constantly on their feet, not usually good for a pregnant lady anyways…
You want to know one sure-fire way to break a camera? Take a picture of a pregnant woman. No way should they ever be allowed to take part in a photo shoot of any kind – Demi Moore, Cindy Crawford, Jessica Simpson, the list goes on – do your own search or I may get in trouble here at work.
What are the essential elements of the job and how does a women’s pregnancy impact her ability to do the essential elements of the job?
Under ADA Title I the former employees may have a case because of the issue of the uniforms. If they are an employer provided clothing, the employer may have to provide maternity sets.
Just because an employer has a policy is in place does not mean it is a legal employment policy. Moving employees to a lower paying job may not be legal under the various laws.
Be aware of the law and how a client can get into trouble. Does EPLI cover ADA issues and do they have it in place?
And before you start screaming about the liberal nanny state – remember – ADA was passed under G H W Bush and amended under G W Bush.
Try reading the article. It does not say they were moved to a “lower paying” job. It only says they were moved to another position where their physical appearance was not at issue. A business cannot discriminate, but entertainment positions may LEGALLY have appearance/weight requirements. These women apparently accepted these positions with knowledge of the weight policy so what the company did here seems completely fair and above board.
Was this policy in force when the waitresses accepted their positions? If so, then too bad for them. The casino still tried to keep them employed.
that is the crux… they still have employment w/them, they just can’t be parkettes… i bet they were making great tips as cocktail waitresses… but i bet that after the pregnancy, they could get that orignal job back… if these girls did not like the new position, they should have been fortunate that the company offered to keep them onboard… if these parkettes do get photo ops, how many of them would have like to seen pregnant ones? if its’ the company policy, i can understand, because they did not fire them, but offered a new position. i hope that intention that it would be temporary due to the pregnancy. sounds like the parkettes jobs are constantly on their feet, not usually good for a pregnant lady anyways…
Did the father have to take a lower paying job during the pregnancy or feel fortunate the company offered to keep them onboard? WOW
Did it say it was a lower paying job? If so then I agree with the waitresses but if not and it was a company policy then too bad for them.
You want to know one sure-fire way to break a camera? Take a picture of a pregnant woman. No way should they ever be allowed to take part in a photo shoot of any kind – Demi Moore, Cindy Crawford, Jessica Simpson, the list goes on – do your own search or I may get in trouble here at work.
What are the essential elements of the job and how does a women’s pregnancy impact her ability to do the essential elements of the job?
Under ADA Title I the former employees may have a case because of the issue of the uniforms. If they are an employer provided clothing, the employer may have to provide maternity sets.
Just because an employer has a policy is in place does not mean it is a legal employment policy. Moving employees to a lower paying job may not be legal under the various laws.
Be aware of the law and how a client can get into trouble. Does EPLI cover ADA issues and do they have it in place?
And before you start screaming about the liberal nanny state – remember – ADA was passed under G H W Bush and amended under G W Bush.
Try reading the article. It does not say they were moved to a “lower paying” job. It only says they were moved to another position where their physical appearance was not at issue. A business cannot discriminate, but entertainment positions may LEGALLY have appearance/weight requirements. These women apparently accepted these positions with knowledge of the weight policy so what the company did here seems completely fair and above board.